, 1880-07-24
SIR Ell MUSGRAVE'S
PAPER.
(Concladed from oar last number.)

The Duke of Manchester as Chairman
then asked Sir Anthony Musgrave to close
the discussion, making a few complimentary
remarks ON the paper. Sir Anthony then
briefly replied to his critics as follows =
"After having inflicted upon you SO long
q D as that which | have read, l ought
not to add to your suffering by any re-
marks now but there are one or two
points upon which, I should like to make
some observations. Mr.. Neville Lubbock
referred to what he regarded on my part
as an uncalled-f for remark that the sugar
planters offered passive opposition to the
development of other industries but my
conscience does not feel very guilty about
that, for if you remember, l said I" passiUe
opposition and | think that we are all of
us at times subject to the kind of uncOn-
sciOus cerebration which makes us I'M
friendly to that which is distasteful to us,
ever though we may not actively oppose
it, and that there is a disposition not to
like that which will withdraw labour from
the purposes for which we require it. l do
not think it is so unnatural as to cOnsti-
tute a crime, l only recognised it as q fact
worthy of notice. | do not love the plan
ters less because / love abstract truth and
philosophical! investigation more, / am not
%unfriendly to them because l desire to
arrive at the truth of the condition of the
negro population, and to make it known.
With regard to coOlie immigration it may
be observed that l scarcely touch upon
that i'll my paper. | am quite convinced
that there is no difficulty i'll the way of the
planters obtaining a full supply of immiA
grant labour OH terms which | say are sub
tantially more favourable than those en-
JOyed by any other West Indian Colonies.
That being the case, there remains practi-
cally nothing for us to talk about OF that
score. All that the planters have to do &
to make application for the number OF
immigrants they require, and the Govern
ment will be prepared to meet their wishes
as far as it can do so. 1t seems to ME,
with reference to that particular point,
that there is little or nothing left to dis
cuss. With regard to the increased
expenditure some remarks were made; but
it ought TO be noted that this increased
expenditure has also been for value
received, and has been provided for by
an increased revenue, which was not the
result of increased taxation; n this is an
important fact. The increased expendl-
ture does not mean increased taxation. L
pointed out that'the taxation has not been
raised since 1869, ten years ago, while the
revenue has largely increased and that
seems to me to be, a state OF financial
affairs which does not afford any ground
for objection. 1t has been obtained from
greaterprosperity of the masses and by bet
ter collection from the sources of revenue
cheers)-and | think those facts reflect very
considerable credit on the department of
the public service more Immediately re-
sponsible for finance. (Hear, hear.) Now
as regards the number of people employed
on sugar estates, l think Mr.. Gibson
implied hat the 80, 900 people employed on
the sugar estates would necessarily be
male adults, supporting perhaps $4,000 or
more of the population. | beg to repeat
that the people employed on the sugar
estates are of both sexes, and of all ages,
and that | believe not many more than
$4,000 are altogether employed. I wish
simply to deal with the facts as I find
them, leaving differences to be drawn by
others. AS regards exports, some little
disagreement was heard. l beg again to
point out, what | have said in my paper.
that the exports have increased. that they
have not diminished on the whole, that
the total value of exports now is larger
than fifteen years ago, although that
increase has not been chiefly of sugar;
but even as regards the exports of sugar
and rum, the returns show that they are
really not less now than they were thirty
years ago. [ have only further to thank you
very much for the kind manner in which
you have listened to me-" loud cheers.)
-