Protection does not make Protected articles dearer.

When an article is thoroughly protected there immediately springs up a trade rivalry in the manufacture or production of the article, which reduces it to the minimum of cost at which labour and capital can be employed to produce it. Competition would bring prices to their proper level. Even if farmers had to pay more for their clothes and implements they would more than recoup themselves by the higher price they would obtain for their produce, and by the saving of the freight and charges on their produce. If Protection makes the protected article dearer, how do Freetraders explain the fact that our agricultural implements come chiefly from protected America, and that many articles are now imported from protected Germany rather than from freetrade England. Sir John Macdonald, the Premier of Canada, speaking of the results of the Protective System which has been largely tried there with great success, says: "I am largely responsible for the national policy of Canada, a policy which has been, and perhaps is now, severly criticised on this side of the sea—a policy of revenue secured by tariff. There is nothing to show that this policy has, in any respect failed in its intention. The balance of advantage has been largely in its favour; indeed, high as party feeling runs in Canada, even the Opposition have ceased to attack the protective policy, or as both parties have agreed to style it the 'national policy' of our Govern page 12 ment. Our policy is to protect such staple industries as are capable of a practically unlimited expansion, and to admit raw material free which cannot be produced at home. "When we commenced to tax woollen and cotton goods, we were assured that the consumer would be ruined, and driven out of the country by high prices. What has been the result? Our manufacturers of cotton and cloth are in a position of increasing prosperity, and to-day the consumer is able to buy his goods more cheaply than lohen Canada was upon a Freetrade basis." If Protection makes the protected article dearer, how comes it, as I shall show hereafter, that Protected Victoria has for one of its best customers in her manufactured products her freetrade rival, New South Wales. The agricultural classes would in reality be great gainers by a prohibitive policy. New Zealand has to choose for extra revenue between an increase in the Customs, an increase in the Property Tax, and an increase in the Railway Hates. If the country settlers know their own interests they will see that it is far more desirable to support an increase in the tariff than to be subjected to the other alternatives which must necessarily press upon them. A letter that appeared in the Otago Daily Times, signed by "Arable" puts the case so well and strongly for the farmers that it is well worth quoting. It says: "So constantly is it asserted that the farmers would be losers by a protective policy, that I trust you will kindly allow me briefly to point out a few reasons upon which many of us base a contrary opinion. No doubt outgoings would be slightly increased, but this not nearly to the extent that some suppose. The typical working farmer lives with his family mainly upon the produce of his farm. He might have to disburse a few shillings a year extra upon cotton materials; and this would be the chief item of his increased expen- diture, for already boots, woollen goods and agri- page 13 cultural implements of colonial manufacture are in a majority of cases, from their greater durability, deservedly preferred; and upon these last the expe- rience of other countries shows that Protection would, by increased competition, exercise a cheapening influence. On the other hand, we believe that, although Protection is by no means such a vital question for the farmer as it is for the townsman, the former must necessarily share in the prosperity of the latter. With the revival of better times would come Adam Smith's corner stone of prosperity—an in creased home market, and an improved sale for butter, milk, eggs, hay, fruit, &c., &c. This would far more than recoup the farmer the small additional cost of his household expenditure, to say nothing of those by-crops which, under Protection, he could grow at a profit, such as linseed, mustard, &c. Again, United States' statistics establish the fact that the value of farm land maintains a constant ratio with the number of manufactories in the district, a fact so appreciated by the small freeholders that they are almost to a man Protectionists, as recent investigations and the hope less minority of Freetraders in Congress conclusively show. Can we take a better guide in matters of self- interest than the shrewd American?"

In this letter we find the farmer's case put very clearly and distinctly, and in a manner altogether convincing. Unless local industries are encouraged to a larger extent than they are at present, the Colony will become merely a consuming depôt for the results of cheap labour in other places.