TARIFF REFORM.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1372, 24 February 1912, Page 7

TARIFF REFORM.

DEBATE IN COMMONS. NEED FOR PREFERENCE DENIED BY MINISTERS. MOTION REJECTED. •» T«lecTHßh- Press AsiacttLtlca—OsDTilrM (Rec. February 21, 0.5 a.m.) London, February 23. In tho House of Commons Captain Tryon moved an amendment to the Address-in-Reply declaring that Hie Government's refusal to modify the fiscal system had imperilled the advantages of overseas preference, had deprived tho country of fair treatment from foreign countries, and had adversely affected labour conditions.

Mr. MacNamara, Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty, said it was eight years since Mr. Chamberlain's doleful predictions that tho country was heading for the rocks, all of which had been falsified. On the contrary, unemployment and pauperism had considerably declined. Mr. Alfred lyttelton (formerly Colonial Secretary in tho last Unionist Government) claimed that it was not unnatural that Canada's sacrifico of American reciprocity should have suggested some requital. It had become important to fortify the cohesion of Empire. Already Canada, Australia, nnd Now Zealand had almost completed preferential trade negotiations. A policy independent of the commercial action in tho overseas Dominions would cause friction. The timo had arrived to end the futile academic objections to colonial preference. Mr. Robertson, Under-Secretary to the Board of Trade, said he did not know what advantage tho colonics would get from foreign countries which they could not get through England. If they entangled themselves with colonial preference thoy might in turn lose the advantages of the niost-favoured-natioii clauses in their foreign treaties. It would ill become them to make proposals rendering food dearer. Harvests had failed in Australia and India before now, and what would happen if they reversed their fiscal policy and placed their dependency on the wheat of three Dominions? Tariff Reform was merely tho exploitation of one part of tho population in tho interests of another. That was a simple explanation of the Protectionist policy with regard to the self-governing colonies. The amendment was negatived, the voting being— For the amendment 193 Against the amendment ...... 258 Majority against 65