PREFERENTIAL TRADE.

Evening Star, Issue 11891, 20 May 1903, Page 6

PREFERENTIAL TRADE.

MR CHAMBERLAIN'S BIRMINGHAM SPEECH. GERMAN COMPLIMENTS. Prew Association—By Telegraph—Copyright ' LONDON, May 18. The gist of further German opinion is that the self-sufficiency of the British Empire is impossible; that any favor shown to the colonies, no matter how material, will be detrimental to industry from the competitive standpoint; and that Germany is better able to face a tariff war with Great Britain than Great Britain is with Germany. Some German newspapers imply that the price of Germany's friendship should be acquiescence in injury to out own interests, the 'Vossiche Zeitung* pointedly remarking that Mr Chamberlain's advice to England and her colonies could scarcely conduce to the improvement of Germany's political relations with Great Britain. Many interviews have been sought with Sir Wilfrid Laurier (Premier of Canada) and Sir G. Sprigg (Premier of Cape Colony), who decline to express any views. Sir A H. Hime (Premier of Natal) fa vors a preferential tariff and reciprocal treatment. He said that the Bloemfontein Conference had considered the possibility of Continental retaliation, which was not. however, of sufficient weight to dpter th<> delegates from framing their resolutions. Lord Milner, in nnswer to a request, said that it would be improper for him to express any opinion on Mr Chamberlain's policy. It was quite obvious, however, thit feeling in South Africa was in favor of preferential treatment, and wonld bp greatly strengthened if the Mother Land showed her appreciate of the Bloemfontein Conference resolutions.

Dr Smartt (leader of the Progressives in Cape Colony) declared that Mr Chamberlain's speech was the most masterly he bad delivered for many a day. There was only on<- policy whereby the Empire could be federated—by realign?, apart from sentiment, the necessity for bonds of commercial unity.

Mr Hofmeyr (Leader of the South African Bond) agreed with Mr Chamberlain if the speech implied , reciprocal tariffs between the colonies and the Mother Land. He was inclined to think that the Cape Parliament would adhere to the Bloemfontein preference proposals if the admission or exclusion of the Cape from the Customs Union was dependent on acceptance. Nevertheless, any one-sided preference would hardly endure. SYDNEY, May 19. Sir E. Barton declines to comment upon Mr Chamberlain's speech, except to say that the Colonial Secretary puts the position very strongly. AN EPOCH-MAKING SPEECH. SHOWERS OF CONGRATULATIONS. "ENGLAND NEVER HAD FREETRADE." LONDON, May 19. (Received May 20, at 8.52 a.m.) Mr Chamberlain has received hundreds of letters and telegrams and many personal visits conveying congratulations on his Birmingham speech. ' Lord Strathcona (High Commissioner for Canada) declared that the speech offers food for serious consideration throughout the length and breadth of-the Empire, indicating, as it does, a domestic trade policy for the Empire on a mutual basis. The Hon. Henry Copeland eral for New South Wales) says that the speech is the most important made in the interests of the Empire for many years, and portrays a far-reaching Imperial policy. Once a Customs Union is established it will conserve Imperial trade in Imperial channels, instead of scattering it broadcast among the nations who are anxious to strangle our trade in their own interests. England never had Freetrade. She had only a free purchasing market—not a free selling market. SIR E. BARTON'S VIEW. STRONGLY SUPPORTS MR CHAM- "*. BERLAIN. MELBOURNE, May 20. (Received May 20, at 9.10 a.m.) Sir E. Barton has cabled the following remarks on Mr Chamberlain's Birmingham speech:—"l fail to see why all the friends of the cohesion of the Empire should not agree with Mr Chamberlain's utterances. For the first time it is laid down by a powerful British Minister that the United Kingdom ought not to stand by and see any part of Greater Britain punished by foreigners for preferring their kinsmen, and that the interests of the partners in the Empire are paramount over fiscal theories. That threats of retaliation are made is on the assumption of a contrary view, and would be but idle vaporings if the whole Empire were prepared to defend its cohesion in trade as well as in territory. Principle is not affected, because in its appreciation we cannot ignore the fact that great colonies like Canada and Australia must necessarily raise large Customs revenue, and at the same time protect their own industries. Within the operation of that necessity there is room for trade preferences in the productions of thj Empire, whether in food supply or in finished manufactures. Tt is idle to say that preference to be effective, must amount to the prohibition of the foreign import. That Canada's preference had been effective and may be more so Germany admits by her threats; yet Canada does not by any means prohibit the importation of eoods from Germany." QUITE SO. PARTS, May 19. (Receivpd May. 20, at 9.34 a.m.) A high French official states that Mr Chamberlain's policy concerns England and her colonies alone, and that no foreign State is justified in taking umbrage, whatever the decision arrived at. POLITICAL PARTIES LONDON, May 19. Many Unionist M.P.s hope that the new pohcy will be mainfc>ined in the front of Hipir programme. The Lib=ral leaders (i.e., Sir H. C. Bannerman's party) intend to force an early debate, in order to obtain a definition of the Government's position. MR J. A. MILLAR'S VIEWS. On being spoken to by a member of our staff this morning, Mr J. A. Millar, M.H.R., said : "I am opposed to any preferential tarff which will in any way" affect the industries of the colony. If proposals are brought forward to increase the tariff on goods from nations outside of Great Britain, I have no objection io support them provided that the existing tariff is not reduced. In my opinion it is our first duty to find work for our own people, and I am not going to allow any matter of sentiment to interfere with the practical side of the question. I believe that in time we will be capable of producing the bulk of things required m this colony ourselves, and the introduction of a tariff which is going to handicap the future development of our industries seems to me to be inimical to the interests of the colony." Our Wellington correspondent wires: Mr Chamberlain's Birmingham speech, in which he referred to the fiscal unity of the Empire, has caused much talk in local mercantile circles. A reporter from the 'Evening Post' interviewed four representative busines men of this city for the purpose of ascertaining their opinions on the subject of preferential tariffs between Great Britain and the colonies. Mr J. Duthie, M.H.R., said he was not in favor of the proposal in view of the immense benefit that Great Britain has reaped from |

