LIBERAL MINISTERS

Evening Star, Issue 21220, 29 September 1932, Page 9

LIBERAL MINISTERS

RESIGNATIONS FROM CABINET HEW APPOINTMENTS ANNOUNCED (British Official Wireless.) Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright RUGBY, September 28. (Received September 29, at 11 a.m.) There is a likelihood that two National Labour Ministers other than Lord Snowden will retire from the Cabinet. The resignation of three members of the Cabinet (Lord Snowden, Sir Herbert Samuel, and Sir Archibald Sinclair) were announced after a meeting of the Cabinet this morning. Late this evening it was announced that the King had accepted the resignations and had approved of the following appointments:—Sir John Gilmour (Conservative), who has been Minister of Agriculture since 1931, will be Secretary of State for Home Affairs, vice Sir Herbert Samuel; Major Elliott (Conservative), who has been Financial Secretary to the Treasury since 1931, will be Minister of Agriculture, vice Sir John Gilmour. Sir Godfrey Collins (National Liberal) will be Secretary of State for Scotland (vice Sir Archibald Sinclair).

No successor to Lord Snowden is announced, but the newspapers anticipate that the duties of this office will be combined with those of another Minister.

To-day’s Cabinet was the first full meeting since the Ottawa Conference, and was called to consider legislation arising out of the agreements reached there.

The opposition of Sir Herbert Samuel and his Liberal supporters to the Ottawa decisions has been well known, and in a statement to-night they explained their views regarding them and their attitude generally towards the Government, with whose policy on other than fiscal matters they are in agreement.

It is understood that before the resignations took effect the Cabinet examined, but found impracticable, the suggestion that legislative action on the Ottawa agreements should be delayed. The afternoon meeting of the Cabinet was held in the absence of the three resigning Ministers, and ordinary business was transacted, but it was not completed when the meeting adjourned until Friday. Resignations have also been tendered by Liberal junior Ministers—namely, Lord Lothian (Under-Secretary for India), Mr Isaac Foot (Minister of Mines), Sir Robert Hamilton (Undersecretary for the Colonies), Mr Graham White (Assistant Postmaster-General), and three whips (Major MackenzieWood, Mr Harcourt Johnstone, and Mr W. R. Rea).

The members of the Liberal Nationalist group led by Sir John Simon have not yet resigned. The Prime Minister, on behalf of himself and his National Labour colleagues in the Government (Lord Sankey and Mr J. H. Thomas), made the following statement:—“We put our hands to a very big job twelve months ago. We knew what it meant. The work is not finished. Reparations, a debt settlement, and the World Economic Conference have yet to be dealt with. We shall go on until these things are done. The nation still needs a_ non-party Government, and purely party considerations would weaken our national influence in the world and be a blow at the movements now at work towards world recovery.” The elder Liberal statesmen (the ■Marquess of Crewe, the Marquess of Reading, and Viscount Grey), in a letter from party headquarters, say;— “Those who share Sir Herbert Samuel’s views on the Ottawa Conference must regard the resignations as inevitable, but the signatories hope that it will be shown that this difference of opinion does not mean joining the Opposition to overthrow the Government, which would shake the financial credit of the country and produce greater distress than even a mistaken fiscal policy can do. It is important, too, that in the Indian and European and international affairs generally the Government should have national support. The signatories understand that, except as regards fiscal policy, there has been no difference on the main issues inside the Cabinet, and it is hoped that this degree of harmony may be found possible outside the Cabinet.”

STATEMENT BY RESIGNING LIBERALS OTTAWA AGREEMENTS CRITICISED. LONDON, September 28. (Received September 29, at 12.46 p.m.) Sir Herbert Samuel and his Liberal supporters, after their resignation from the Cabinet, issued the following statement;—“ We regard the Ottawa agreements generally as a danger to the Empire’s best interests, a derogation of the powers of Parliament, a barrier to the removal of restrictions on world trade, a burden upon the British people, and the probable cause of increased unemployment and social unrest. It is plain that with differences so fundamental upon matters of such high import it is impossible for us to remain members of the Government.” The above is an extract from a 2,000 word statement, and summarises the resigning Minister’s position. There follows a condemnation of the Government’s entire tariff policy, in which the signatories declare that the Government, instead of making every possible effort to free the world of the network of tariffs, quotas, and commercial restrictions, has built up an immense, intricate, and lasting system of similar restrictions, resulting in the loss of one-fourth of Britain’s valuable reexport trade, contributing to the laying up of thousands of Jons of British-

