Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NO MORE "OPEN DOOR" FOR GERMANY.

As soon as the Germans have finished with th;> torpedoing of merchant vessels and tlio wholesale butchery l.y Zeppelin of men, women and children in these islands and elsewhere, we are to place the riches of the British Empire at their dispo>a! in order to enable thorn to begin the game again at tiie earliest possible moment! Such :«. the policy commended to the British people by the Executive Committee of the Union of Democratic Control, which is headed by Charles Trevcljaii, M.P., J. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., and Arthur Ponsonby, M.P." This policy, says Sir Loo Chiozza Money, M.P.. is enunciated in a pamphlet which i* being circulated throughout the United Kingdom by the Union. The pamphlet dwells with alarm upon the pros])ect of German trade being shut out from the British Empire—''one-fifth of the globe"—and upon " German traders being excluded from the whole continent of Africa and from the continent of Asia, except Asiatic Turkey and China." It seeks to show that such an embargo upon Gorman activities would "operate against Great Britain and her Allies," and pretends tint our own trade with Germany is so essential to us (that the movement against German trade is a danger which threatens the British working classes and their children. Sir Loe Chiozza Money subjects the grounds for the represent taione advanced by t!:e pamphleteers to a critical analysis. It is represented that Great Britain and Germany are economically interdependent, and 'n support of this view the following statement is given:— In 1912 the United Kingdom bought and retained merchandise from Germany amounting to over G"< millions sterling, and sold produce and manufactures to Germany amounting to more than 40 millions sterling."

The Union, says Sir Leo, might have taken the troub'c to give later figure-. It. is true that in 1912 British imports from Germany were worth 60 millions sterling, and that the exports of British goods to Germany were worth -10 millions. In 1913, however, the facta were that our imports from Germany ; we:o worth £80,400,000. of which we retained in the United Kingdom £76, • 290,000, while our exports of British goods to Germany were worth £40,700,000. Why does l\u U.D.C. conceal the 1913 figures:- The fact that our imports from Germany in 1913 were worth twice as much aw our exports to Germany is sufficiently startling, but it by no means brings out the most important features of the case. Our £40,700,000 worth of exports to Germany in tho year noforo the war very largely consisted of coal and half-iuauu. fnctured material-:, while our much larger imports from Germany consisted as to the greater part of fin'shed manufacturer." Kxamination (if the British figures shows that the £27.0! 1.1,000 worth of manufactured exports of 1913 consistjJ a n to nearly £12,000,. 000 of cotton and woollen yarn, combed woo', cotton etc.. and observe the curious contrast between the British and German iron figures. Jn view of these facts, it is idle to prc--1 tend that the stoppage of trade rela- ' tionfi between Great Britain and Germany after the war would be as d'sadv.intageous to ourselves as it would be to Germany. It is also represented by the pamphlet that British wealth han.s upon German wealth, and that if either the United Kingdom or the British Empire cuts off trade relatio'H with the Germanic empires after the war, we should ho injuring our.selws lie. caiii-e we profit by Gorman prosperity. Sir Le:i'i» answer to this representation is that it is a complete delusion tliat the rise or German export trade 111 the hist thirty years ha,< been for the good of this country. No man of sense,

whether Free Trailer or Protectionist, has ever seen in German (onipctition a thing which has nut to li,> contended with. What, he are tlio fact*:' Germany ha« been gaining wealth l-y selling in the markets oi' the world n competition with ourselves. In market alter market she im* beaten us n many lines of articles, and thereby deprived British traders of trade and British workmen of work. Take the Swiss market for cxamp'o. In the l.i-t year for which we have records Switzerland imported 2b' million pounds' worth of goods from Germany, and only four million* wort!' of goods from the United Kingdom. That in to >av, the Germans almost (■:.• eiy monopoly, ed the Swiss market. ~' Germany had not been trading, we should undouhtedly have done more In,sine* with Switzerland, and it is idle to pretend tb.it is not the case. The two nations \\v--e each seeking wealth in th.> .same markets. After dealing in detail with further similar representation*. Sir Leo Chiozza Money go,-,, on to snv that without the materials produced in that large area oi the world controlled by the British Empire and its Aides German trade could never in our time reach the dimensions which it had ittaUied in the year IbT'. Possessing those materials, and posseting markets infinitely supciior to tho.»e at the command of Germany, we and our Allies, without the German markets, cuM expand our trade cno.-imiu-ly beyond tlio pre-war dim.'it-e.oiis. | u ,-hort, the whip-hand in w tii Great Britain and her Allies, and the attempt of l!i;s pampldot to show thai economic prepare upon Germany would injure nnr own wealth production, k fa'..e. The Cnieii of Democratic Control ac< nssvi the nation v.luVli hail ours iu m-. >,,. hers of eontemplafnc "a war of -.<• veng •" and a " vi mleta." This al-i i- utterly I'aUe. Why are t!: < ;.!■ i majority ef people making up th-i, minds that after the war Germany cannot he icstorod to I he old (rale terms? The answer n not out of >■,.. venge biif. became of common prudeneo. This is a war to r'd Kurope ,u German military domination, and its

object wouklfciot Iw soccured if at ;f» toii)iiuatioji£ Gvnnany wore allow d oneo more to iiv.-umulati" tlio means ni

waging a second war. It is notu qu.ston of eternal puiiMinieu.{. b;:t .T taking precautions in the pr.*r:it ami hereafter of to he rautio.is tor such time as cirounifitaiicc-; ntyy show to bo necessarv.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PWT19160602.2.19.48

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 5, Issue 179, 2 June 1916, Page 4 (Supplement)

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,015

NO MORE "OPEN DOOR" FOR GERMANY. Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 5, Issue 179, 2 June 1916, Page 4 (Supplement)

NO MORE "OPEN DOOR" FOR GERMANY. Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 5, Issue 179, 2 June 1916, Page 4 (Supplement)

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert