Evening Post. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1932. A PROMISING START

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 32, 8 February 1932, Page 8

Evening Post. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1932.

A PROMISING START

In these days of shrinking revenue and crushing taxation it takes a Chancellor of the Exchequer to excite the enthusiasm of that paradoxical creature, the British taxpayer. When Mr. Snowden brought down that appalling Supplementary Budget of his with its economies totalling £70,000,000, and its £80,000,000 of extra taxation, the House cheered wildly, and forgetting their manners the people who crowded the galleries did the same; and that this unique demonstration was no flash in. the pan was proved by the record vote which confirmed it at the General Election'and by those almost incredible queues of income-tax payers hustling to pay up the increased taxation before the due date. On Thursday the House of Commons and its galleries/ were again crowded, again the enthusiasm was intense, and the new Chancellor of the Exchequer is credited with such an "ovation" as not even the Prime- Minister received when he first faced the House with his new team after the victory. But except in respect of the enthusiasm aroused, Mr. Neville Chamberlain's first important appearance as Chancellor of the Exchequer suggests a contrast -with Mr. Snowden's last important appearance in that capacity rather than a parallel. Mr. Snowden's Supplementary Budget marked what was virtually his farewell to the House of Commons. It marked a last great heroic effort to cope with the tremendous difficulties of the country on the traditional basis of Free Trade, and there was something of the resolution of despair in the courage with which the country braced itself to bear a huge addition to its heavy burdens and almost idolised the man who had proposed it. Mr. Chamberlain's proposals, on the other hand, represent a new policy and a new hope, and cheering, though welcome enough in these hard times, is not a paradox in such an atmosphere. But though the policy is new in the confidence of a British Government and the nation, Mr. Chamberlain has the best of reasons for regarding it as an old policy that has had to wait too long. This aspect of the case was appropriately mentioned in a message dispatched from London on Thursday morning:

Mr. Neville Chamberlain spent a portion of yesterday in 'seclusion in the preparation of his speech. He is deeply impressed with the importance of the occasion) being not unmindful that he is bringing to fruition a policy in the advocacy of which his father sacrificed his health and life.

It was Mr. Joseph Chamberlain who, under the inspiration of an Imperialism which had been broadened and quickened by the South African War (1899-1902) and by a visit to the country shortly afterwards, launched his great Imperial Preference crusade in 1903 and gave Free Trade, the biggest shake that it ever had till this world-wide slump came along. In order to free himself for the campaign, Mr. Joseph Chamberlain^ resigned his seat in the Balfour Cabinet, but his son, now Sir Austen, retained his place in it as PostmasterGeneral and became Chancellor of the Exchequer immediately afterwards. It was certainly in large measure to his father's influence that Sir Austen owed his rapid promotion to so high a position at the age of 40, but when his younger ■'brother became Chancellor of the Exchequer last year, nobody doubted that he had won it by sheer merit. The only reason why Mr. Mac Donald hesitated about the^appointment was toe possibility that Mr. Neville Chamberlain had remained so loyal to his father's faith that as Chancellor he might make trouble in a Cabinet with Free. Traders in it But Mr. Mac Donald, himself a Free Trader, has taken the risk, and the result has justified him. Not only was the speech in which Mr. Neville Chamberlain opened up the tariff problem on Thursday of such a kind that, had Mr.. Joseph Chamberlain been alive, it would fully have justified the same beautiful compliment that Gladstone paid to Sir Austen's maiden speech in 1892 as "a speech that must be dear and refreshing to a father's heart," but it based the change on the broad and urgent ground which formed the basis of the JNational Government's appeal to the electors. He Has failed to convert 'bir Herbert Samuel, and we shall soon discover that he has failed to satisfy Lord Beaverbrook, but he has stuck to the procedunHor which the Government asked a mandate, and he has expounded its conclusion in a clear, moderate, and cogent manner. The balancing of the budget was the urgenUask that the first National Government had to tackle. The balancing of trade was left for its successor to deal with after the electors had been consulted. A prompt and drastic first instalment was provided by Mr. Runciman's Abnormal Importations Bill, and if. the second has not followed as quickly as the tariff die-hards would have liked, the fact merely testifies to the greater complication of the subject and to the open mind and the bona fides with which the inquiry promised to the electors has been carried out.

.Vhen the National Government was tormod, said the Chancellor of the -Exchequer, it was with a mandate to appiy an unprejudiced mind to the

restoration of confidence in our financial stability ami to frame plans for ensuring a favourable balance of trade.

After a well-deserved tribute to the spirit of the nation which on lhe Ist January had paid £105,000,000 in income tax as against £60,000,000 last year—an increase of 75 per cent. —and a reference to "the definite but somewhat partial and uncertain improvement in trade," Mr. Chamberlain stated bluntly that "the corner had not yet been turned." For some of the necessary remedies Britain would need "the willing co-operation of other nations," but there were others within her own control.

During the last two years, ho proceeded, while imports had remained practically stationary, exports had decreased by nearly 38 per cent. Such figures established the necessity for action. They desired to correct the trade balance by diminishing imports and stimulating exports, and to fortify their finances with fresh revenue raised by methods which put mo undue burden upon any section of the community.

The strong presumption raised by that fall of nearly 38 per cent, in exports in two years was followed by a suggestion of circumspection and scientific method which we are not accustomed to associate with tariff policy.

They proposed, said Mr. Chamberlain, by a system of moderate protection, scientifically adjusted to industry and agriculture, to transfer to Britain's own factories and fields work which was now done elsewhere. They desired a flexible plan which could be readily varied and adapted to suit changing conditions. By its judicious use they hoped to make more efficient their methods of production and distribution, and they needed also to use it for negotiations with foreign countries which had hitherto paid little attention to their suggestions. It was prudent to bo armed with an instrument at least as effective as those which might be used to discriminate against British trade in other countries.

We cannot recall ever having seen the case for moderate protection more persuasively put. The essence of the proposals which followed is a. general tariff of 10 per cent, ad valorem on all imports,' except for a free list including grain and meat, and for the exemption of Dominion produce till the Ottawa Conference has concluded. We heartily congratulate Mr. Neville Chamberlain and the Government on the promising start thus made with an exceedingly difficult matter, and trust that Lord Beaverbrook's die-hards will not embarrass the Government either by insisting on lhe resignation of Sir Herbert Samuel, or by demanding a much wider and more drastic measure.