BRITISH CABINET

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 35, 25 January 1932, Page 7

BRITISH CABINET

SOLIDITY UNSHAKEN MAY DIFFER ON TARIFF. UNITED ON GREATER PROBLEMS. (British Official Wireless.) (Received 25, 12,39 p.m.) Rugby, Jan. 24. The Cabinet announcement of its “agreement to differ” on the tariff policy while maintaining unity in the face of all ther issues is being keenly discussed in political circles. All of the twenty members of the Cabinet were present when the decision was reached. It is understood that the dissenting Ministers were Lord Snowden and three Liberal Ministers, Sir Herbert Samuel, Sir Donald Mac Lean, and Sir Archibald Sinclair, Secretary for Scotland. While these Ministers in differing on this issue from the majority of their colleagues were prepared to take the usual course in such circumstances i resigning, they refrained from doing so when it was urged upon them the importance of the Cabinet maintaining a united front upon the uther problems confronting the country. This was as vital now as it was at the time when the National Government was formed and the resigning of dissenting Ministers on this question would infallibly be interpreted as implying disagreement on international and Imperial issues upon which they were actually in complete agree ment. The present expedient therefore was adopted since it was generally agreed that a rigorous adherence to precedent lost its importance in the face of unprecedented problems. Lord Hailsham, who it is understood played a notable part at the Cabinet meeting, expressed his belief that: “So far from weakening the position nothing will so strengthen the weight of our influence abroad as the knowledge there that even these fiscal differences which are matters of common notoriety are not of avail to shake the solidity of the British Cabinet in a time of the country’s danger.”

STATEMENT BY SIR HERBERT. (Received 25, 8.35 a.m.) London, Jan. 24. Sir Herbert Samuel, explaining why he, Lord Snowden, Sir D. Mac Lean and Sir Archibald Sinclair are retaining office, says that it was necessary temporarily to suspend the rule of Ministers’ collective responsibility. Many might think that this would not work, but the Cabinet’s duty was to try to make it work. The plan was admittedly unprecedented, anomalous and illogical, but these considerations did not perturb them. This Government was not founded on the principle of collective responsibility on all subjects, nor would withdrawal from the Government prevent the passage of the measures to which the free traders objected. TARIFF PROPOSALS. PROMPT ACTION EXPECTED. (Received 25, 12.35 p.m.) London, Jan. 24. With the internal Cabinet difficulties momentarily overcome it is expected that the tariff proposals will be speedily formulated and the financial resolutions relating to them be before the House of Commons within a fortnight. Iron and steel may be given limited protection, but none of the new duties will apply to Dominion products, giving Britain a bargaining point for the conference at Ottawa.

LABOUR COMMENT. ON “AGREEMENT TO DIFFER.’’ (Received 25, 1.15 p.m.) London, Jan. 24. Mr. James Hudson, former parliamentary private secretary to Lord Snowden, speaking at Dartford said: “If I know anything of my old chief there is no man more capable of utter contempt for the latest Government subterfuge. He asserted at Manchester in 1931 that no Government of which he was a member would introduce what this Government has decided to introduce. He has violated his deepest conviction. Ho was prepared to smash the Labour Government if it yielded to Tory or Liberal pressure against his Land Taxation Scheme, but has supinely connived at his Government’s destine tive scheme. He actually smashed the Labour Government because some of its members dared to contemplate a revenue tariff as being better than an attack on the unemployed. He remains in this Government which carries out both.’’ “RAMSHACKLE” FOUNDATIONS. Mr. Herbert Morrison, speaking at Paddington, said that the recent Cabinet occcurrences have proved that the foundations of the Government are ramshackle. The whole political world is shocked by the Cabinet’s amazing do cision to allow Ministers to go as they please in connection with the most Important act in its policy. The Premier should make way for a Conservative Party loader or seek a dissolution, ATTORNEY-GENERAL RESIGNS. (Received 25, 12.20 p.m.) London, Jan. 24. Mr. W. A. Jowitt, K.C., has resigned the Attorney-Generalship. Sir Thomas Inskip is his likely successor. DTD MR. MACDONALD THREATEN TO RESIGN? (Received 25, 2.30 p.m.) London, Jau. 24. Sir Herbert Samuel’s recent speech, in which he stated that nobody in the Cabinet desired Mr. MacDonald's resignation, is interpreted as meaning that Mr. MacDonald threatened to resign if four dissenters from the tariff left the Cabinet. The Conservative and Liberal rank and filo doubt whether the departure from collective Cabinet responsibility is workable. The belief is expressed 5n those quarters that four Ministers will eventually resign.