BRITISH POLITICS.

Gisborne Times, Volume X, Issue 1034, 29 October 1903, Page 2

BRITISH POLITICS.

WAR SPEECHES.

By Telegraph—Press Association —Copyrighi

London, Oct. 27,

Alt- Chamberlain, in a letter to a municipal candidate at Birmingham, expressed regrot that he was relinquishing the great work whereon ho was engaged at the Colonial Office, but said ho was sure it was tho best course to take for the sake of the cause he had at heart. It was the workers’ cause, and unless wo were content to fall back into a condition of a second Holland and be a distributing and not a manufacturing Dation, we must make up our minds to meet the conditions. ( Air Asquith, speaking at Newcastle, said that the building trade had grown 60 per cent, in thirty years, and coal 100 per cent. The carriage of foreign goods in British ships was worth ninety millions annually, and ought to be added to the exports. If foreigners paid taxes on bread, meat, and dairying products, why not tax maize and bacon ?

There are 55,000 applications for 5000 seats in the Hippodrome at Liverpool to hear Mr Chamberlain speak to-night under the auspices of the Working Men’s Conservative Association.

Lord Stanley, speakiag at Howick, said bread and meat wore tho rawest of raw materials. He was not prepared to say that the cost was wasted. Ho was unable to say whether ho might not eventually follow Mr Chamberlain. If ho did, he would tell his constituents ho would not fear separating from the party if he thought it was pursuing a wrong course. Air Balfour and Sir Alichael HicksBeach attended a banquet to Mr Colston, member for Tbombury division, Gloucestershire, at Bristol, on tho 13th, Sir M. Hicks-Beach supports Mr Baliour’s policy.

AIR .CHAAIBERLAIN AT. LIVERPOOL., ,

By, Telegraph—Press AssociationCopyright. Received 10.45 p.m., Oct. 28.. LONDON, Oct. 28.

The Earl and Countess of Derby and many members of the House of Lords and House of Commons were present at Mr Chamberlain’s address at the Hippodrome, Liverpool, under the auspices of the Working Men’s Conservative Association. He received a splendid ovation and spoke for an hour and a-half, amid growing marks of approval and outbursts of prolonged cheering. He opened hy comapring the injury done to British trade by foreign dumping and the injury done to small shops by the gigantic emporiums’ surplus sales below cost price. His wellground fear had been described as “ dumphobia ” by a lawyer trying to be humorous about the business, although he knew nothing whatever on"the subject. It seemed a curious thing to Mr Asquith, not to us. Dumping occurs only when resorting to dumping in a state of depression. Sir Edward Grey, at Alnwick, h.ad admitted that niucji might be sajd for, the idea of an Empire within which there were no barriers, or which imposed duties on foreign goods only., “ .That,”- said Mr Chamberlaiiu “ is my ideal, but. as a practical statesman I know that it cannot be realised in a twinkling. If Sir Edward Grey is unable to follow me, it is because my, proposals are only a step, though a great one, towards the ideal he and I s-harc. The whole problem as it affects the worker is contained in the one word ‘ employment.’ However important were cheap food and higher wages, if workmen' lost employment nothing could compensate them for the loss. An interesting thing had escaped his opponents’ attention. When free trade was carried, the workers were neither represented nor consulted. The movement was a manufacturers’ and middle-class movement. The leaders anticipated tiiat wages would be maintained at •a reasonable level. Received 12.9 a.m., Oct. 29

Mr Chamberlain, continuing, said that the freetrade movement was one to give cheap food:' If the laborer had cheep foocj it was considered he would Be able to work for low wages, thus enabling employers to compete with foreigners. John Bright, in ISSB, writing to a friend in America, declared that if Americans were protectionists they wero compelled to give higher wages and shorter hours. Mr Chamberlain paid leaders of freetrade auy-

how believed that a big loaf meant lower wages. Chartists were entirely opposed to freetrade, describing it as a red herring across the path of electoral roform, but thanks to Bright workers were enfranchised, and have a majority. “They can,” said Mr Chamberlain, “ say yes to the proposals or crush them. I have an idea that the workers on this question ar3 in advance of their leaders It so we will win. The Cobdon Club may rage furiously in all the languages of the worid, and free foolers may imagine vain things, but we win. I appeal from the Trades Union Congress to you,against the officials to the men appointing them. These officials eirculiiied a manifesto through the Oobden Club. Why, the Cobden Club declared trades unions were based on brutal tyranny aud monopoly.

Received Oct. 29, 12.29 a.m.

Mr Chamberlain added that from bis stundpoint it was quite impossible to reconcile freetrade to a trade unionist. Mr Kcir Hardie agrees with me. Mr Keir Hardie declared in the House of Commons that no member of the House of Commons supporting trades unionism could be a consistent freetrader, and added that trades unionists do not intend to allow the sweating aud underpaid laborers of Continental nations to compete with them. Is that your opinion? (Cries of 11 Yes.”) Then you will not be freetraders. You must consider besides the consumer the producer, who is more important. Tbe legitimate purposes of trado unionism are to secure higher wages consistent with tho conditions of each trade, to raise the standard of living, to prevent unfair competition, to provide for the health and safety of employed, aud for tho care of their fellows who are suffering temporary illness or misfortune.

-ffliK "Received 12.44 a.m., Oct. 29. Continuing, Mr Chamborlain said tho Factory, Mines, Truck Acts, compensation to workmen, fair wages clause, and prohibitions of prison-made goods were all opposed to the doctrine froetrade, which was against interference with individual freedom. “It is,” he said, ‘ too lute now to call mo a heretic for declining to consider sacred the doctrines which my accusers have long since abandoned. What is tbe use of prohibiting sweating in England if we allow sweated goods to enter? Limitation of hours aud precautions for safety add tn tbe cost of production, and increase tho difficulties of selling. Unless manufacturers are given a compensating advantage, they are unable to compote, aud you will be vvorkless. Could we calculated the cost of precautions to England over and above similar precautions in other countries wo would be justified, without an infraction of freetrade, in imposing a duty corresponding to that cost.”