The Lyttelton Times. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1896. FEDERATION AND IMPERIAL TRADE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVI, Issue 11152, 29 December 1896, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1896. FEDERATION AND IMPERIAL TRADE.

Notwithstanding- the renewed activity displayed by tiie Premiers of New South Wales and Victoria, and mentioned in our cablegrams this morning, it is tolerably safe to conclude that intercolonial federation is not quite so healthy as it was some months ago. This much may be gathered from the correspondence between the two Premiers with regard to the proposal to postpone the convention for another year. Mr Seddon has seen his opportunity, and with.his usual promptitude has made use of it. The Premier does not belong to a party that has ever been on the side or federation. His former chief was a most persistent opponent of the proposal. “ We will not fede - rate with you,” Mr Ballance used to say, in effect, to the Australians, “but we will trade with you, and no federation is required for that.” Mr Ward, the special commercial representative in Mr Ballance’s Ministry, was of a different way of thinking, and was, as his friends will remember, very earnest and very eloquent in the exposition of his own views on the subject. He had the greatest respect for the, immense and fast-growing markets of Australia. He placed the highest value upon their power of absorption, and regarded them as of the utmost importance to the producers of this colony. He thought, therefore, that it was a grave mistake not to join in the federation movement. Mr Seddon does not go so far as Mr War 4 was at that time prepared to go ; bdt he is ready to go further than Mr Ballance, who held that this colony could make its trade without any assistance from formal reciprocity, was inclined to go. Mr Seddon has noted two things as signs of the times. The first is, as we have indicated more than once in these columns, that the star of Australian federation is not for the moment in the ascendant. The second is that the great fiscal change carried out by the Parliament of New South Wales and most emphatically supported by the constituencies of the mother colony, has prepared the way for the establishment of free interchange ol: all colonial products. Intercolonial!}', the scope of Mr tSeddon’s invitation to the Premiers of the adjoining

colonies does not appear to go beyond the offer o£ reciprocity Mr "Ward made two years ago, and which led to the abortive negotiations with the South Australian Government. But there is more in the matter than meets the eye. The discussions must cover the whole question o£ Imperial trade with the colonies, which has been lately raised by the Secretary of State. Mr Chamberlain is a freetrader to tbe backbone, and, like all freetraders, ho is quite ready to suspend the working of freetrade laws in accordance with the exigencies of profit. The chief query which he put to the colonies at the outset was, What are you prepared to do in return for anything wp may do on our side for you ?” The approaching conference—which Mr Turner now proposes should he held at Melbourne—will be able to give a, reply which ought to be satisfactory* For our part, we cannot see why the jealousy of the Australian Governments should have been roused by the proposal to meet in, New Zealand. That the representatives' from the neighbouring colonies would have received a very hearty welcome goes without saying. Nothing, however, in the shape of locality, can get rid of the fact that the lead in the matter was taken by the Premier of New Zealand, and unworthy as was the spirit in which the invitation of New Zealand was received, we think Mr Seddon has done quite right in not insisting upon his first proposal. He has wisely retained the substance of the lead and dropped the shadow of the name of the place of meeting. We trust he will be able to assist in the most important step that the conference will have to take. The intercolonial reciprocity question is the ostensible piece de resistance. It has a solid importance of its own, which we would by no means attempt to underrate. To our farmers it is of very great consequence, but the Imperial trade question is even greater. The latter affects the only market that will 1 be capable of taking the whole of our products to the end of time, even if they should increase as the most sanguine believer in our soil and climate may predict. In that market we require, and we are entitled to* a slight advantage over our producing rivals who have no community of interest with the consumers. Certain treaties bar the way, and nothing hut combined colonial action can remove them. We hope that Mr Seddon inay add to his reputation and to his record of public services by discovering a-a entirely satisfactory solution of the difficulty.