shipping, also causing the unemployed to increase by 300,000 during the last five months, and involving a charge of £70,000,000 on the exchequer. They recall the withdrawal of their resignations in January on the agree to differ principle. “ The Ottawa agreements have produced an entirely fresh situation because they are graver than earlier measures, also although the gravest difficulties are facing the country at home and abroad there is not the acute and imminent danger which was existing either last year cm in January, therefore there is no overriding national duty to maintain the present political combination. “ The principal objections to Ottawa are, first, that the whole policy of 1 hard bargaining ’ on trade between Empire Governments is wrong. We regard the continued unity and harmony of the British Commonwealth of Nations as of supreme importance both to the Empire and the world, but such conferences as Ottawa as only imperial. Pressing one part of the Empire to make unwilling sacrifices to induce another part equally unwilling, to make counter sacrifices will not promote unity and harmony, and, while bringing trade to the forefront of the political field, it invites disagreement among the Governments, which is likely sooner or later to become acute. Tighter bonds may mean greater friction. “ Secondly, the agreements are unconstitutional because apart from the question of whether the Government is entitled to give an undertaking not to reduce the duties on Empire articles for a term of years without the consent of the dominions, Parliament cannot enact such a statute as would bar a subsequent parliament from reducing taxes, despite an electoral mandate. “ Thirdly, the agreements tie our hands when it is essential to enter the World Conference free to make agreements to expand our trade with foreigners, which is the largest part of British commerce.

“ Fourthly, although the dominions’ concessions will benefit some trades they will be too small substantially to assist the unemployed. Moreover, many, if not most, of the reductions are hedged with conditions and, qualifications, making them problematical. Mr Bruce, regarding Australia, is reported to have stated: ‘There is no radical departure from Australia’s fiscal policy.’ Also, British agriculture is unlikely to benefit. No reference is made to migratioin, which is .of the greatest interest to Britons.

“ Fifthly, taxes and quotas on foodstuffs and raw materials raise the cost of Jiving and production in Britain. “ Sixthly, we condemn the termination of the Russian trade agreement, as it is doubtful whether we could enter a more satisfactory agreement, thus striking a further blow at trade.”

The statement adds: “ We shall state other objections in Parliament. We suggested at a Cabinet meeting that the Ottawa legislation should be postponed to enable our free entry to the World Conference, permitting us to remain in the Government and that when the conference ended the situation could be reviewed afresh. We are disappointed that the Conservative Ministers refused this sacrifice after the Liberals had repeatedly subordinated their views on fiscal policy in the interests of national unity.’

LORD SNOWDEN'S DECLARATION

GOVERNMENT’S POLICY CONDEMNED.

LONDON, September 28. (Received September 29, at 12.30 p.m.) Lord Snowden, in a letter to Mr MacDonald, states: “ I connot, without loss of self-respect, remain a member of a Government that is pursuing a policy disastrous to the country’s welfare, leading to disruption of the Empire, and fraught with great danger to international relations. The acute national emergency no longer exists. The main purpose of the National Government has been achieved, the British delegation went to Ottawa with the intention of increasing interimperial trade and lowering world tariffs. They have returned after weeks of acrimonious disputes and sordid struggles with vested interests with agreements wrenched from them to avert a collapse of the conference, but which expose the hollowness of the talk of Imperial sentiment in economic affairs. These agreements maintain existing tariffs, increase existing duties on foodstuffs, impose a duty on wheat, and raise the price of meat and bacon. By some incomprehensible plan for restricting foreign imports the dominions are to dictate to us where we shall or shall not buy. The agreements have surrendered our fiscal autonomy and handed to the dominions control of British trade policy, reducing Britain below the status of a dominion. You can’t expect Freetraders to acquiesce in such a policy of national humiliation and bondage. If unfortunate results follow a break-up of the National Government, the Tories must bear the responsibility. lam convinced that Tories’ tariff and Imperialist policies are more dangerous in their permanent effects than last year’s crisis,” NO SERIOUS DIVISION LONDON, September 28. The ‘ Daily Mail ' says; “ In the dominions the impression may be produced that the British people and the Cabinet are seriously divided on the issue of preference under the Ottawa agreements. This is not the case. It is quite certain that the last thing that democracy desires to see is the dominions rebuffed and Britain once more the world’s dumping ground.” *• NOT All QUITTERS " LONDON, September 28. (ReceivedaSeptember 29, at 12.10 p.m.) “ We are not all quitters, and shall stay to support Mr MacDonald,” said Mr Runciman, prior to a dinner to the Simon supporters at which he explained the Ottawa agreementsj.