Preferential Trade.

Manawatu Herald, 13 June 1903, Page 2

Preferential Trade.

la the House of Commons, Mr H. Chaplin, Conservative member for Sleaford, moved an amendment to the Budget, that a remission of the corn tax is needless, and will injuriously disturb trade, and that it would be preferable to reduce the duty on tea. Sir Michael Hicks-Beaeh, late Chancellor of the Exchequer, said he regretted the repeal of the tax, which was fiscal, not protectionist. |f the Cabinet and the House had Received his proposals ; for reducing the enormous increase of expend!* ture with less indifference he - would still have been Chancellor of the Exchequer. Repeal of the corn tax appealed directly as a bar to Mr Chamberlain’s proposals. Year. after year, without ft -whisper, of disagreement' from colleagues, he had opposed colonial preference in regard to wines, tea, sugar, com and flour. If Mr Chamberlain persisted in his scheme, declared Sir Michael, he would destroy the Unionist party. Mr Ritchie, Chancellor of the Exchequer, . said ha. doubted if inquiry would show any practical means of carrying out preferential treatment. He did not support the policy which would be detrimental to the Motherland and the colonies. Hitherto, he asserted, members of the Government, in referring to preferential! tariffs, had spoken, only for themselves. Mr ' Ritchie in-' timated his intention to remote the i duty oh molasses under 50 degrees. Sir H H. Fowler (who was Secretary: of State for India in 189495), said the country would certainly repudiate a scheme to revolutionise the fiscal policy. Mr A. R. D.’ Elliot, the new Financial Secretary to the Treasury, endorsed Mr Ritchie’s opinions. The debate was adjourned. EXCITEMENT IN POLITICAL CIRCLES. The debate in the House of Commons on Mr Chaplin’s amendment was a dramatic one. Despite the Speaker’s ruling there were many animated references to preferential tariffs. Much excitement and bewilderment prevailed in the lobbies, some members predicting Mr Ritchie’s resignation, others that Mr Chamberlain would resign. In official circles it is believed, that Mr Balfour will endeavour to postpone a dissolution until legislative effect has been given to pending domestic reforms. Some members fear that the Cabinet dissensions will cause Unionists lukewarmness over the Irish Ladd Bill, but the Government ia confident that, the Nationalists’ assistance will render the passing of the Bill safe. The, situation is . singularly interesting, and is comparable to that of 1886 when Mr Gladstone was defeated over his Irish land policy. The “ Standard ” says Mr Ritchie’s direct challenge to Mr Chamberlain has created a profound impression, and has disclosed a wide cleavage in the Cabinet. It is anticipated that a crisis will not arise until the issue is submitted to the country in a mere definite form. -j'