THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXX, Issue 8434, 4 May 1907, Page 5

THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

.PREFERENCE QUESTION. Received May 3, .7.30, a.m. LONDON, .May 2. iDr. Jameson, in a clever speech, -endorsed every word Mr Deakin had said. The colonies were,.he stated, .ripe for,action. They were all.waiting .the British Government's decision. The colonies had Jnot asked Britain to sacrifice her .fiscal principles, but asked for her to change .thejnethods she had adopted to the practice of the principle of preference, if only by reducing, as far as coloniail products are concerned, existing duties. He dwelt on the great advantage that .would accrue to South .Africa if the duties on tobacco and wine were reduced. He emphasised the fact that two territories of South Africa which were absolutely under the control of the British Government had been directed to adhere to the Customs Union of South Africa, which gave preference to the Motherland. He hoped that this fact indicated the possibility of another.advance. He mentioned that a minority of the Cape Parliament was opposed to further preference, and possibiy was opposed even to .the continuance of the present preference unless Britain was prepared to give reciprocity to some small extent. Mr Moor urged the experimental reduction of the duty on tobacco. The debate will be resumed to-day. Received May 3, 9.2 p.m. LONDON, May 3. Sir J.L. Mackay, on behalf of India, regretted being at variance with .the autonomous colonies, though the Indian Gov.ernmnt tried to regard preference from an Imperial as well as an Indian standpoint. .Under the existing system India enjoyed a highly advantageous position. Her extensive seaborne trade had increased by 66 per cent, in a decade. Some of her best customers were protected countries in Europe, without whose markets she would be unable to dispose of her produce. If India kept outside preference foreigners might treat her separately, but otherwise they might retaliate, hurting the Indian trade. India had nothing to gain by the Empire adopting a system of tariffs discriminating against foreign manufactured products and foodstuffs. The risks and sacrifices involved were too geat for India to accept preference. Any preference granted to the United Kingdom by the autonomous colonies ought also to be granted to India. General Botha personally favoured preference, but he had not been long enough in office to get a mandate from the Transvaal. Therefore he adhered to the resolution of 1902. Sir P. Bond adhered to the resolution of 1902, though Newfoundland desired to co-operate in a policy of preference. Mr Asquith acknowledged the ability and clearness of the colonial case as presented. He complimented Mr Deakin on his able exposition, and gladly noticed that nothing had been said that would jbe calculated to weaken the sense of Imperial unity or the determination to cement that unity. He dwelt on the great advantages of discussing such subjects face to face. Sir Wilfrid Laurier had often emphasized that the basis of unity must be the right of each member of the Empire to first regard his own interests. British statesmen had never for gotten the lesson of the American Independence, and would not attempt again to force a fiscal policy upon a reluctant possession. The colonies had been granted full fiscal independence, and even used it to build up a tariff wall against the Motherland. If the colonies desired to foster industries by protective tariff their action would not evoke remonstrance or criticism from him. Some of the colonies had given preference to the Motherland, but did not admit the Motherland manufacturers to compete on equal terms with local producers. Doubtless the colonies held that that was vital to their interests. Similarly the British Government held that free trade was vital to the British interests.

A POINT-BLANK REFUSAL. Received May 3, 9.14 a.m. LONDON, May 2. At the Imperial Conference, Mr Asquith. Chancellor of the Exchequer, point blank refused to grant any fiscal preference. He indicated vaguely the possibility of assisting in the matter of steam lines and cables. SIR WILLIAM LYNE ATTACKS MR ASQUITH. Received May 3, 10.7 a.m. LONDON, May 2. Mr Deakin asked if Mr Asquith meant to exclude consideration of Mr John Hofmeyr's and of Sir George Clarke's schemes, which involved neither Protection nor I^reetrade. Mr Asquith asked for time to consider this question. Sir William Lyne, Commonwealth Minister for Trade and Customs, expressed his dissent from the views of Mr Asqyith, from foundation to summit. Mr Asquith's pronouncement was calculated to lessen the | sympathies of the colonies. He resented Mr Asquith's attempts to belittle the value of the preferences at present conceded by the colonies to the Motherland.

A LABOUR MEMBER'S VIEWS. Received May 3, 9.14 a.m. LONDON, May 2. Mr Ramsay Macdonald, Labour member for Leicester, in a letter to The Times, ridicules the puny benefit which Australian preference concedes to Britain. If Britain accepts it, she penalises Canada, New Zealand, and India as if they were foreign states.

CABLE NEWS.

United Press Association —By Electric lelegra'ph, Copyright,