THE FISCAL CAMPAIGN.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11726, 29 October 1903, Page 5

THE FISCAL CAMPAIGN.

MR CHAMBERLAIN ON HIS GREAT MISSION. THE CAUSE OF THE WORKERS. EARL STANLEY WAVERING. United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright. LONDON, October 27. Mr Chamberlain, in a letter to a municipal candidate in Birmingham, expressed regret at relinquishing the great work whereon he was engaged at the Colonial Office, but said he was sure that it was tne best course to take for the sake of the cause he had at heart. It. was the workers’ cause, he said, and continued: “Unless we are content- to fall back into the condition of a second Holland, and be a distributing and not- a manufacturing nation, we must make up cur mind to meet tlio new conditions.” Earl Stanley, speaking at Howick, said bread and meat were tlie rawest of raw materials. He was not prepared to see their cost raised. He was unable to ray whether lie might not eventually follow Mr Chamberlain. If lie did, he would tell Ins constituents. He did not fear separating from his party if tie thought- it was pursuing a wrong course. MR BALFOUR AND SIR M. HICKS-BEACH. LONDON, October 27. Mr Balfour and Sir M. Hicks-Beach attend a banquet to Mr Colston, Member for tlie Thornburv Division of Gloucestershire, at Bristol, on November 13th. Sir M. Hicks-Beaeh supports Air Balfour's policy. THE GROWTH OF BRITISH INDUSTRIES. LONDON, October 27. The Hon. H. 11. Asquua, speaking atNewcastle, said tlie building trade had grown 60 per cent, in thirty years, and the coal industry 100 per cent. The carriage of foreign goods in British ships was worth £80,000,000 annually, and ought to be added to exports. If foreigners paid taxes on bread, meat, and dairying products, why not tax maize and bacon? MR CHAMBERLAIN AT LIVERPOOL. GREAT RUSH FOR SEATS. LONDON, October 27. Fifty-five thousand applications have been made for the 5000 seats in the Hippodrome at Liverpool to hoar Mr Chamberlain speak to-night, under the auspices of the Working Men's Conservative Association AN APPEAL TO THE WORKERS. TRADE UNIONS AND FREE TRADE. THE EFFECT OF LABOUR LEGISLATION. (Received October 20th, 10.15 p.m.) LONDON, October 28. The Earl and Countess of Derby, many peers and members of the House of Commons were present at Mr Chamberlain’s address in tlie Hippodrome at Liverpool, under the auspices of the Working Men’s Conservative Association.

Mr Chamberlain received a splendid ovation. He spoke for ail hour and a half, amidst growing marks of approval and outbursts of prolonged cheering. He opened by comparing the injury done to British trade by foreign “dumping” and the injury done to small shops by gigantic emporiums and surplus sales below cost price. His well-grounded fear had been described as "duinphobia” by a lawyer trying to be humorous about business, although* ho knew nothing whatever on tho subject. It seemed a curious tiling to Mr Asquith, though not to us, that dumping occurs only when resorted to by a country in a state of depression. Sir Edward Gray, at Alnwick, had admitted that much mightbe said for tiie idea of an Empire within which there were no barriers or which imposed duties ou foreign goods only. “That is my ideal,” said Mr Chamberlain, “but as a practical statesman I know >t cannot be realised in a twinkling. If Sir Edward Grey is unable to follow me it is because my proposals are only a step, ; hough a great one, towards the ideal ho and I share. Tho whole problem as it affects tlie workers is contained in the one word ‘employment.’ However important aro cheap food and a higher wage, if the workman lost liis employment nothing could compensate him for the loss.” An interesting thing had escaped the attention of his opponents. 3Vhim Free Trade was diried the workers were neither represented nor consulted. The movement was a manufacturers’ and middle class movement. The leaders anticipated that wages would be maintained at- a reasonable level. The free trade movement was one to give cheap food. If the labourer had cheap food it- was considered lie would be able to work for low wages, thus enabling tho employers to compete with foreigners. John Bright-, in 1883, writing to a friend in America, declared that if the Americans were protectionists they would be compelled to give higher wages and shorter hours. Mr Chamberlain continued: —“Tlio leaders of the free trade movement anyhow believed that the big loaf meant lower w.ages. The Chartists were-entirely opposed to free trade, describing it as a red herring across tho path of electoral reform, but thanks to Mr Bright, the workers were enfranchised and have a majority. They can say ‘Yes’ to the proposals, or can crush them. I have an idea that the workers on this question are in advance of their leaders. If so, we will win. The Cobden Club may rage furiously in all the languages of the world, and the frce-fooders may imagine a vain thing, but we shall win. I appeal from the Trades Union Congress to you, against the officials to the men appointing them. These officials hare circulated a manifesto through the Cobden Club. Why, the Cobden Club declared that’ Trades Unions were based on brutal tyranny and monopoly!”

Mr Chamberlain went on to say that from his standpoint- it was quite impassible to reconcile free trade and trade unionism. “Mr Keir Hardie agrees with me. Mr Hardie declared in the House of Commons that no member of the House supporting trades unionism could be a consistent free trader, and he added that trades unionists do not intend to allow the sweaters and underpaid labourers of Con-

CABLE NEWS.

tinental nations to compete with them. Is that your opinion?” (Cries of “Yes.”) Then you will not he free traders. You must- consider, besides the consumer, the producer, who is more important. The legitimate purposes of trades unionism are to secure higher wages, consistent with tlie conditions of each trade, to raise the standard of living, to prevent unfair competition, to provide for tiie health and safety of employed, and for the care of their fellows who are suffering from temporary illness or misfortune.” Continuing, Mr Chamberlain said that tlie Factory, Mines, and Truck Acts, compensation to workmen, tlie* fair wages clause, and the prohibition of prison-made goods, were all opposed to the doctrine of free trade, which was against- inter ferenc-o with individual freedom. “It is too late now to call mo a heretic for declining to consider sacred the doctrines which my accusers liavo long since abandoned. 'What is the use of prohibiting sweating in England if we allow sweated goods to enter? The limitation of hours and precautions for safety add to the cast of production, and increase the difficulties of selling, and unless manufacturers fire given a compensating advantage they will be unable to compete, and you will bo work less. Could we calculate tlie cost of the precautions to England over and above similar precautions in other countries, we should be justified, without infraction of free trade, in imposing a duty corresponding to that cost,”