FISCAL QUESTION.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 12647, 6 January 1904, Page 3

FISCAL QUESTION.

CABLEGRAMS.

[m PUSS ASSOCIATION. —COPYBIQBI,]

SUPPORT FOR MR CHAMBERLAIN (Received January 6, 1.2 a.m;) LONDON, Jahuary 5. The Walsall District Chamber of Commerce, by 39 votes to 11, endorsed Mr Chamberlain’s proposals. PREFERENCE FOR PRODUCE. (Received January 6, 1.0 a.m.) LONDON, January 5. Mr Chamberlain, in a letter to General Richard Harrison, Unionist candidate for Mid-Devon, says: “My proposals ensure moderate preference for corn, and especially meat and- dairy pioduce, helping farmers and improving the value of holders’ allotments." BEFORE HOME RULE. (Received January 6, 1.2 a.m.) LONDON, January 5. Mr R. B. Haldane, replying to a correspondent, says that the fiscal question must take precedence of the Home Rule question. He recognises the Government’s progressive Irish policy, and hopes, perhaps, later on to see by means of non-party laws a gradual evolution in Ireland. This would depend largely on the extent to which Irish Leaguers gain and keep confidence in Great Britain. It would be unwise to revive Mr Gladstone’s bills, or anything resembling them.

MR CHAMBERLAIN AND AUSTRALIA. LONDON, January 4. The “Daily Chronicle,” in the course of an article commenting on Mr Deakin’s invitation to Mr Chamberlain to visit Australia, says:—“Mr Chamberlain is not appealing to the selfish instincts of the British manufacturer and to the popular ill-will against foreigners. He has long since ceased to emphasise unity of the Empire, which was the leading' clause of his original programme. If the idea that loyalty to the Empire is necessarily bound up with particular fiscal changes spreads to the colonies it must excite as much controversy there as here, and the ties of sentimental regard binding the Empire may indeed be severely strained.” The “Daily News” says; “Mr Deakin is far from secure. It will soon be seen whether he is able to withstand the possible combination of the Labour men and Freetradc Liberals, or be compelled to yield to Mr Reid. It was natural that Mr Deakin, under the circumstances, should be eager to obtain Mr Chamberlain’s help. If the root of self-government is not interfered with too much by Britain, we do not believe that the colonies will join in bullying the Motherland, if they understand the issue. "We suggest that in order to prevent mistakes some eminent Liberal should follow Mr Chamberlain to state the alternative case.”

The "Morning Post” says:—“ While the Freetraders are harping on the difficulties of negotiating with the colonies, Australia, which according to them is the crux of the situation, is anxious to begin. If Australia is prepared to act in the spirit of Mr Deakin’s telegram it will not take long to arrange for preference, and an Imperial tariff can be arranged, enabling the colonies to make definite offers as soon as we can reciprocate.”

SIR R. GIFFEN’S VIEWS. LONDON, January 4. Sir R. Giffen, statistician, in an article in the “Nineteenth Century” on the fiscal policy, says:—“ The giving of preference to the colonies would be puerile and ineffectual, and would confer no material advantage on either the colonies or the Motherland. The idea of the Empire becoming self-sustaining in the matter of food is a dream. Measures of Protection ought to be carefully examined in detail as well as in principle and theory'. The country is losing sight of the urgent business of making an agreement with the colonies respecting commercial negotiation with foreign countries, and the desirability

of common action when difficulties arise, though that is the excuse for beginning the present agitation.” Sir Robert ridicules the cocksureness of the Protectionists.

A BANKER’S OPINION

LONDON, January 4.

Mr J. H. Tritton, president of the Bankers’ Institute, lecturing at Chelmsford, said Mr Chamberlain’s proposals would retard the closer union of the colonies and the Motherland. He dreaded even the suggestion to close our ports against foreign countries.