The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. MONDAY, MAY 10, 1920. COALITION TROUBLES.

Southland Times, Issue 18817, 10 May 1920, Page 4

The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. MONDAY, MAY 10, 1920. COALITION TROUBLES.

The remark by Mr Bonar Law that the issue between individual effort and nationalisation had to be fought out in the Cabinet requires a little elucidation. It is probable that he was referring not to any proposals to take over industries and run them under State control, but to matters involved in the questions regarding taxation that are at present agitating commercial. and political circles. It will be remembered that when he was making his Budgetstatement, Mr Chamberlain mentioned that there would be some effort in the direction of a levy on wealth. Up to that time it was known that there were ministers who favoured this course and that the department of Inland Revenue was frankly urging its adoption. Mr Chamberlain’s remark confirmed the belief, and now it is clear that Cabinet is divided. Mr Bonar Law probably regards the levy on capital as tantamount to the diminution and discouragement of individual enterprise and the advancement of State interference in trade and commerce to an extent hitherto unknown under peace conditions in the Old Country. It is difficult to see any other way of interpreting his cryptic utterance. The government has definitely declared against nationalisation as a policy and all sections of Labour, with the exception of the miners, seem to have abandoned the demand for it. There does not seem to be any room for a Light on this issue within the Cabinet; but there is every reason for expecting a tussle over the incidence and method of taxation. le was clear, from Mr Chamberlain’s remarks to a recent deputation of commercial men, that tho Chancellor of the Exchequer is seriously thinking of making a raid on wealth. His alternatives to the excess profits tax was this levy on capital or a much heavier impost on income. Both of these alternatives might well be regarded by Mr Bonar Law as heavy' handicaps on commercial enterprise, ana he is doing the country a service in drawing its attention to the fact that if it is decided that individual enterprise should continue to be the basis of the commercial future of Britain, care should be taken that the burdens placed upon it are not so heavy as to wound it to death. It does not need argument to make plain the wisdom of this advice. There may be disputes a.s to the respective merits of individualism and nationalisation in trade and commerce. but if the nation is committed to the former, if it is prepared to permit private enterprise to carry on the organisation and control of tho nation’s industries, it must not extend the State’s interference, wither by laws, or by taxation, to a point beyond which its action amounts to hostility. That is what Mr Bonar Law means, we think, when he raises this dual issue. His reference to it suggests also that the Coalition has its internal as well as its external troubles. Outside the government, however, the chief difficulties seem to be in front of Mr Lloyd George. His efforts to capture the Liberal organisation have failed. As we remarked at the time, the return of Mr Asquith to the House of Commons and to the active leadership of the Liberals, made a great difference to the political outlook for the Prime Minister. Where before there was a possibility of an amalgamation of the two wings of the Liberal Party, or the greater port of them, there was with Mr Asquith again in the saddle, the prospect, only of a difficult, and almost hopeless fight. It is interesting to notice, too, that the Daily Mail welcomed Mr Asquith back to the House of Commons with the declaration that the country wanted: Progress, Economy and Leadership, and that he stood as the strongest apostle of all three. The Northcliffe Press is openly antagonistic to Mr Lloyd George, but its fulsome advocacy of Mr Asquith, not a little humorous in view of past events, shows that the political sea is full of ragged rocks for the party' leader who las no party'.