Page 392 - clra62_0019-(GIPE)
P. 392

384        ECONOMIC  INQUIRIES  AND  STUDIES
                  of distribution  and  less  taxes, and to  show the cost  of distribution
                  and the expense of national services as separate items.  The final  result
                  is,  of course, the same as  that  followed in  1881;  but  it is important
                  to  realize  that, taking the  community in  mass, when  a  man buys  a
                  pound of tea, for instance, or a gallon of spirits, he pays only part of
                  the  sum b,e gives for the tea or the  spirits, and that the remainder is
                  paid either  for  government services or for the expense of bringing  it
                  from the wholesale dealer who receives it from  the producer, or from
                  the producer himself when  there is  no  intermediary, to  the door of
                  the consumer.
                    It will be observed  that two items tare added in  italics in order  to
                  show a correspondence  between  the aggregate income and aggregate
                  expenditure.  But  this  is  merely  to  "round  off,"  and  there  is  no
                  pretence at  exact statement.  The question  of how professional  and
                  domestic  services should  be dealt  with is,  of course, a  controversial
                  one, but  as  they are  included  in  the  income, an  equal  sum  should
                  appear  in  the  expenditure,  less  amounts  paid  for  such  services  in-
                  cluded in  the  cost  of production and distribution.  The  services, as
                  for  builders  and  others,  which  result  in  permanent  works,  really
                  represent an investment of capital, to which  the services of a certain
                  portion of the community have been appropriated.  They have created
                  so much' which is not consumed:, The increase of capital since 1885
                  having  been  about 5,000 million  £, or  277  million  £  per  annum,
                  the figure  of 264 million £  here  shown  as  the annual investment  at
                  the  present time  is  fairly  justified.  Probably the figure is lower than
                  it  ought  to  be, and  a  higher estimate  of income should  have  been
                  worked up to.
                    With  regard  to  particular  items,  I  have  to  make  the  following
                  observations supplementary to the information contained in the table
                  itself:
                    Bread.-The value of wheat and wheat flour imported in  1902 was
                  36 million £  sterling, the  quantity being  81,000,000 cwts.  of wheat
                  and  19t  million  cwts.  of  flour,  or  about  108,000,000  cwts.  in
                  equivalent  cwts.  of wheat -alone,  giving  a  price  of 6s.  8d.  per cwt.,
                  and about 29S' per quarter.  The home produce, estimated at 7,000,000
                  quarters, gives a sum at the same price of about 10 million £-total,
                  46 million £, making, with the addition for manufacture, etc., a total
                  of about 60 million £  as here  stated.  It is an omission, perhaps, as
                  it was in  the Report of 1881, that  nothing is put  down for  oats  and
                  other grains used as food,  but the omission seems immaterial for  the
                  present purpose, especially as we  should  have  to  make a deduction,
                  if the matter was gone  into  minutely, for home wheat consumed  by
                  cattle and not used as human food.  The heading " bread" of course
                  includes biscuits and other manufactures from wheat.
                    Potatoes.-Imports, about £5 lOS.  per ton,  1.6 million £.  Home
                  production  for  hOllsehold  use  at  2  cwts.  per  head  of  population,
                  4,200,000  tons  at,  say,  £5  per  ton-total  23  million  £.  The
                  estimate of 2 cwts.  per head of popUlation was given by Mr. Turnbull
   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   396   397