Sir W. Lyne.

Manawatu Times, Volume LXIV, Issue 104, 6 May 1907, Page 8

Sir W. Lyne.

(Continued from pago 8.) Entertaining the Premiers. London, May 3. The Victoria League cntevtaincd the wives and daughters of Premier?! and Ministers at luncheon. Princess Louise was present. The British Empire League and British Science Guild gave a banquet at the Hotel Mctropole, 300 being present, including Lord Hugh Cecil, Lord Kelvin, and leading scientists and educationalists. Lord Derby, the chairman, on behalf of the League, proposed the Premiers' health. The toast was supported by the Chancellor of Oxford on behalf of the Science Guild. The latter declared the Universities of Montreal, Melbourne, Sydney and New Zealand looked forward to an interchange of students and professors. Mr Deakin, replying, said the Imperial problem was to retain the principle of selfgovernment without leaving the self-govern-ing colonies scattered and disunited until the hour of emergency to improvise expedients for unity in war. He to the work of the Empire League in New Zealand and was loudly cheered.

Per Press Association. —Copyright. London - , May H. Sir W. Lyne in a vigorous and outspoken speech, declared 'that Mr Asquith was unnecessarily brusque and uncompromising, and his attempts to belittle the advantage of colonial offers were scarcely fair. If Australian preference, restricted to 8 per cent of trade, yielded a profit of £100,000 if more widely extended, as was contemplated, it might perhaps have yielded a profit of £1,200,000. Sir W. Lyuo, replying to Mr Maekay, stated that it was unlikely that the people of Australia with higher social conditions would place the Lascar, earning 4|£d a day, in the same category as Australian seamen earning 4s to ss. Mr Mackay interjected that Lascars receive 9d a day. Sir W.. Lyne asserted that foreign shipping and trade was increaing in Australia far quicker than British. He feared Britain was losing her hold on the Australian markets, and preference would rectify this. Britain was really more concerned than Australia. He advocated low Australian duties on British goods and higher duties on foreign goods. Australia did not want a one-sided bargain. If 2s per quarter preference was conceded to colonial wheat 20,000,000 more acres would b« planted in the colonies. The concession would not raise the price of bread. The colonies were able to supply nearly everything Britain wanted. Sir Wm. Lyno emphasised the increasing keenness of foreign competition in the colonies, citing the latest statistics. Foreign nations gave bounties and concessions of all kinds in order to increase trade, thereby increasing also their mercantile marine and reserves for naval warfare. If the British Government was satisfied that it had received a mandate against preference, why hesitate to appeal to the country by referendum to find out if it was still of the same opinion. He denied that there was a mandate. More Deakin. Mr Deakin inquired whether the British Government, being absolutely determined against preference, would consider a proposal on the lines suggested by M Hofmeyer in 1887 and Sir Sydenham Clarke in Melbourne in 1908. The proposal involved the creation of an Imperial fund by a 1 per cent special import duty levied on all foreign goods entering British ports, the fund to be applied to the improvement and development of the maritime communications of the Empire, improvements in the carrying of mails, cables and other common Imperial ends. Dealing with, the Suez Oanal difficulty, Mr Asquith said lie was not prepared to answer without consideration. Later Mr Deakin asked Mr Lloyd George if he was prepared to take their propositions into consideration. He said Britain could make up lier contribution to the Imperial fund by any means she pleased so long as she provided an equivalent. Mr Deakin thought such a proposal was well worth examination in order to ascertain if it came within Mr Asquith's undertaking that Government was prepared to look favourably on any proposal for improving interImperial communication, and development of commerce and trade. If the Government was favourable to the idea then the Conference could try to arrive at a practical agreement. It was better to wait for that or some similar scheme than close the Conference without being able to show any advance. His great ob-» ject was to elicit some positive proposal. • Mr Deakin'a suggestion appeared to be received with disfavour on the part of two colonial representatives, also by Messrs Lloyd George and Churchill. The two latter consented to consider the matter. u Both will speak on Monday. Press Opinions. Tlis Times says that Mr Asquith's statement was depressing. The colonial Premiers' statements were full of hope and constructive imagination, and suggest that they will fight in the future in the determination to mould it to their ends, which contemplate progress, and that we in the Empire should be united by increasing ties. Mr Asquith, in reply, was only able to offer on essential points a rigid adherence to the old position. It is true he promises attention to communcations from the economic standpoint. This subject is, however, small, and from the political standpoint becomes far smaller when compared with preference. ,He pleads that his hands are tied. Are they tied against anything except a protectionist tariff, for example, preference based on a corn duty? Has the electorate ever denied or affirmed the principle of preference? Mr Asquith's attitude is the attitude of extreme fiscal puritanism, not to say pudency. The Daily News says that Messrs Asquith and Mackay's case was unanswerable. The people of the Motherland are determined that their prime necessities shall never again be taxed, a verdict from whence there is no appeal. The Standard challenges the Government to submit the question of reciprocal preference to a referendum. Leaders of the Imperial element in the nation must now show colonial Premiers that their message is not in vain. The Daily Chronicle emphasises and the Morning Post admits that regarding the domain of trade and communications the results of the Conference have not been negative. The Morning Post, however, contends that on the main question the voice of India is only the voice of a Department of the British Government, which is administering the country, and adds, tested by value per head the Australian market is incomparably more valuable to Britain than the German. According to the Daily Telegraph the Motherland stands alone in desiring less than in 1902. Sydney, May 4. The Herald, after reviewing the position Mr Deakin and his party obtained at the elections, remarks that for such a Minister to claim he has a mandate from Australia to offer preference on his own terms, is a course of political conduct which we can hardly define in Parliamentary language. His astonishing colleague, Sir W. Lyne, nearly equals in effrontery the Prime Minister when he invites the Imperial Government to intsitute a referendum on the sub3ect - - . ' «■-