GOODS OR ARMIES?

Northern Advocate, 5 January 1937, Page 4

GOODS OR ARMIES?

WHICH WILL CROSS * FRONTIERS? VITAL QUESTION FOR NATIONS 1 UNRESTRICTED COMMERCE THE ONLY SOLUTION r United Press Association.-j-By Electric Telegraph. — Copyright .] (Received 1 p.m.) LONDON, January 4. “If goods don’t scon cross frontiers, armies will.” In these words, a London businessman summed up the international trade position. It is widely felt that, despite the marked trade recovery in Britain—largely based on armaments expenditure —the outlook is not reassuring, in view of the worldwide restrictions on commerce. It was believed that, as' the depression passed, the shackles would be removed, or at least the leg-irons would be made lighter, but those concerned complain that there is a widespread tendency to stiffen up economic nationalism, even allowing for attempts by the United States to secure lower tariffs by agreements throughout the Americas and elsewhere, and for British trade treaties with various countries, some lowering inter-Empire barriers. ■

Curiously enough, international trade is freer in raw materials and armaments than in most cthCr things. A cynic might suggest that this freetrade in death is a gesture of gratitude on the part of the leading nations for internal recovery, and the decrease in unemployment caused by the rearmament race, which is not yet nearly over. If w’ar does not come to speed up things, it will be two years before Britain’s rearmament passes its peak, and when that happens, what will follow if outlets for the products of the plants at present engaged on armament making are still blocked? To a certain degree, the armaments boom has been responsible for an increased demand and higher prices for foodstuffs and raw materials, although undoubtedly there is a genuine world need for these things, which would mean a permanently improved outlook if it were not for the crosscurrents in national policies. While restrictions are being lessened in the production of some commodities, , it is suggested that the tea restriction scheme may be extended beyond 1938. However, efforts to rope in producers still outside the s'cheme, such as China and Japan, has so far proved unsuccessful. Finally, it is suggested that some nations may soon refuse to accept the alternative “guns or butter,” and may say, “If you have guns you can have butter:”