BRITISH POLITICS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1465, 27 May 1905, Page 2

BRITISH POLITICS.

THE FISCAL QUESTION.

By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyrlghi London, May 26.

Mr John Burns, in a letter declining the request of tbo Froetrado Liberal Association to visit Australia and lecture on Mr Chamborlain’s proposals, says : “ Fortunately for Great Britain, Mr Chamberlain is badly beaten in argument, is hopelessly at fault in his facts, and /continuously . wrong in his statistic?. lam somewhat surprised that a few responsible Australians should have been fascinated by his fallaoies, and some Labor legislators too simple to see through his Home electoral devices. The only effect of the revival of protection would be to disrupt the forces of reactionary Imperialism, AU the best minds and most disinterested statesmen and every one of the Labor members are against Mr Chamberlain. I suspect some of your politicians ore this are sorry they identified themselves with the most costly, dangerous and ruinous policy ever projected against the well-being of the British people.”

STORMY SCENES IN HOUSE OF COMMONS.

By Telegraph—Press Association —Copyright Received 11.44 p.m., May 26. London, May 25.

The House of Commons .met in a heated condition, and there were stormy scenes.

Replying to a question, Mr Balfour said that if the colonial conference re-assembled before the dissolution, it would meet under the terms of the resolution adopted at the last conference. He never suggested that such: a conference should consider colonial preference, but refused to state that if the conference adopted a scheme of Imperial preference such would not be submitted at tho general election. Replying to Mr Churchill’s direct question, Would the Government rofrain from submitting any proposals for Imperial preference to the conference meeting before the dissolution ? Mr Balfour Bald, “We do not make proposals any moro than at the previous conference.”

The Daily Chroniclo says the answer committed tho Government to nothing. Received 11.56 p.m., May ?6.

Mr Balfour offered Tuesday for a vote of censure if Sir H. C. Bannerman would pledge himself to prevent a recurrence of the outrage on decency and fair play. He indicated that Mr Lyttelton would speak early and himself later.

Sir H. C. Bannerman replied that if he gave the undertaking he would be usurping the authority of the chair. He added that Mr Balfour’s departure from invariable practice had provoked the disorder. When there was a direct imputation of dishonorable conduct, Mr Balfour ought to have explained immediately. Mr Balfour refused tq accept such a doctrine.

Sir H. O. Banhermsn said since censure would deal with the whole question of the colonial conference, it would be perfectly reasonable for the to spoak as it chose. There would be no ground for disorder if ordinary procedure were adopted. 1 Mr Balfour fixed Tuesday, since Sir H. 0. Bannerman had given the pledge in grudging, stumbling language. The Liberals shouted that there had been no pledge.