The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1870-12-10

it. In helping TO stop our lIauo WIN
has, we believe, damaged us most materially 10
saw nothing of the extra money the planters have
had to pay out for the article.
We once had an enactment by which planters
could import for their own use all the materials
required in erecting their works, and also the
machinery for their own use. The advantage OF
getting their materials and machinery duty free
was nalpable. but the law was found to work a0-
surdiv. and it was given up. Why should A i'm
mort a steam engine free for his own use, rather
than that B should import it for him, and sell 1T
to him on a credit, perhaps, without having TO
charge him with the duty? Or why should
Smith be allowed to import his bricks free, when
Jones had a stock of them on hand to sell to
him duty paid? This distinction between goods
imported to use and TO sell, which we find in
tariffs of many countries, is frivolous. in fact,
absurd. Nothing is ever imported to sell all the
time, but to be used by some one and if it be
imported duty free, the user gets the benefit of
it. 1t is hard to make the public believe that
the consumer invariably pays the duty, not the
importer or the shipper.
AS we have already stated, the advantage and
importance of getting the materials for sugar
works, or any other works, free of duty, is pal
pable. y tax on the import Of them is equivalent
to an export tax on the manufactured article.
For this reason we would include in our free list,
besides lumber, iron and the other articles al
ready mentioned, common bricks, fire bricks,
building stone, states. lime, cement, nails, tools
and machinery of all kinds, and perhaps some
other articles OF first necessity on plantations.
In the free list we would also include every
thing that is mainly used by the shipping, whether
Hawaiian or not, coasters or foreign going
such as anchors, ard chains, spars, rope, pitch,
tar, Oakum, and perhaps paint and oils. We
have never been able to see the point OF having TO
keep anchors and chains " in bond, and the
same remark applies to other articles exclusively
used for ships. Copper and composition sheath
ing is already very properly on the free list.
We do not offer the above as a carefully drawn
up enumeration of all articles that we would in
clude in the free list. but they are sufficient to
illustrate the principles by which we should be
guided in making it up.
Is so extended a list of d~uty-free goods would
necessarily be so much loss to the revenue, we
should propose to make up for the deficiency by
doubling the duty on an equivalent amount of
articles of luxury, or perhaps, more correctly
speaking of articles which are not reproductive
or which enter into the cost of our products, ar
ticles not necessaries and such as are principally
consumed by those who can afford to pay Il little
more for the goods. Such, for instance, as silks,
delaines, muslins, printed %cottons, alpacas, CO.
burgs, merlnoes, shawls, laces, perfumery, fine
made up clothing, toys, millinery and furniture.
We would keep the present ten per cent. on all
other goods not included in the free or the 20
per cent. list. This ten per cent. list, it will be
observed, would include almost all cotton and
woollen piece goods which are usually made up
into clothing for ordinary wear, as we'll as all ar
ticles of general consumption but which naturally
hold an intermediate place betwIxt nccessaries
luxuries.
Thus, besides the special reasons given for dis
eliminating in the duty levied on the above three
classes of goods, it will be remarked that they
are respectively articles of first necessity-articles
of general use, but of less necessity-and articles
of luxury. Although the principle of what is
called g protection - by high A~tiO0, 10 is"v.ed
an tho above proposal for a new tariff, real
protection to our manufactures is virtually
secured by hoO duties on raw Materials, OF ON
materials in as crude a state as IL country in our
condition can be expected to make use of them.
1t has sometimes been suggested that, viewing
our position in the Pacific, we might reap neat
advantage by making this an entirely free port,
that is, have no duties at all. We question
whether this would, in the first place, be practi-
cable, and if it were, whether the advantages
would prove in reality so overwhelming. BY
having the necessaries of life free, the raw ma
terials requisite for raising our productions free,
and the :" recruits !" for the shipping free, COM
bined with a good Z" bonding - and . drawback -
system, we think we should secure to ourselves
nearly all the advantages of u purely free port,
giving up what is universally admitted
to be the simplest and easiest method of raising
a revenue.
1t will be observed that by the above scheme
bulky articles come in free. This is a great
boon to a port that depends very much upon the
that frequents it. For whilst it induces
vessels to bring bulky articles as freight. and thus
assists their coming, they may, when the market
is oyerstOcked, be shipped offagain,-such for in
stance as lumber, iron, provisions, salmon, &c.,
whilst if they had paid even ten per cent. duty
it, as it were, nails them to the spot, and helps to
stop trade. This advantage is, however, only an
incidental one, we place them on the free list
upon an independent principle.
Our plan would render our excellent Custom
House stores almost useless for the purpose for
which they were intended. Would they not, now
ever, be much better employed, a large part of
them at least, in storing sugar and other produce,
a very low rate for our agriculturists? We
understand from a gentleman, recently arrived
from Mauritius, that the government storehouses
at Port Louis, the capital, are not only used for
this purpose, but that any planter can get an adj
vance from the government on the sugars placed
there at six per cent. per annum. Now, seeing
that a government is only the instrument for car
rying out the will of the Sovereign and the
people, why should we not at once take steps to
copy from the singularly successful Island of
whatever arrangements have been
to answer there? The same gentleman
informs us that not a pound of the 100 or $780,
900 tons of sugar made there annually is shipped