Rangitikei Advocate. SATURDAY, APRIL 13, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8786, 13 April 1907, Page 2

Rangitikei Advocate. SATURDAY, APRIL 13, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES

WE cannot but feel sorry for Mr Balfour. The party of which he is nominally leader has been hypnotised by Mr Chamberlain, and Mr Balfour, who realises that protection would be a mistake for Britain, lias been left ;iiigh and dry by the tide of opinion which has swept the Conservative party in a new direc tiou. The National Review becomes almostjiysterical over the position, and exclaims in a burst of petulance that Mr Balfour must leave the party or the party must leave Mr Balfour. Various attempts have been made to get Mr BalfoUr to commit himself to the statement that a tax on food is desirable in order to give a preference to the colonies, but it is not easy to induce such a skilful master of dialectics to go further than he deems prudent. There was an amusing scene in the House of Commons during the debate on the address when Mr Hill, a tariff reformer, proposed an amendment to the address in favour of preference to the colonies. Mr Balfour spoke at considerable length without making any very definite statement, and Mr Lloyd George made an extremely effective speech in reply. Mr Lloyd George, as will be gathered from the extract we quote below, is a very able debater, and we must regret that the Yew Zealand Hansard is not brightened by any of this light and good tempered kind.

MR LLOYD GEORGE quoted from a famous speech by Mr Chamberlain at Bristol to the following effect:—“Wo are agreed upon retaliation, we are agreed upon preference. I will add to that because I am determined to withhold nothing in. my appeal to the country. You cannot have retaliation —and the more you look at it the more it will be clear to you—without a general tariff. You cannot have preference—that is to say, you cannot secure for your kinsmen abroad the advantages which will accrue to their trade, their ever-increasing trade, unless you think in the same spirit, unless you will treat them a little better than your rivals and competitors, unless you will give to them in return for a preference on your manufactures, a preference on their chief product, even though that product may bo described as a principal part of the food of this country. ’ ’ Mr George continued : “And here is a word which I think

must reauy nave eeeu luieuueu iur the right hou. gentleman, the loader of the Opposition:—‘lt is useless to try to hide yourselves in the sand.” (Laughter and cheers.) And then he goes on to say that pt is useless to try to avoid misrepresentation by trying to hide what your policy is. That is what the right hon. gentleman the member for West Birmingham said, and to-night the right hon. gentleman opposite has attempted, I Will not say to hide what his policy really is, because I really do not know now whether he is committed to the taxation of wheat and of meat, and I am sure no one sitting behind him can tell, either. (Laughter and cheers. ) This debate was not intended to influence the House or the country. It was got up actually, I believe, for the conversion, the conviction, or the committal of the right hou. gentleman (loud laughter),; and if I may respectfully do so, I congratulate him upon the very skilful way he has eluded the snare set by the very ingenious fowlers sitting around him. (Laughter.) The right hou. gentleman has not committed himself, but, at any rate, tne bulk of his party have done go, They have committed

themselves to this deolaration of the member for WeSfcJßirminghara. The right lion, gentleman himself is still free. (Laughter.) Thereforewe'have got to consider the wider proposition which is really the only businesslike proposition left to cousider. The other is trifling with the colonies, trifling with ns, and trifling with the country. What is that proposition? It is that we should put a duty on corn and on meat with a viewjto making a deduction on all these commodities that como from our self-governing colonies, because India is outside. India makes no offer; it is satisfied with the present arrangement; she has protested against anything of the kind, and we have no right to force it upon her. What do we stand to gain by it? We have heard a good deal about the offer from the colonies, and during the last few years we have heard that this offer was urgent. We are constantly told, ‘Here is an offer which is made to yon, made, probably, for the 'last time. Hear the voice of the Colonies. If you] do not do it now it may he too late.’ Really, on going into a tariff reform meeting you might think you had stumbled into a revivalist meeting. (Laughter) I will say this for the right hou. gentleman, that he never adopted that tone. He said, ‘There is no hurry.’ (Laughter.) He said, Lotus eat, drink, and bo merry, for tomorrow we die.’ ” (Laughter.)