UNITED FRONT

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 74, 29 March 1932, Page 7

UNITED FRONT

AGREEMENT TO DIFFER SNOWDEN'S DEFENCE BATTLE STILL AHEAD (From "The.Post's" Representative.) LONDON, 16th February. A Tory and a Socialist Lord criticised Lord Snowden 's action in remaining in the Cabinet after he had disagreed with the tariff reforms. ' Lord Snowden's speech in reply was eagerly awaited, and the House of Lords and its galleries were thronged. • In the same comfortable lounge suit he wore in the Commons, the ex-Chan-cellor awaited the occasion with calm, sometimes folding his arms and sometimes sticking his thumbs in the armholes of his waistcoat. Lord Banbury moved: "That this House regrets the abandonment of the doctrine of Cabinet responsibility by His Majesty's Government." He said that in 1904 and 1905, when the Liberal Party was divided into two facr »tions—Liberal Imperialists and proBoers—Mr. Chamberlain brought forward his Tariff Reform notions, and the two branches of the Liberal Party were- ■united on that. They raised the cry, "Your food will cost you more," and when the Government went to the country the Liberal Party was triumphant. History repeated itself. Was it, not possible-r—nay, was it not certain—that Sir Herbert Samuel intended at the next election to be in a position which would enable him again to rise the cry,."Your food will cost you more," and so unite, the Liberal Party, which at present was divided into two, or rather three, sections? More than that, Sir Herbert Samuel said that the imposition of a tariff would relieve the shoulders of the well-to-do at the expense of the poor. Thus, there were to be two cries, and the worst passions of human nature were to be appealed to. Under these circumstances, was it right that Sir Herbert Samuel and the other dissentient Ministers should remain in the Cabinet? LORD PONSONBY'S SPEECH. The' peril of the Cabinet's arrangement to good government was the basis jof Lord Ponsonby's speech. He taunted the Lord Privy Seal with remaining in office. Viscount Snowden's former associates, he said, had been watching with interest, first, his swallowing of the overthrow of the main item of his last Budget, the taxation of land values; and they were all wondering when his gorge would rise. It had risen, but not to the extent of cutting himself adrift from those who wanted to pursue a policy to which he was so deeply opposed. But.they would hear from him to-day why he still conceived it Ms ..."duty to remain in the' Cabinet. , This expedient had reduced Parliamentary Government to a farce. It was not a considered plan, but merely a dodge, a subterfuge, so that the Government could maintain what they supposed was believed to be a united front. But nobody was taken in. Everybody saw through it and recognised it for a gross imposture ( which would add considerably to the mistrust which was felt in the country for the present Administration. It would be a great advantage to get a clear-cut party Government back. Without trace of nervousness, Lord 'Snowden related how the Free Trade Ministers 'offered to resign when the Cabinet disagreed, how a bargain was Btruck,'how the minority decided to remain. "I have no party," said Lord Snowden quietly, " 'but the secession of the Liberals would have destroyed the Government's representative character." \ : . But the interest of the speech wa3 aiot to learn why the compromise was reached, but the way in which it will be observed, arid the . speaker's own view-of the policy the Government are ' making law. The House was enlightened with outspoken clearness^ "The proposals," asserted Lord Snowden,"contain nothing which will contribute to "the alleged adverse balance of trade, though they are fullfledged Protection of a permanent character. ._ . . We hold with the fullest conviction that the tariff proposals of the Government will be disastrous to the economic and industrial life and prosperity of this country. AN ISSUE AT NEXT ELECTIONS. '■ " Much as we should have deplored any impairment of the National Government, we could not have remained in' office had it involved acquiescence either implicit or explicit in these proposals." ■-..., But, unfortunately, there was the bargain—the offer to allow the Free • "^ra^e theory uncurbed expression. Plainly the concession will be used to the full. ;Was it thought that the.field could be left to Protection to entrench, while Free Trade went by default? That there should be a campaign for tariffs and only a single protest from disseut"ers?. ■< ■. . -•• . • ' "This will be an issue at the next election," said Lord Snowden grimly, and warned the House that any attempt to limit the Free Traders must break the Cabinet compact. Yet if on this issue there was falling out, harmony reigned in all else, and should the bargain be strictly honoured, "I-believe we shall be able to cooperate in the work for which the Government was formed." "I would like to congratulate Lord Banbury on the vigour which he still maintains and also his new allegiance and new leadership," said Lord Snowden. "We have seen many strange whirligigs during the last few years, but surely none have been more unexpected or remarkable than that of Lord . Banbury enrolling himself under the leadership of Mr. Lansbury—(laughters—and the leadership of the Opposition in their Lordships' House. I am not going to follow Lord Ponsonby in his attack upon the motives of those who have been parties to this arrangement or his remarks about the nature and character of the National Government. That part of the noble lord's speech could bo answered in one sentence: The criticisms of the Opposition are due wholly to the annoyance they feel that the National Government has not broken up. (Laughter.) In regard to their opposition to thetariff proposals of the Government I would just as soon—and I am speaking of what I know—trust the safeguarding of free trade to Sir H. Page Croft as I would to the Labour Party. (Laughter.) Mr. Arthur Henderson, the leader of the Labour Party at the last election, made a statement—and ho was quoting from the 'Daily Herald,' which considered the statement so iin--portantthat it put it in a frame—that in certain circumstances he was in favour of a2O per cent, tariff. Well, he could understand that the Labour Party would be disappointed, at any rate in • one half, with the proposals of the Government—that these proposals had gone only half the way." Lord Ponsonby: "Mr. Henderson did correct that." Viscount Snowden replied that he was quoting from the "Daily' Herald," - which six weeks afterwards attached more importance to the original statement that it did to the revised statement. (Laughei*.) .The Government had- been charged with lack of unity upon an important question. The Labour Party ought to be the last people in the world to Charge anybody with a lack of unity. JThejr were unable two-nights ago to