BRITISH POLITICS.

Gisborne Times, Volume X, Issue 1055, 24 November 1903, Page 2

BRITISH POLITICS.

THE FISCAL CONTROVERSY.

By Telegraph—Press Associaiion- Copyright

London, Nov. 29.

Mr Chamberlain, speaking at- Cardiff, continued : When dumpers had destroyed the steel bar trade they would dump tin plates. A hostile tariff, scientifically directed, kills trade, which under normal conditions would remain ours. A great change had come over public opinion in Britain. Unrestricted free imports were doomed. People were tired of lying down to bo trampled upon and bullied when they got up. Somo of his opponents recognise possible d'fficulties, but. propose no remedy. Except for the Ciiarlottenburg technical school schema and Lord Rosebery's specific commercial repose, they would go to sleep. “ Gentleman,” he said, 11 forget your troubles. If you suffer from nightmare try Lord Rosebery’s famed soporific pills.” Mr Chamberlain concluded : " I think we want commercial activity.”

A semi-official report issued at Pittsburg shows that out of 336 American tin plate mills 158 are idle, while 359 are working in Britain, compared with 404 last year. Sir J. T. Jenkins, writing to the Westminster Gazette, asserts that the Welsh tin plate products last year were tho largest in the history of the trade. Sir J. T. Brunner, interviewed on behalf of the Daily News, condemned the Government’s lack of assistance to trade and commerce. He declared that every other Government constantly gave direct aid. Apart from protective duties the Government could by cheaper transit, if it brought the inland ways up to date, do moro for trade than any possible protection could do. He also advocated the zone system on the railways, applying the bettermont system to railways, and making London available for the largest ships. He added that the resurrection of Danish agriculture under Government assistance had taught valuable lessons. Mr Groen, secretary of the Rural Labor League, in a letter to the Times, states that tho farmers and agricultural laborers of England and Wales decreased from 1,670,000 in 1851 to 981,333 in 1901, the wheat acreage from 3,350,390 in 1886 to 1,531,587 in the present year. He adds : 11 Mr Chamberlain’s proposals cannot mean less rural employment.” Mr Green addressed recently twenty village meetings in Liboral constituencies in Eastern England, and states that Mr Chamberlain’s proposals were carried with acclamation, excepting in three instances.

MR CHAMBERLAIN'S SPEECHES

NATION’S GREATNESS NOT MEASURED BY INCOME TAX.

By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyrigh Received 9.45 p.in., Nov. 23. London, Nov. 23.

Mr Chamberlain, in the course of his speech during the luncheon ut Cardiff, said that he believed his proposals would put wages in the workers’ pockets, and restore some of the lost industries. It would give us the industries which we ought to have, but we must look beyond the material benefits, inasmuch as the nation's greatness was not measured by the income tax or number of cheques received at tho clearing house. Britain had been tho greatest of kingdoms heretofore, but tboso days of the kingdoms had gone. Wo were dealing with an Empire, and the Empire cannot fulfil a great position unless supported and fortified by the co operation of her children across the sea. They would Dot inevitably support us unless we were ready, as they were, to make sacrifices for the greater interests coming into view.

MR CHAMBERLAIN ADDRESSES 3000 WORKERS.

By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright

Received 9.45 p.m., Nov. 23. London, Nov. 23.

Mr Chamberlain subsequently addrossed 3000 workers at Newport. He contrasted Mr Asquith’s optimism with Sir H. C. Bannerman’s quotation in a recent speech that one-third of tho population was on the vergo of hunger. “My ideal,” added Mr Chamberlain, “is to give full employment and fair wages for every industrious man. The allegation that there was an increasing influx of foreign goods to Great Britain and decreasing exports to protected countries was due to employers’ want of energy and workers’ want of intelligence, and was based on ignorance. If you discovered inventions enabling you to make steel cheaper than other countries, those oountrios would raise their tariffs. Thus you who had crawled in under the new invention would quickly crawl out again.

THE COLONIES’ ATTITUDE. “ STATEMENT THAT THEY HAD NOT RESPONDED WAS A SLANDER.”

By Telegraph—Press ißSoeiation—Copyrighl Received 11.4 p.m., Nov. 23. London, Nov. 23.

Mr Chamberlain, continuing his speech, ridiculed his opponents’ fears of the results of meeting foreign protectionists on their own ground, and cited the successful abolition of the sugar bounties. He dwelt upon the German newspaper threats with reference to Canada’s preference to the Motherland and German fears regarding South Africa and Australia. Well, South Africa and New Zealand had given replies, and others were going to follow. He applied the lessons of dumping to Newport, adding that Lysaght had informed him that of the steel dumped at his works 63 per cent came in foreign vessels. Dumping also occurred in the colonies. We were not safe in colonial markets unless we arranged to secure British trade in Imperial markets. His opponents' statement that the colonies had not responded was a slander. Not a day passed without bis receiving letters from colonial statesmen and others, including manufacturers’ and other associa tions in Australia, assuring him of reciprocal support. They were entitled to believe in them in future. “ When they gfow to manhood they may prove children who were almost giants compared with their parents,” he added. If they rejected offers they were not afraid to stand alone, but we, I am convinced, will meet them in the spirit they would show us. A resolution expressing high appreciation of Mr Chamberlain’s services and thanks for his speech was carried with enthusiasm.

CANADA’S POSITION. By Telegraph—Press Association— Copyrigh; Received 12.19 a.m., Nov. 24 Ottawa, Nov. 23.

Mr G, A. Drummond, President of the Canadian Manufacturers’ Association, outlined the position of the Association in regard to preference as follows :—We favor a general tariff approximate to that of the United States ; also reciprocal trade with the Empire, with preference to the Motherland. In order to make the existing preference of real value the basis of Canada’s tariff must be raised, with the view of transferring to the Motherland many orders which now go to America and Germany, but the minimum tariff must afford Canadian producers such protection as will enable them to maintaiu wages and a standard of living on a parity with that of the United States.

London, Nov. 23.

Alfred Marshall, Professor of Political Economy at Cambridge University, in a letter to the Unionist Free Food League, admits that the changes of half a century in the economical conditions of the Western World have been immense, not wholly to Britain’s advantage. He adds: Thirty —"'s ago I was convinced that protection, frit could bo »!*** “J wisely, might on the waucountries in a certain stage of industrial development, That induced me to inquire whether freetrade was wholly right for England. I have pursued the inquiry ever since, and have gradually settled down to the conclusion that the changes during the last two generations have greatly increased the harm which would bo done to England by even a moderate protective policy, and freetrade is more a vital necessity to England now than when jt was adopted,