FUTURE OF TARIFF REFORM.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 820, 31 March 1910, Page 3

FUTURE OF TARIFF REFORM.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN INTERVIEWED.

London, February n. The Morning Tost had some good " copy ” on Monday in the shape of a two-col inn n interview with Mr Joseph Chamberlain, who is now in London for a few days prior to leaving for the South of France. Mr Chamberlain had something to say about Scotland and the North, where he thought the laud taxes and the Budget were popular, but, he continued : “Tariff reform is, and must remain, the main object of our policy. Where we have won, we have won on Tariff Reform. Where we lost, Tariff Reform was still our best friend. There are no doubt exceptions, but speaking generally we did best in those places where Tariff Reform had been preached longest and most boldly. We lared worst where the local leaders had been most vacillating or most timid.” Referring to the proposal to drop the food taxes, Mr Chamberlain said: — “If they drop Tariff Reform, what do you think they are going to put in its place ? liven from their own point of view they are wrong. Tariff Reform is the most popular part ot our policy. They will find nothing to replace it. But there are the wobblers. There ate always wobblers when a great policy is proposed—men who are frightened at its greatness and cannot see that in its greatness lies its strength. We have had too many wobblers. They are no good. Men who are frightened themselves cannot put strength into others. But there will be fewer wobblers in future. In many parts of the country the working classes are far ahead of their leaders on Tariff Reform.

This isn’t as it should be. Some of the local leaders and some of the speakers have been afraid of • the food duties. It is no good waiting till you are asked questions about the food duties; it looks as if you were afraid of them ; you must deal with them boldly and straightforwardly. They are very simple to explain, and when explained are always understood. But, alter all, we have overcome our greatest difficulty in regard to them, for people can’t go on repeating the same lie, and the little loaf and black bread lies are now played out, and I don’t think we shall hear much of them at the next election,” It seems to Mr Chamberlain that a majority of the Cords were in favour of reforming their own Housej ami be was prepared to go as far as to agree that while on the Liberal side the tendency was evidently towards a single chamber, . the aim of the Unionists should be to strengthen the House of Lords by a reform of its constitution. The'people had evidently made up their mind that the Upper House should be reformed, but while in theory it was difficult to defend the constitution of that House, it must be admitted that the country yvould probably not obtain by any change a Second Chamber which would work so well in practice as the House of Lords had worked. Reform would make the House of Lords stronger, and as a “ House of Commons man ” Mr Chamberlain was fully able to sympathise with objections to any change which would greatly strengthen it, but an effective Second Chamber was obviously essential to the good of the country. "\ 11 But,” repeated Mr Chamberlain, “lam not going to say what course I should take at the present moment. It is for the Liberals to make the first move. They will have great difficulties with their Labour and Irish allies. Personally, I am strongly of opinion that the Unionist Party should not make any effort to obtain the support of either the Labour or the Irish Parties.” Mr Chamberlain concluded : f‘ The Imperial side is its strongest side. Tire working classes are Imperialists. I have spoken to them often on the Imperial (ptes[iotj. They always respond to such an appeal.” He considered it ridiculous to talk of “a measure ” of Tariff Reform. ''fhere can be no measure ot Tariff Reform —it is a broad and deep policy affecting the British Empire as a whole. We must jjave the full policy or nothing,”