EMPIRE’S TRADE.

Gisborne Times, Volume X, Issue 1000, 19 September 1903, Page 2

EMPIRE’S TRADE.

MR BALFOUR'S GREAT MESSAGE By Telt-graoh—Press Association —Copyright London, Sept. 17. The Freetrtwe Union, in reply tu Mr Baifour's manifesto, bus issued a statement declaring it will bo time to consider the proposals dead svlien Mr Chamberlain has withdrawn them. If retaliation becomes the accepted policy of the Government Free traders will in do wise slacken their resistance.

The Tones agrees with Mr Balfour in emphasising the contention that coal and machinery, die two main articles of export, are used for fostering foreign proto ed manufacturers’ competition against ourselves The Financial News says Mr Balfour goes to the heart of the question in his reference to the permanency of protection abroad, and unless we protest wo will lose a chance of produo'ng economically ; otherwise what is the meaning of his historymaking message, which does not support the supposition that Mr Baifour is hostile to the incidental partial protection accruing from an Imperial preferential tariff. The Financial Times declares that Mr Balfour’s position will be endorsed by the bulk of the Unionists.

The first edition of Mr Balfour’s pamphlet was sold in two hours. A larger edition is being printed. Canadian feeling resents the absence of reference to preference. It considers Mr Balfour subordinates the Empire for local party purposes. The St. James’ Gazette announces that if his full programme for Imperial union is not adopted, Mr Chamberlain will resign.

Tne Standard's Vienna correspondent states that exporters admit the adoption of Mr Chamberlain’s policy would ruin Austria’s trade with Australasia.

Sydney, Sept. 18. Tho Telegraph says that what Mr Balfour favors apparently is in tho abstract protection outright, and actually a tariff which can bo enforced, being suspended according to the Government’s view of the the advisability or otherwise of retaliation. If Great Brituin began to lay about her with a retaliatory tariff we should havo either to sharo with her natural retaliatory measures on foreigners, or exercise absolute fiscal independence. Fortunately there is not much prospect of such a dilemma being forced on us and the nations, and generally British sagacity may bo relied upon to confirm tho verdict of tho recent bye-elections and labor and co-operativo societies throughout tho country, and denouuco Mossrs Chamborlain and Balfour’s plan of taxing down the undeniable prosperity of the country.

BREAK-UP IN THE BRITISH CABINET. OHAMBERLfIIN RESIGNS. ALSO MR RITCHIE AND LORD GEORGE HAMILTON. CORRESPONDENCE OE GREAT INTEREST. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright Received, 9.5 p.m., Sept. 18 London, Sept. 18. It is officially stated that the King has accopted the resignations of Chamberlain, Ritchie, aud Hamilton.

LETTER FROM MR CHAMBERLAIN TO MR BALFOUR.

By Telegraph—Press Association —Copyright Received 10.58 p.m., Sept. 18. London, Sopt, IS. Mr Chamberlain, in a letter to Mr Balfour on tho 9th, in anticipation of Monday’s Cabinet meeting, said: “I most carefully considered tho situation as it affects tho Government and the groat question of fiscal reform. When you, in replying to a deputation in reference to tho Corn Tax, and Fat Birmingham called attention to the changes in the commercial position during the last half contury and suggested an inquiry on the subject, I do not think either of us intended to provoke a purely party controversy. We raised, not for the first time, a question of the greatest national and Imperial importance in the hope that it would be impartially discussed by frieuds aud op pouents, and an inquiry initiated which would lead to conclusions which would be accepted by tho majority of the people and represented accordingly by the results of next general elections. Whether the view is reason or not, it certainly was not sharod by the Liberal leaders, who scouted the idea that a system generally accepted in 1846 could possibly require any modification in 1903. The whole party organisation being directed against an attempt to alter, or to even enquire into, the foundation of the fiscal policy, advocates of reconsideration meanwhile have to grant them an advantage owing to the admitted differences of opinion. The Unionist party organisation being paralysed and our opponents in full possession of the field, they placed in the forefront of their arguments their objections to taxation to food, and even to any readjustment of existing taxation towards the mutual advantage of ourselves, the colonies, and the Empire’s closer union.”

IMPORTANCE OF COLONIES’ TRADE NOT RECOGNISED.

By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright Received 11.24 p.m., Sept. 18 London, Sept. 18. In his letter to Mr Balfour, Mr Chamberlain continued “ The unscrupulous use made of the old cry of the dear loaf and in the absence of full public discussion, serious prejudice was created. People are generally alive to the danger of unrestricted competition on tho part of foreigners, who close their markets against us, while they find in ours an outlet for their surplus production. Still, they do non appreciate the importance of colonial markets to our trade nor the danger of losing them unless we meet in some way their natural patriotic desire for preference. The result for the present at any rate is that preference to the colonies involving any new duty, however small, on articles of food, even if accompanied by a reduction of taxation on the other articles of food of equally universal consumption, is not acceptable to the majority of the constituencies. However regrettable or mistaken this decision may be, no Government of a democratic country can ignore it.” GAN BEST PROMOTE THE CAUSE OUTSIDE.

