The Dominion. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1909. PREFERENCE AND THE EMPIRE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 625, 30 September 1909, Page 6

The Dominion. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1909. PREFERENCE AND THE EMPIRE.

Surely, there was never advanced a T more singular argument-in favour of a 1 tnu- m A ? n !u in ' s fiscal p° lic y «*» t^t . contained in the memorandum summar- • Wn l? m l ? Uo which has : been issued Federal-Minister for Trade, and Customs. The conclusion which .he reaches is that ''without mutual interests, mutual..trade preference > to our own race, and success against for- , oign competition," ho '!fears future danger to the power and prosperity of the Empire, It can hardly be said that Bri- , tarns-obligation'to do it's part in estab- , hshmg a scheme of .mutual'benefits-..- is proved by:the fact that Australia buys each year from foreign countries a -larger proportion of : the things' that it wants, liven-if we agreed that tho increasing' de-pendence-of Australia upon tho foreign manufacturer is "an insidious retrogression, and even if wo believed it to be dangerous to. the welfaro-of the Empire, wo would not thereby' be bounds '■) fly to the conclusion that a British tariff wall is the only thing to be aimed at. The correct conclusion to bo drawn from the .fact stated -by Sir.Robert'Best .3.obviously cithor that British manufacturers should become more energetic '■ or that Australia should make ports fiee-.to'thc products of Britain.- We can all understand that Australasia would benefit if Britain placed such a' duty on foreign products as would enable Australasia .to obtain a highor price for its goods. But as the extreme champions of Imperial tariff reciprocity hold that tho tiade_of, the Empire should be kept,by the Empire, what .they "demand" so loudly is, not thai we in New.Zealand should profit at the expense of the foreigner, but that wo should': profit' at the expense of; the British consumer. ' As we do not wish to go into the whole question ct Protection versus Free-trade, wo can- ; not- spend, much time, upon ihe ■ very strange statement of Sir Robert Best .tl.at'-'ever-j 1 pound sterling diverted from the Empire's own trado is so. much potential energy wasted." Roally, we thought that, the grass grew! long, ago',..ovor tho gravo. of tho theory that every- time a bi-otmaker,buys a coat which' ho badly needs:.:hß - is -doing- himself an' injury ' by) supplying tho tailor with "the'sinews of. war."; When; Britain buys ;'£38,782,062 worth of goods from Germany, she certainly "contributes:to'the- wealth and prosperity, of her competitor," but :■ to .what.use does Germany-put the British money ?In paying Britain for-part of the £41,359,840 -.worth'if goods' that sho buys" from.forcompetitor. .These are the actual figures for the year-1907.- 'The fact lis—wc must apologise for stating a truth so elementary— the nations under existing conditions cannot, do without'each other. Jri tho .meantime each separate member: of, the-Empire must do what it' can- to sticngthcn the Empire, and make it commercially efficient, without weakening itself. , That is the principle which must govern Now Zealand's attitude,..', and which certainly lies behind the feeling of the New Zealand public that while wo do' our part we must not dictate to Britain to her part. Mr. J. G. Harkness, wo observe, disputes our statement that ho was not "voicing the .wishes of, the people, of lijew Zealand" in "demanding" -"onepolicy for the Empire" on the ground that "the 'present fiscal policy of Britain has broken down, and impedes' her development and,the' developmont of tho Empire's trade.'-' These are the essential points of his reply to our criticisms ill the interview printed in another column: Tub Dominion, I think, said I did not-ex-press the views of New Zealandcrs in asking for reciprocity from the Old Country. Well, if that is not tho view of the majority of Now Zealanders I really do not understand what our position ; is. . . . Why do wo give preference to English goods? Simply because wc-expect to get an exchange from her—to prepare tho : way for reciprocity withinthe Empire. :. . . The dependencies'that have to contribute toward tho. maintenance,of tho Empire as we,do in our contribution toward naval defenco havo a right, in-this matter of Argentine butter, to preference.- >, What The Dominion actually said was that Mr.' Harkness was not correct in saying that,he was voicing tho wishes of the New-Zealand public in "demanding" a/iything,' or representing ,Ncw Zealand • opinion :in:basing his "demand" for preference on some- alleged hardship which this country endures at Britain's'hands. Tf ho will'look into the question he will find abundant testimony to tho correctness of c-ur estimate of New Zealand opinion. "Our position," which docs not appear to be clear to Mr. Harkness, is simply this: that Now Zealand will act in the way which it thinks will be its best servico to tho commercial efficiency of the Empire, leaving Britain absolutely free to act in what ski thinks is the best way in .which Bho can serve the sam'o end. It is. a com- ' pleto: mis-reading of New Zealand opinion to, say that we: give preferenooto British'goods "simply because wo expect:to' get an,exchange from her" of a fiscal kind. When Mr. Seddon first thought of granting preference, he, and probably, a good many other no doubt hoped that Britain would respond to tho New. Zealand offer. We still, hppo that: Britain may see her way to give preference to the products of the British colonies. But public opinion to-day does not look upon the Preferential Trade Act as simply one half of an uncompleted bargain. Wo all know, and wo should all frankly admit, that if our preferential, tariff benefits Britain, without any cost to us, as the Prime Minister stated is the case, it must necessarily benefit the Empire as a whole, and ourselves as a part of it. It , will'bo' time to talk of "aright to preference" founded on our "contributions to ; the maintenance of the Empire," when ■ Britain depends as much' upon this Do- i minidn's battleships as wo do upon hers. '