her Freetrade policy. It seemed evident that the proposal would lead up to a further proposal to make the colonies take a very much larger share of the burden of the defence of the Empire. As a matter of fact the colony of New' Zealand was not in a position to carry any greater burden of that kind at present. Of course, New Zealand has always shown, and always will show, every desire to assist the Old Country when circumstances necessitated such a course, as in the South African War, but the costly work of developing and building up the colony must go on, and we canuot at present carry any additional harden. The Mayor (Mr Aitken, M.H.&.) thought that the proposals made by Mr Chamberlain would suit this colony very well, but he bad not considered the matter from the international point of view. If Mr. Chamberlain's proposals were earned out our exports, would be in a better position on the Home markets, and in return for that we would, presumably, take as large a percentage of British-made goods. He thought, however, that the colonies should be consulted in the matter. Mr John Duncan (Messrs Levin and Co.) said he was strongly in favor of a reciprocal arrangement between the colonies and the rest of the Empire under which preferential import duties should be allowed upon all goods of British manufacture; or, if fiscal reasons operated against that course, that idditional duties should be charged on the imports of foreign manufacture. In return for this an import duty should be imposed in England on all foreign grain—say 6s a quarter—and that all grain grown or shipped through a colonial port should be received free. If a preferential advantage could be given to the colonies on their exports of frozen meats arid dairy produce it would largely tend, in his opinion, to cement the union between the colonies and the Old Country. Mr W. T. Nathan (Messrs Bannatyne and Co.) said there were a number of points to be considered. First of all there was the question of Freetrade. The principal exports from the colonies consisted ch efly of fowl-, stuffs. If they were going to give preferential treatment to the colonies they could only give it by the imposition of duties on goods shipped from foreign countries to Great Britain, leaving colon isil produce to enter free, as at present. Would the imposition of a duty on breadstuffs call forth a loud protest from the laboring classes! Because there is no donbt that such a duty would affect the price of bread That appears to be the great drawback to the proposal—that it seemed likely to affect the price of foodstuffs in New Zealand, where in a number of lines he thought there were too many manufacturers for the requirements of the community. Goods were in many instances sold at prices which are not remunerative, the result of the overproduction. UndeTProtection New Zealand could never be an industrial nation.