[To the Editor of the : SPECTATOR.] SIR , —Ma 'or Stuart-Monteith in
his letter appearing in your columns (March 22nd) calls attention to the effects of Protec- tive duties in causing over-production. This aspect of the matter is well worth attention. The increased Preference granted to Colonial tobacco is a case in point.
The tobacco preference was raised by the Conservative Government to 2s. per lb. One result was that in Southern Rhodesia production increased within two years from 2 to 24 million lb. as against a consumption in Britain of only 5 million lb.. The Conservative DOminion Secretary visited Rhodesia in .1927 and boldly stated that owing to the grant of the Preference the home market for Rhodesian tobacco was practically unlimited. Within a few months of this " boost the local Government was paying the wages of the native labourers employed by numbers of ruined tobacco producers. A recent uncontradicted estimate given in the Rhodesian Legislative Assembly placed these . settlers' losses at three millions sterling. The same results followed in Canada, Northern Rhodesia, Nyasaland and South Africa. The COnser:-ative Party could not have caused more harm to Colonial tobacco Producers had it set out with the definite purpose of ruining them. Evil is wrought by want of thought, and Preferenees are an easy, tinkering palliative, likely to be grasped at by those disinclined for the labOurs of Prone' r diagnosis.
As an old tobacco producer I have, weathered many a storm and succeeded in profitable production in pre-War days without a Preference. But the whirlwind raised by the Conservative Party is beyond me, four crops lie practically unsold, prices are comparatively less than pre-War, sales can only be effected at a heavy loss and I now subscribe myself (as can many others), .
" A COLONIAL PRODUCER RUINED BY PREFERENCE."
Previous page
