Minutes of Evidence p.1401-1509 - Parliament of Victoria

J ~ L. Irving 1
conti:nved.
·8th May 1883,
C. G. Turner,
8th May 1883.
1476
49886. 1V e do not want to go into a discussion upon politics; we want to keep to facts if we can.
Do you disagree with the evidence that previous witnesses have given ?-Not altogether.
49887. In what respect do you disagree with them ?-I think we are not prepared to sweep away
all our Customs duties at present. Of course a revenue must be collected. ·
· 49888. You do not agree with their evidence so far.as the total abolition of the grain duties goes?­
No, not altogether.
49889. What do you recommend in place of it ?-I recommend the duties upon oats and barley to
be reduced and maize to be reduced one-half.
49890. What about wheat?-·wheat, I do not see that it is any use at all, it is a hindrance.
49891. You agree with them about wheat ?-Yes, it is a hindrance.
49892. What else do you wish to say ?--Pulse and bran, that ought to be swept away altogether
too.
None is coming here, and the duty is very high.
49893. Take the duty away altogether?-Certainly.
49894. What else ?-The reason, I say, wheat we fire now ex1Jorting, wheat and flour, both to a
large extent, and the injury that the duty upon the wheat does is that we cannot get a change of seed into
this colony; it always is desirable for a farming community to change their seed from one climate to another,
so as to produce a better sample and better crops.
49895. You agree with the evidence of Mr. Gibson ?-Cmtainly I do, as I have orders for wheat
and oats from New Zealand, but the excessive duty has prevented my bringing thel'n into the market except
at an excessive price.
49896. Is there any other point you wish to refer to ?-I do not know of anything else.
The witness VYithcl!rev;.
Chal'les George Turner sworn and examined.
49897. By the Chairman.-What are you ?-Grain merchant.
49898. How long have you been in the business ?-About twelve years.
49899. Will you state to the Commission, please, what you wish to add to the evidence of the
previous witnesses ?-I particularly wish to refer to the duty upon bran and pollard. I should prefer to
see it swept away altogether ; I do not see any reason for it at all.
49900. You propose the abolition of the duty upon bran and·pollard ?-Yes.
49901. That, I think, was the evidence o.f the biscuit manufacturers, was not it?-Yes, I think it
was, and mostly bran runs very scarce here at times; there i.s not sufficient produced here.
49902. In consequence of the very fine dressed flour, and it does not leave much ?-The millers
do not produce snfficient brn.n and pollard, and occasionally it becomes very high in price, and the duty
being very high, something like 5d. a bnshel, we cannot get it in.
49903. Do you produce bran and pollard at all, or do you simply deal ~nit '?-We simply deal in it.
I think the duty upon wheat and flour should be swept awa,y, as it is simply useless, and I do not see why
the millers should be protected by a duty upon bran and pollard. It is not necessary to them, and it
makes things much clearer. ·
4990,1. Is there anything else?-With regard to the duties upon grain, I should be inclined to go
back to the old tariff rather than take it off altogether, that is a shilling a cental upon oats and barley and
6d. upon maize. I do not think it would be a good thing to sweep away the duties altogether.
49905. You agree with 1\fr. Irving that it would be better to halve the duties upon oats, barley, and
maize
I think we shall soon be able to grow sufficient oats and barley for ourselves.
49906. Looked at in that light, would it not be better to keep them two years longer, and sweep
them away with the rest ?-No, I think not.
49907. \Vhy ?-I think it would be easier for the farmer. He could easily give us half the duty.
49908. But as soon as the farmers produce sufficient to supply our wants the thing rights itself?­
But oats is not like wheat; you will never get to the position you are in with wheat that you can be always
exporters. Some years you may export, and some years you would have to import. I thinl< the farmer has
so far had it all his own way with the 2s. duty, and now he ought to give the consumer a little show; and
the same with maize; the maize duty ha,s been a very heavy taxation upon the cabmen and wharfmen.
49909. As a mere dealer in the article, it wcmld make no difference to you, would it ?-It would
make a difference. We should do a much .larger business i:l' there were no duties.
49910. More export business ?-J'r1ore export business. Thn.t is where it troubles llS.
49911. vYould it tend to make Melbourne more and more the centre of the grain trade of the colonies?
~I think so, decidedly.
49912. W oulcl it help to get back the steam trade business, which, we are told, has altogether
forsaken us, thongh we see EO many at the wharf ?-I think it would, and it would certainly bring more
trafii.c here; fOT instance, the ·whole produce of the north coast of Tt1Sl.llania, if there were no duties, would
come here. .A.t P'·'e:~mlt it goes to Sydney or wherever can sell it, but it never comes here.
the Hon. Jlfr. Lo?'imer.--You W2vnt to go back to the 1877 tariff ?-Yes.
49914. w:1s 6d. a cental on maize then ?--Yes.
49915. Do you think you wm1ld have a duty upon maize at all ?-I think you ought to have a duty
upon maize, or you would have o::tts such a miserable by competition with maize.
49916. What would the oat grower here do would go into wheat growing.
49917. Would he be any the worse at that?-I cannot say.
49918. Do you think it pays as well to grow oats and barley as wheat '?-Some men it does ; it
depends upon the climate and the soil.
profitable.
For instance, at Lancefield you could not grow wheat to be
The witness withdrew.
Edward Vale,
8th May 1885.
Edward Vale sworn and examined.
49919. B,y the Chairman.-What are you ?-Cab proprietor.
49920. You are a delegate this afternoon from the Cabmen's Union ?-Yes.
49921. How many cabmen belong to that union ?-About 700.