PREFERENTIAL TRADE.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2074, 8 May 1907, Page 2

PREFERENTIAL TRADE.

Press Association.—Copyright. SPEECHES AT MANCHESTER. LONDON, May C. The Manchester reception was wonderfully enthusiastic. Tlie Mayor, in presenting tho Premiers with the freedom of tho city, stated that two millions of people in a radius of ten miles watched the proceedings of the conference- with the deepest sympathy and interest. Ihe ceremony wa s not only a personal tribute, but also a proof of tlie affectionate brotherly feeling towards the oversea communities.' Sir Joseph Ward, on behalf of the Premiers, acknowledged the extraordinarily demonstrative welcome, which tho colonists warmly reciproeated. There were scarcely a familv m the United Kingdom without relations in the great colonies. The recipients did not regard tho presentation of the freedom as an empty form,, but as an emblem of the affectionate regard that a worldfamed city felt for the oversea communities. Such events increased the colonists’ pride that they were living under a glorious flag, repreclon} 1 " 8 StlCngth) P° ,ver > and freeTho Mayor proposed the toast of Our Guests” at the luncheon. r ,, J ° Se P ]l W:l rd, in responding, egretted that time did not permit mJ IS u lll “ Callal > whidl brought Manchester in direct contact with ie shipping and commerce of tho uorld. New Zealand was able to estity to the advantages of direct lade with the famous centre of commerce. Mr Seddon, liis -distinguished predecessor, worked incessan j to ensure direct communuication, and nobody had done more to strengthen the ties of Empire. It was vitally necessary that both the Motherland and the colonies should develop trade.. Nothing ought to he e . undone to secure closer trade union. While it was possible to admire Germany’s energetic efforts to acquire trade abroad, yet if the British flag was to remain in the ascendant for thorn as carriers, it would ho unwise to ignore the endeavors of Continental rivals to usurp British trade. British merchants ought to support British shipping every where, thereby placing trade on a sounder basis. emphasised the

mi mSSSS! universal kindness shown to the Pre xniors by all parties. Though preference had not succeeded at the Conference, the Premiers fully recognised Britain’s right to control liei own fiscal policy, just as the colonies exercised a similar right in their territories* He denied that the Premiers had experienced any rudeness. CONVERTS TO PREFERENCE. LONDON, May 0. Messrs W. Hays, Fisher, and E. I A. Yerburgli, who were amongst Sir I Michael Hicks-Beach’s followers who urged in ,1903 the need of cautious inquiry, and resolutely objected to protective taxation of imports of food, now writes to the Times that the preferential case submitted to the Imperial Conference has so strongly impressed them that they preferred to recognise a moderate corn duty would not. infringe the sacred principles, and may be an instrument of the greatest Imperial utility. Lord Stanley, a Unionist freetrader, joins Messrs Yerburgli and Fisher on the question of preference. MR. ASQUITH’S ATTITUDE. LONDON, May G. The Times, in a special article on the preference debate at tho Imperial Conference, says: Air Asquith’s tone was frankly that of a local particularist, prepared to consider practical proposals for tho improvement of channels of inter-Imperial trade, but apparently lie does not realise that it is the duty of the country rejecting proposals whereon all others are agreed to formulate counter-proposals. AUSTRALIAN COMMERCIAL . FEELING. MELBOURNE. May i. At a meeting of the Chamber of Manufacturers, Mr. Joshua, the

President, declared that if, as their opponents said, preferential trade and protection could not exist together, then they were not preferential traders. If preference was dead he did not think many people in Australia would pass sleepless nights in consequence. It was quite true they would howl if a proposal were made to reduce the duties, because the present duties in many respects were a mockory of protection. They had reason to be proud of tho manner in which Mr. Deakin was representing them, hut it might bo he was a shade too enthusiastic and Rightly overstated tho question if I • ho led British people to believe Australians were hungering and thirsting for preference. CHEAPER CABLE' RATES. MELBOURNE, May 7. The Postmaster-General is now making an investigation into the cable rates with a view of ascertaining the possible effect of a reduction. Personally, he would like to see Sir • Joseph Ward’s suggestion that the rates come dpwn to a shilling a word adopted. Enquiries, howover, convinced him that so heavy a decrease would be impracticable. He sees no reason why a reduction should not be made to 2s or 2s 6d if the other partners to the Pacific cable and the owners of the Canadian land line and cable company will agree. Lately he

has been considering a proposal for transmitting free press cable news. The idea strikes him as commendable, but it will be necessary to secure the co-operation of other parties to the service before it could be adopted. Another difficulty would be the loss on terminal charges, from which a substantial revenue is now derived. A LABOR VIEW. Received May 7, 11.10 p.m. MELBOURNE, May 7. Mr. Prendergast, leader of the Labour Party, in a speech said the

people were "the creators of those who were pleading for preferential ’ trade—the same people who had led them into the Boer war. Of all the resolutions submitted in favor of preferential trade not one was designed for the benefit of the- people—thej were all *sr traders. The sort of preferential trade English capitalists wanted was the kind they sent their soldiers out to get for them They had their hand on nearly everything in Australia and every time they got a show they cut down wages and increased the Hours of labor, so as to create bigger dividends If the people put up with that sort of thing from a foreign Government they would be doing an injustice to themselves. SPEECH BY MR. LLOYD GEORGE. Received May "7, 9.57 p.m. LONDON, May 7. Tho Imperial Conference was resumed. .I ,1 Dr. Jameson hoped Mr. Lloyd George would give a more sympathetic answer than Mr. Asquith s dem- ' give refusal. He moved a further resolution: “That while affirming the resolution of-1902 the Conference considers that as the British Government through the South African Customs Union" is allowed preference against foreigners to the United Kingdom, Canada, Australasia, and all other British possessions which have gran - ed reciprocity, the British Government should now be taken into con sideration tlio granting of a like preference to all portions of the Lmpire on present dutiable articles ill the British tariff. ; Sir Wilfrid Laurier thought consideration of the resolution might be postponed until the main resolution was considered. All". George’s very elaborate and abb- speeeeh’ on the question of preference occupied three hours, necessitating smother day’s debate to .enable Mr. Churchill to speak.’ It is believed that’ the Government* will propose a vague non-committal rcso-