By Telegraph— Press Association— Copyright Received, 12.4 a.m., Sept. 19 London, Sept. IS. Mr Chamberlain continued : “ Therefore I feel as the immediate practical policy of preference cannot be pressed hopefully at present, although there is a very Btrong feeling in favor of the other branch of the policy, that of giving fuller discretion to the Government to negotiate with foreigners for freer exchange, enabling them to retaliate in tho absence of concession of just claims to greater reciprocity, and as I believe you share with me these views, it seems to me you will be absolutely justified in adopting them as the policy of your Government, although they involve some changes in its constitution. As Secretary of State for the colonies I have been in aa especial sense a representative of the policy of closer union. I believe it possible to-day, but it may be impossible to-morrow, to make arrangements for such union. I have had unexampled opportunities of watching the trend of events, and appreciating thefeeling of kinsmen beyond the seas. I stand in a different position to my colleagues, and I would be justly blamuble if I remained in office and accepted the exeluston of so important a part of my programme. I think, with absolute loyalty to the Government and its policy, with no fear embarrassing it, I can best promote the cause outside. I cannot but hope that in an independent position arguments may meet with less prejudice thau from a party leader. Accordingly, I suggest you limit the Government’s present policy to the assertion of oar freedom and connection with all com mercial relations with foreigners, and agree to my resigning. I will devote myself to explaining and popularising the Imperial Union. Experience hp.s convinced me that it is an essential feature in the w.elfaro I and prosperity of the nation. j

MR BALFOUR’S REPLY. A GENEROUS TRIBUTE. “DONE MORE THAN ANY MAN LIVING OK DEhD.” By Telegraph -Press association—Copyright Received 1220 a m., Sept. 19, London, Sept. 18. Mr Balfour replied on the 16ih : “I agree with you that the time has come for a change in tho fiscal canon whereby it bound ourselves in our dealing to other Governments. It seems paradoxical that you should leave the Cabinet at the moment others are leaving and disagreeing on this very point, yet I reluctantly admit some force ui the arguments based on your special personal relations to preference. You nave done more than any man living or dead to bring home to the citizens of the Empire a consciousness of Impeiial obligations aud the interdependence of fragments whereinto tho Empire is divided. I believe you are right in holding that interdependence should be expressed by commercial equally with political aud military relations. I believe with you closely in a fiscal union between the Motherland and tho colonies. It is good for both and bared on fitting terms tho advantages will increase as the colonies grow in wealth and population. If ever there were any differences between us they merely related to the practicability of the proposal requiring coiouial limitation in all-round development of protection aud on the Motherland’s part in the establishment of preference to important colonial products. Isay nothing about limitation, but in regard to preference involving taxation however light upon foodstuffs, I am convinced with you that opinion is not yet ripe for reasons which are discoverable in past balties and recent political misrepresentations. I am deeply concerned in your ability under very special circumstances to remain a Minister. I do not venturo to raise objection, and if you think you can best servo tho interests of Imperial unity by freely pressing your views on preference in an independent position I will not criticise your determination. The loss to the Government will be great indeed, but the gain to tho causo you have at heart may bo greater still. If so, what can Ido but acquiesce ?”

LONDON AND PROVINCES STARTLED.

MOST ORIGINAL RESIGNATION IN HISTORY. Received 12.55 a.m., Sopt. 19. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright London, Sept. 18.

The newspapers predict that the resignations, particularly Chamberlain’s, will startle London and the provinces, although Birminghamites for some time havo been convinced ho would doff his coat for tho biggest fight of tho generation. The Morning Post says that it is tho most original resignation in historical memory. Chamberlain and Balfour remain tho best of iriends, thore being not even a political or party breach. Tho resignation will win tho hoarts of his host countrymen and the admiration of a statesman who made a daring risk to himself and his prospects on his convictions. Recoived 1 a.m., Sept. 19.

Austen Chamberlain does not resign. The'Times says that while Mr Balfour is backed by the Duke of Devonshire and tho rest of the Ministry except the Cobdonito seeeders, and has Mr Chamberlain’s loyal, independent support, reconstruction of the Cabinet will not involve serious difficulty. It adds that the correspondence reflects the highest credit on both. Cuamborlain's retirement may paradoxically strengthen the Government’s policy aud position in some respects. Tho Daily Chronicle says Mr Chamborlain, in proposing the particular line the Cabinet actually adopted, won a conspicuous victory in the Cabinet, though suffering a startling reverse in the country. The Cabinet has not rejected, but merely postponed the preference proposals. The Standard, while not anticipating the adoption oy tho country of Mr Chamberlain’s proposals, confesses his inevitable retirement is an administrative misfortune, and declares that his ungrudging admission regarding the constituencies is creditable to his sense of honor and political discernment, though ho does not believe the drift of opinion is permanent.