Evening Post. FRIDAY, JUNE 20, 1924. THE PREFERENCE DEBATE

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 145, 20 June 1924, Page 6

Evening Post. FRIDAY, JUNE 20, 1924. THE PREFERENCE DEBATE

The House of Commons has treated the preference resolutions as it was confidently expected to do as soon as the figures of the General Election went up. Though the fiscal issue directly before the electors was not Imperial preference but the. protection of British manufactures, the question of Free Trade versus ' Protection was widely discussed; the fear of an increase in the taxes on food was made the most of by .the parties then in Opposition; and the popular sentiment in favour pf Free Trade was provedyto be just as strong as when it smashed the crusade which Mr. Joseph Chamberlain had opened so brilliantly twenty years previously. The subsequent withdrawal1 of Protection from the programme of the Conservative .Party shows that the verdict of the electors must be accepted as-for all practical purposes, irreversible. The Dominions would: surely have stood in a better position to-day if they had been as candid as the defeated party in accepting the verdict. But though they have always asserted that the resolutions of the Conference, even1 when supported by their Ministers, are not binding upon them till confirmed by their own Parliaments, and in practice have ignored these resolutions with the utmost freedom, the attempt was nevertheless made to deny the same freedom to the British Parliament.

; The doctrine of the continuity of the -Imperial policy was invented, or at any, rate, given an. unprecedented application, in order T;hat a Parliament which had just been elected to support Free Trade should be compelled to confirm the protective policy of its predecessor. A rejection of that policy was 'declared to ,be " unthinkable," and in such a.context we do not know what other meaning to give to ,"unthinkable " than dishonourable, and so grossly dishonourable J.s to be practically impossible. We are glad to see that* Mr..Bald--win, who has always played fair, has declined to avail himself of •this argument in support of the policy which he submitted to the Imperial Economic Conference. - In the debate on the preference resolutions which is reported to-day ''he expressed the opinion that the defeat of the resolutions would not be a breach of faith, because Parliament was supreme in these matters." It may therefore be regarded as established .beyond dispute, and with the consent of all parties, that any proceedings of the Imperial Conference leave Britain and the Dominions equally free, and that the consents, which are required to make its proposals effective are the consents not of leaders and parties but of Parliaments and peoples. The definite establishment of this fundamental principle and the recognition by the Dominions that it will not always operate to their advantage may perhaps prove to be of greater importance than the controversy of 'which its • discussion was an "incident. ' '. '

■The only hope that remained after it was clear that the House of Commons would feel itself free to deal with the preference resolutions on its view of their merits was centred in the first four of them. Major-General Seely, who himself as Van unrejpentant Freetrader," and whom we trust we . may also welcome back to the House as an unrepentant Imperiajist, put in a strong plea for. the acceptance of the resolutions relating, to dried fruits, wine, sugar, and'tobacco. According to, Router's, report,

he, begged the House to consider long before rejecting the tat four resolutions.

It would be the gravest, rebuff to . the Dominions to reject the proposals solemnly reached at the Imperial Conference, which proposed to do nothing but reduce taxation and cliea-pen products, just because they,, wanted to cling to some particular idea. An adverse vote would gravely damage the Imperial relations at a moment when gratitude for an we owed the Dominions should make us hesitate to do anything to hurt them.

General Seely's last, argument seems to us to have overshot the mark, though not so seriously as the contention of Mr. Baldwin that tr reject the resolutions as a whole " would gravely imperil the future of the Empire." But we nevertheless welcome the solicitous regard thus shown for the interests • and sentiments of the Dominions by a leading member of a j)arty ( which has_ lately seemed to treat its Imperial obligations very lightly. No disposition to compromise was-shown by the official spokesman of the Liberal Party. Mr. Asquith declared the • resolutions as a whole- to be " an attenuated, emasculated, anaemic, and even apochryphal version of the fullblooded gospel of Imperial preference." With filial loyalty Mr. Austen Chamberlain had 'taken a similar line~ during the election campaign, and other staunch Tariff Eefbrmers had done the same, but they had accepted the Baldwin Government's proposals as representing the half-loaf that is better than no bread. It was not to be expected that Mr. Asquith would temper the rigour of his Free Trade gospel : in favour of the six resolutions which were protective in character, but he did not display his usual logic when he was induced by his objection to preference to miss the chance of enlarging1 the boundaries of Free Trade. The first four resolutions may have deserved Mr. Asquith's scorn because of their narrow scope, but,, nevertheless, as ' General Seely pointed out, they deserved his support as a Freetrader. If 'Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald was equally illogical, his candid confession of the reluctance, with which he opposed the resolutions showed at any rate a better appreciation of the sentimental aspect of the. case.

But what of Mr. Lloyd George? "The intervention of all the party leaders except Mr. Lloyd George," we are told, " partially atoned for the dullness of rthe opening day's debate." He had paired in "favour cf^ the first four resolutions, but " it was announced that he had an engagement" elsewhere. Of an important debate in March a contributor to the " Nation " said : "Mr. Asquith was absent ill and Mr. Lloyd George was' absent." He. would have shown the Dominions more respect if he could have attended to vote on this occasion.