jutiyu. - lU’ceived May 7, 11.18 i>.m. Mr George adopted an interrogative form. Mr. Deakin frequently replied anil others occasionally. Mr. George said the Government was willing to consider the suggestion though nothing would induce them to change their position re-

warding the United Kingdom’s tan it He challenged Sir William Uyne’s and Dr. Smartt’s statements and arguments. He reviewed the United Kingdom’s position as gauged by the teßt of growth of imports and experts.. Tlie.ir protectionist rivals admitted that while British trade with the rest of tlie colonies was satisfactory, Australia’s position was unsatisfactory.. This called for full inquiry as to whatever action could be applied since it alone showed a considerable decline in British imports. Ho contrasted Britain’s circumstances with Germany and France, maintaining that the highest wages and shortest hours were paid to British skilled laborers, yielding goods of the highest value. The United Kingdom’s exports and manufactures were much higher per head than those of France, Germany', or the United States. Her tonnage of shipping was enormously greater. Referring to Sir William Lyne’s rejnai’ks regarding foreign shipping in Australian waters, Mr. George said the totaol entrances and • clearances of oversea trade in Australian ports 5n 1905 were under two million tons, flag was 51 million tons. The Imperial Government might ignore the whilst shipping undor the British mandate given to Mr. Deakin at last selection in favor of protection and preference, and might endeavor to the to a

e- removed. Had a freo-trado rosol e- t-ion boon proposed and refused t ic Press might have declared that t x- colonies refused to listen to t >r Motherland’s appeal to bo put i >s equal terms with her children, wl v slammed the door in their aid m >. ther’s face. >- Received May 7, 11.41 p.m. The Government did not adopt tli; course, recognising tho unfairness ignoring local conditions and oxigo: eios. They did not wish to attem] to manoeuvre each othor into fall ~ positions, sinco all were in porfei Q accord regarding tho objects dosirei s It was better to try to discharge tl 0 political business of the Empire. Tl: f Government favored the scheme ( fc tho development of inter-Imporh 1 trade which did not inflict sacrifice ' on individual communities, creatin discontent and discord and impnii mg true unity. Ho heartily agreoe that the Empire would bo a. gron ;nincr if much now bought abroa . could bo produced and purchase! >vithin tho Empire. Then a part o he surplus population now going t I foreign lands might bo kept witliii the Empire, adding strength to suel federation of free commonwealths i’liis was worth some sacrifice. Hi inly differed as regards ways am means. Ho was convinced a tax oi food meant casting an undue shari )f the sacrifice on tho poorest part o the population. Received May 7, 11.43 p.m. A tax on raw materials would fetter Britain in her sovere struggle •vit-h foreign competitors. Such sacrifice would weaken Britain’s power mil make further sacrifices. Bri’aiu ought not to bo called upon to make it. Mr. Deakin had asked the Government to do wlmt no protectionist country would do, namely, tax necessaries of life or livelihood, which Britain cannot produce and which tho colonies could not supply iufficiently for -many years. He accnowledged tho considerable advantlge which colonial preference conferred on tho British manufacturer. Tho Canadian tariff satisfactorily affected Britain’s export trade and apparently benefited Canada. The South African and New Zealand tariffs would doubtless presently show similarly happy results. Tho same applied to Australia. Britain felt grateful not only for the actual concessions but the spirit of comradeship and affection. If asked what the colonies were prepared to do in return he would reply that Britain was the best customer of colonial products. Received May 7, 11.51 p.m. Tho export of the autonomous colonies in 1905 to all foreign countries were 40J millions, and the exports to tho United Kigdom were 65$ millions, exclusive of bullion and specie" valued at 21$ millions. He would be sorry if the Conference parted without carefully considering every suggestion for developing inter-Imperial commerce. Regarding Sir Joseph Ward’s valuable practical suggestions, Mr. George admitted that it" would bo a. undoubted advantage if traders could cable orders quickly and at a rate not- prohibitive. Regarding the appointment of commercial attaches or consuls in the colonies to assist British trade, Mr. George admitted that Britain had not yet done enough. He was doubly glad Sir Joseph Ward had raised the question, for Mr. Asquith ungrudgingly acceded to every request for improving the equipment of the Board of Trade’s commercial department. Received May 8, 1.40 a.m. He approved of the appointment of Imperial commercial travellers to investigate trade conditions and requirements in the colonies, who would report all such matters to the Board of Trade, who would disseminate the information. He was confident that these travellers would visit the great industrial in Britain, and ascertain what colonial produce they really demand. Sir Joseph Ward’s

third suggestion regarding improved transport and passenger communication between the Motherland and the colonies was most important and most momentous. All the experience of France and others showed that merchant shipping subsidies were ‘not a benefit to shipping. The late Government appointed a committee, chiefly of tariff reformers, to investigate, and they reported adversely to the policy of subsidising shipping. He was unable to consider any suggestion for a system of subsidies as a means of improving’ inter-Imperial trade.