Page:History of West Australia.djvu/279

 Rh

tobacco, 1s. 6d. a lb. The basis was altered in 1848, when a duty was placed on all spirits of 12s. a gallon; on refined sugar of 4s. a cwt.; tea, 2d. a lb.; manufactured tobacco, 1s. 9d. a lb; and wine, 2s. a gallon; stock, grains, flour, and meal, agricultural implements and other machinery, and goods specially exempted by the Governor, with the advice of the Executive Council, were admitted free; all other goods were customed at 7 per cent. on the invoice value. In 1854 the free list was the same, and the duties on other goods were reduced to 6 per cent; spirits to 10s., refined sugars to 3s., and tobacco to 1s. Then in 1867 the duty on goods was raised to 7 per cent.; spirits to 15s., and tobacco to 1s. 9d.

The new Tariff Bill brought forward in 1871, except in a few cases, did not pretend to materially alter the 1867 basis. Spirits remained the same, but the impost on manufactured tobacco was raised to 2s. 6d. Wine, which in 1867 was admitted at 2s. a gallon, was now raised to 4s.; and beer, stout, cider, and perry, which in 1854 were charged at 3d. per gallon, and in 1867 at 4d., were raised to 6d. Cigars and snuff were also increased from 2s. 6d. a lb. in 1867 to 5s. in 1871. Bread and biscuit, corn and other grains, machinery of all kinds, sacks, wool bales, salt and preserved meats, and rice, were subject to a 7 per cent. tariff. Much of this increase was proposed because of a failing revenue, which, owing to bad seasons, lower prices obtained for exports, and a diminishing convict expenditure, fell considerably below the general expenditure. Several country members considered in 1870-1 that an import duty should also be imposed on flour. On 1st August, 1871, Mr. Logue moved, by resolution—"That it is the opinion of this Council that the items flour and meal be removed from the list of goods imported free." In his opinion a protective duty would not increase the price of the poor man's loaf, while it would certainly benefit the farmer, and tend to increase the revenue. Mr. Drummond heartily coincided with this view, but Mr. Barlee, on behalf of the Government, opposed it in a mild and conciliatory speech. If it could be proved to him, he said, that such a duty would benefit the farmer he would support it, but he was sure that it would be detrimental to the interests of the poor man, and would discourage immigration. Mr. Lee-Steere protested that though he was a free trader he was not inconsistent when he supported the motion; the producer must be protected. Mr. Walcott, the Attorney-General, did not see how a protective duty would benefit the farmer, as the money paid by the consumer would drift into the pockets of the importer, and, said he—"If the soil of this colony can grow wheat, our farmers ought to be in a position to compete with those in the eastern colonies; if the soil will not produce a crop of wheat the sooner our farmers cease growing it the better for their own sakes as well as that of their creditors." Mr. Logue carried his motion by nine votes to eight, a result heralded with loud cheers by the country members. On 4th August it was decided to impose a duty of 20s. per ton of 2,000 lbs. on flour. The debate on the whole question was long and somewhat excited.

A Free Trade League had been formed, and its members waited on Governor Weld on 14th August soliciting him to refuse his approval of the new tariff. Three days later the Governor vetoed the bill, and described the proposed impost on flour as a tax which pressed unduly upon the poorest classes, produced revenue utterly incommensurate with the tax laid upon the consumer, and benefited the speculator rather than the farmer. But probably as a salve to soften the irritation, he complimented members on their intelligence, saying:—" You have strengthened my trust that the introduction of free institutions is increasingly developing that capacity for self-government which, ever since my arrival in the colony, it has been my steady aim to foster."

In order to obtain the opinion of the country, Governor Weld dissolved the Council, and on 6th March, 1872, writs were issued for an election. The official members of the new Council were unaltered. The unofficial were—W.E. Marmion, A. P. Bussell, and W. Bickley; and the elected—M. Logue, G. Shenton, J. G. C. Carr, L. S. Leake, E. Newman, W. S. Pearse, W. L. Brockman, J. H. Monger, J. Drummond, T. C. Carey, J. G. Lee Steere, and A. Y. Hassell. On the opening of the Council on 30th July, 1872, Mr. Leake was re-elected Speaker, and Mr. Carr Chairman of Committees. The protectionist tariff, so far as agricultural products went, was made in some constituencies a test question, and several members were returned on that ticket. The Governor was anxious to lower the duties, and had representatives of the large towns with him, but most of the Councillors from the rural constituencies polled for protection. A new tariff bill was considered when the duties on general goods were raised to 10 per cent. But flour was placed on the free list, and corn and other grains, except rice, were subjected to an impost of 6d. a bushel; bran and pollard, 20s. a ton; butter (which prior to 1872 paid the ad valorem duty), 3d. a lb.; hay, 20s. a ton; meal, 20s. a ton; potatoes, 10s. a ton; dried fruits, 2d. a lb.; spirits, 14s. a gall.; beer, stout, cider, and perry, 9d. a gall.; sugar, 4s. a cwt.; tea, 4d. a lb.; tobacco, 2s. 6d. a lb.; cigars and snuff, 5s. a lb. The free list included live animals, bags, sacks, wool bales, blasting powder, coal, coke, flour, black-smiths' forges, gas pipes, whaling and agricultural implements, machinery for manufacturing purposes, fencing wire, &c. On the more important clauses the voting was very close; thus, the proposal to impose a tax of 20s. a ton on flour was negatived by nine votes to eight; the tax on hay was carried by nine to eight, and on potatoes by eleven to six.

The debate at times became heated, and Mr. Logue made the assertion that the Governor had asked the nominee members to pledge themselves to free trade before he finally appointed them, an action which Mr. Logue considered neither fair nor honest. Mr. Barlee, with his usual diplomacy, tried to conciliate members, but as to the reflections on the Governor he, in tones of admonition, told members that he had not thought they would so far forget themselves. The Governor had, indeed, submitted to the nominee members a broad outline of the policy of the Government, and asked them, prior to their nomination, if their views were in accord with the general principles of that policy. If not, "they were at liberty to decline the position offered to them;" therefore no member was pledged to vote against his conscience. Mr. Bussell indignantly denied the insinuation of Mr. Logue, and the other nominee members followed his example.

As a result of these differences on the tariff the position of parties became clearly marked. A strong opposition was apparent even in the first session. The Colonial Secretary was the leader of the House, and had on his side the two other official members, the nominee, and the more conservative among elective members. Mr. Lee-Steere was the leader of the Opposition or more radical section. Several propositions put forward by the latter body were rejected by the Council or were vetoed by the Governor. The Opposition was indignant, and lamented