PREFERENTIAL TARIFF.

Gisborne Times, Volume IX, Issue 928, 29 June 1903, Page 2

PREFERENTIAL TARIFF.

IMPORTANT ADDRESSES BY CHAMBERLAIN AND BALFOUR. SPEECHES CHEERED THROUGH OUT. By Telegraph—Press Association Copyright Received -1 45 p.m„ June 28. London. June 27. The address in the casket presented to Mr Chamberlain by the Constitutional Club on Friday was written a year ago. Mr 13ulfour, in the course ,-t a speech making the pia senta’ion. > u 1 that it well’d be lolly to in .ke fiscal differences the ns'of party or nwuhy. Negotiations in it? true sense was impossible under present conditions. Our balloon had been kept up by throwing out sand bags, and when the sand was cxnuusted we must consider our position. Tue issues raised were in no wise new. Existing evils ami dangers bad been emphasized for years by tiie Government or its members, and the public would make a mistake in concentrating its gaze on particular methods of meeting evils. It was not a controversy as to whether food should be taxed, but whether evils existed which demanded a remedy. There was no real or substantial reason

lucre was no real or why the pi iJu-c ! policy, ii wist- ami prae ticai in other respects, shield not be carried oat without increasing the cost of living What was wanted was freedom in negotiation for the purpose of increasing freedom in trade, untrammelled by a pro hibitivo tarill. lie would say nothing about the further objects of strengthening the Imperial unity, leaving that to Mr Chamberlain, the one man dead or alive who h;is given life and expression to the idea of Imperial unity. (Cheers.) Received 5 p.m., June ‘J7. Mr Chamberlain, replying, reciprocated Mr lialfour’s compliment with a generous protestation of loyalty and fidelity. Lie paid a giowing tribute to the colonies, nil lying the ideal of common obligation to the Umpire despite' the iutiitlcivnce, slights, and sneers of the Opposition in the past. There were many methods of promoting closer unity. Nevertheless, they must consult, and follow the wishes and interests of the colonies, remembering that llu success of any Imperial union de pended on the cordial support tendered trout all parts, lie, in a certain sense, as representative of the colonies, was hound to ask for an enquiry in pursuance of their suggestion that closer unity would most profitably he reached by commercial union through preferential tanll’s. This was no party question. Tlio preferential tariff was the on y system capable of keeping the Empire tog-thcr. lie. suggested as to whether the export of liriush maoufaclures to the eo-omes did not exc-a-d those 10 all the protec ed Slates of Europe nml America together, it group of exports tiiat ,vero continually and repi.l,y rtecreasing |in quantity and piolitable character, lie suggested whether it would not be wiser to cultivate a trade with 10 million kinsmen taking from us Till per head, rather than loso tho opportunity for tho sake of attempting to conciliate 000 million foreigners, taking a few shillings’ worth per head, and added that the inquiry will also compriso the condition of tho relative progress of tho protected countries regarding a policy of retaliation, or, as Mr Balfour better described it, a policy of negotiation. If, in having something to bargain with, wo fail in our negotiations, wo reserve to Great Britain her vast production, instead of tolerating ruin in tho irou and textilo industries by tho importation of goods manufactured in tho protected States, so that hero they are below tho cost price. He described ns monstrous tlie accusation that tho Unionist party intended to impose greater burdens on the poor, and the cry of “ tho dear loaf” ho declared to ho an imposture. Even if tho prico of a particular article were raised by the tariff, there would bo compensations in other directions, and tho cost of living would not ho increased in the slightest degree. Ho urged an impartial enquiry into tho relation and interests of the majority of tho population. Tho speeches wore chcerod throughout. The Standard, commenting on tho speeches, asks if the Colonies will so far waive their policy of protecting local industries, so as to open a remunerative market to British goods, and adds that it will probably be harder to convert somo of tbe Colonies than to obtain the assent of some of tho constituencies to Mr Chain heriain’s scheme.