FISCAL UNITY.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 128, 30 May 1903, Page 3

FISCAL UNITY.

STIRRING SPBKOH By M 8 BALFOUR. Per Press Association, Received 30,12.56 a.m. Loudon, May 29. In the Commons Sir Charles Dilke siid recent Ministerial speeches indicated a revolutionary change in the fiscal policy, involving duties on ford and raw materials. India was exc'uded from Mr Chamberlain's scheme thcugh she paid her share of running the Empire. The proposals for Imperial Fid ration were premature, and were regarded with disfavour in Austria.

Mr Balfour co: s'dered Mr Chamberlain was bound to submit, for the coun try's consideration, a preferential resolution as adopted at the Colonial Conference. Tho position of tbe United Kingdom was now altogether differen' to what it was in 1846, for instead <f there bting universal fi eetrade Britain wes the on'y civilised freetrade nation. As the wall of hos'ile tariffs increased, Britain wcu'd be less and less able to find in civilised ccuttries a market for her manufactured grods, and soon the only neutral market would be her own Empire, rendeing it extremely difficult and onercus to dispose cf the exports necsssary to pay for tbe enormous imports of foodstutis and raw materials. It was ques'unable whether the time had not arrived when the country wasl bound, in fe'.f d-fence, to contemplate i h > possibility of having to raise revenue for pu r pcß< sother th">n na'ional expenditure. "Are w.-," said Mr Balfour, " really content to b3 absolutely helpless in the face of all foreign countries with rfgard to ta'iff nego'iatione. ? It would be eminenily disagreeable to negotiate a taiiff treaty under such conditions. If foreigners treated our colonies as 6f pirate cations we should be forc.d to ret is", and, if necessary, adopt retaliatory tariffs. We must possess some wrap in to meet those aDtempticg to disintegrate the Empire by fi cal means. We might profitably discus 3 the desirability of raiding revenue in order to bind the Colonies and the Empire closer. I ennot imagine anyone denying that would bo worth paying for, if you do not pay too heavily." Received SO, 1.25 s.m. Mr Balfour, continuing, said it would be unwise to tax raw material, but if the people were not ready to submit to a tax on food in order to gain this object, it would be impossible to carry out the large Ech'mes proposed by the Colonial Premiers. It would never do to tax food unless the people accepted it as part of a big policy which they heartily endorsed, it' it would mean that by a tax on food you can pu v , the whole fiscal position and the whole Imperial position on a different and better footing. Is it so certain the working classes would repudiate such a tax if, by a general tax on foeds'uffs, it wili be possible to obtain from the Colonies large measures cf freetrade in manufactured goods ? I am to": sure it ia not worth while. Ido not knew whether the British wctking classes will consent to the sacrifice, or whether the colonies will consent to modify thi ir tat iff', but wi'hout discussion no conclusion is ps sible if the traditional obj clion of the Biitish to tax food, and the traditional affection of the colonies for protection is to be overcome. Ido not believe the evil ecor.om.ic tendencies prec'icted will atisa. My views ere in confermity with Mr. Ohamberlaiu'e. I ana net certain the Echeme is practicable, but if the Expire remains a saries of isolated units thrro is vain hope that this branch of Aoglo-Saxondem will attain tbe great triumphant destiny of Unittd States. (Cheers). Mr. Chamberlain wholly agresdv/ith Mr. Balftur. The entire reversal tf fiscal piliry was not intend d, but until a new mandate was given the Government, nou'd be unable to produce a (itfinite, complete scheme to give <ffeot to his f-ugg-stions, and would be unable r o make arrangements For the colonics until tbe Uni'ed Kingdom tiecliied ifcelf.