THE EMPIRE’S TRADE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXI, Issue 13326, 4 January 1904, Page 5

THE EMPIRE’S TRADE.

MR CHAMBERLAIN AND AUSTRALIA. PRESS COMMENT. United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright. LONDON, January 1. The “'Westminster Gazette” says that Air D cabin’s invitation has destroyed the colonial offer theory. Mr Chamberlain lias been invited to go in order that the offer may come. Tho “St James’s Gazette” implies that Mr Chamberlain will be unable to accept the invitation as early as Australia wishes, owing to his need for rhst. The “ Pall Mall IGazette ” declares Australia’s invitation is a New Year’s gift, and no mean contribution to fiscal reform. A BITTER PILL. (Received January 5, 8.5 a.m.) LONDON, January 2. The “ Pall Mall Gazette ” says that Australia’s invitation is an uncommonly- bitter pill for Mr Chamberlain’s opponents. Mr Chamberlain announces that his correspondence with Mr Daakin will be given to t-ho. Press in a day or two. Tho “ Daily Mail ” says that Mr Chamberlain prefers to postpone his visit to Australia till his policy receives the national mandate. He can then go with authority to settle the details of the scheme, , MAX NORDEAU ON THE SITUATION. VIENNA, January 2. M. Max Nordeau, writing, in the Vienna “ None Erie Pres so,” says that notwithstanding the dislike of the working classes to the taxation of food, the fundamental ideas of Mr Chamberlain’s policy not only appeal to millions in England but also create intense enthusiasm. The national development of the colonies towards independence is given np and Imperialism is now tho watchword. MR CHAMBERLAIN’S REPLY. MELBOURNE, January 2. Mr Deakin has received the following reply from Mr Chamberlain:—“l am deeply grateful to you and your Ministry for your flattering invitation, and for the assurance you give of a cordial welcome from the people of Australia. I recognise the advantages and pleasure to myself of such a visit as you suggest, but at this stage of a great campaign for the unity of the Empire, in which I rejoice to have your sympathy and support, L think I can best serve our common cause ,by devoting myself to its promotion here, where the Motherland is called upon to say what answer she will make to the advances of her children across tire seas. Ido not doubt she will b e ready to meet, in no grudging spirit, all the proposals for .strengthening the bonds between us. Until her mandate has been given, I cannot leave for a lengthened-absence. At a future time—l hope not distant—l may he able to avail myself of your invitation so generously given; and, meanwhile, I accept it as a great encouragement, and ns evidence that the Commonwealth of Australia is not indifferent to tho duty cast on all of us, in the present condition of the wo),ld, to weld together the Empire wfyich is our common heritage, won for us by' the sacrifices of onr forefathers, and only to be maintained by th e devotion of their descendants to the same ideals.”

A NEW ZEALANDER’S VIEWS

Questioned by an Auckland interviewer in regard to .the preferential tariff policy, Mr N. A. Nathan, of the firm of L. D. Nathan and Co., who has just returned to the colony after a stay of eighteen months in England, said that the general opinion, he found, was that Mr Chamber--lain would carry the day in the end. It seemed also to be generally regarded that the colonies would gain more from the adoption of preferentialism . than the Mother Country would. Whilst, however, the general feeling was in favour of the new policy, Mr Nathan sand ho came across many people who ■were so imbued with freetrade principles that they would not condescend to argue the question or even to read the reports of speeches by Mr Chamberlain and others who are assisting him in his propaganda. “Did you speak to any Americans on the matter?” ashed the interviewer. “Yes,” said Mr Nathan, “ and most of those with -whom I conversed thought that it was only natural that the component parts of the British Empire should enter into such a compact for their mutual benefit—in fact, some of them expressed surprise that the preferential policy had not been initialed years ago.” Mr Nathan added that of course it was recognised in the States that the carrying into effect of a preferential tariff would deprive America of a great deal of her present trade, and he stated that the represen t.-a-tives of some American firms who had agencies in the colonies had coin© out by the mail boat to make inquiries into the probable effects of inter-British preferentialism, PROGRESS OP MR CHAMBERLAIN’S CAMPAIGN. English merchants and manufacturers hold the belief that England will soon depart- from her free-trade policy, ns is shown (writes the San Francisco correspondent of the “Age,” under date November 10), by the fact that they have already begun to increase their stocks and lay in large supplies of goods, upon which Mr Chamberproposes there shall he a 10 per cent import duty. This is the burden of much private correspondence between England and th-o United States just now. AlO per cent duty does not sormd largo, but upon the cheaper classes of goods, which ore imported into England in immense quantities, 10 per cent would represent the difference between profit and loss. English manufacturers,’ in letters to their American agents, predict'that the Chamberlain policy will triumph- within nine months—meaning at the general election which is expected in England within a year. With this in view, they have already begun to. investigate the market and place their orders—“ a- most practical and convincing hit of evidence,” as one American newspaper points out, “ of the change which lias taken place in public opinion within a very short time.”