SPECIAL INTERVIEWS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XL, Issue 12281, 27 May 1903, Page 1 (Supplement)

SPECIAL INTERVIEWS.

PREFERENTIAL TRADE.

AUCKLAND OPINIONS ON MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S SPEECH.

Few utterances by any responsible British statesman in modern times havo given rise to such world-wide discussion as the recent speech by Mr. Chamberlain, in which a departure from " the narrow interpretation of free trade current in Homo circles" was foiesfcadowed. Mr. Seddon, at Rotorua ; Sir «T G Ward, in the South; and Mr. Carroll, at Tuakau, have all welcomed Mr. Chamberlain's fiscal proposals, and with a view of ascertaining the trend of public opinion in our own city a Herald reporter called upon several prominent manufacturers and traders yesterday and asked whether preferential trade between Britain and the colonies would be- likely to prove mutually advantageous. For the most part it was agreed that some such change as the Colonial Secretary indicated is desirable and likely to prove popular at Home, as well as in the Kings dominions abroad. On the other hand, it was more than once pointed out that Britain would only loose her hold on free tree, as free trade has been understood since the days of Cobden and Bright, if it were clearly demonstrated that such an important stop would advance her material interests. Said a well-known merchant: Mr. Chamberlain is far too astute a politician not to have mastered his subject before he made his great speech in Birmingham, and he may confidently be cxpectcd to recur to it at no distant date. Thero is no reason to suppose it is a mere election cry; if it were so, that would simply indicate how ripe Britain is for such a departure. Certainly, we appear to be 011 the eve of great changes." Mr. B. Kent (president of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce), asked to state his views, said: "I am of opinion that the preferential legislation which Mr. Chamberlain foreshadowed in his great speech at Birmingham will meet with the hearty approval of by far the majority of the members of the British Empire. Tho fact is that Great Britain has" never enjoyed complete free trade. At its best it has always been a onesided arrangement, working against our own people in their export trade. And I cannot but think that even the great giants of free trade, Richard Cobden and John Bright, under the greatly altered conditions of the Empire to-day, would not have been opposed to the preferential basis to Great Britain and her colonies.' We are Empire-making nowadays, and it seems to me that preference in trade to our own people is one of the methods— a. very important method— binding our kith and kin together with ties that cannot be broken. Of course, the proposed fiscal change is a bold and daring one, but Mr. Chamberlain is a bold and daring man, and the British people have faith in his sagacity, and believe that 110 radical changes will be made without the utmost prudence." Air. .1. 11. Upton, an ex-president of the Chamber of Commerce, took a more guarded view. He said: " The question is not so much how will a preferential tariff affect the colonies, but how will it affect England. _ If England will put a duty 011 goods derived from foreign countries, and so enable our produce to go in at a less cost, we shall, of course, profit by it. But it- seems to me that it would be almost an impertinence on our part to say to England, ' You tax every other product similar to ours and let us off, and we in turn will give your goods preference.' As a matter of fact,' we buy most of our goods from England already. It is a matter for tin- English people to decide upon, and I have 110 doubt that Mr. Chamberlain has given much thought to the changes that would he involved. A statesman of his great ability would not have said what ho did without having good reason for it. Before we can form anything like an accurate opinion upon the issue at. stake,' however, we shall have to await developments." " Would a far-reaching change- in her fiscal policy, such as is foreshadowed, be likely to benefit England?"' . "The question is not an- easy one. England's great position. has been built up by the principle of free trade. The theory is .that all taxation of trade impedes trade. Other nations tax England's manufactures, but if, in retaliation, she puts a tax on what she receives from other countries the harm derived may be merely doubled. What would benefit England most would be that all taxes should be removed except for purposes of revenue. She does that; other nations do not. When New Zealand, Australia, America, and other countries put protective duties on English manufactures they damage themselves and make trade difficult. If England adopts a system of retaliatory tariffs, who will pay for it? Not the foreigner. Suppose England imposes duties 011 food, which forms a very large part of her imports. That will make things difficult for her, because she will have more to pay for her bread. Moreover, she will have to pay higher wages, and the cost of her manufactures will become greater, to their resulting disadvantage in the market." "You would move cautiously in the matter?" My mind is quite open. I am merely dealing with facts. Whether a change of policy is desirable or not has to be proved. Free trade has been long established in Great Britain. Before it was established by Bright, Cobden, and others of their way of thinking the masses of the people were sunk in extreme poverty. The cry which carried free trade was 'cheap bread.' Would England to-day endure a duty on corn and the consequent enhanoed price of tho staff of life? Mr. Rowntree in his investigations at York, and. Mr. Booth in his investigations in London, have shown that one-third of the population of England live below the poverty line—that is to say, they have just enough to keep body and soul together. If the price of bread — largest element of their food— increased, the poverty must bo intensified." " The question is les3 a colonial than an English one?" " Necessarily. Supposing _ preference of trado within our own dominions: We sell a vast amount of wool to Germany; Germany could make it very hard for us by putting a heavy tariff on colonial wool. Of course, that would hurt her, but the Germans are not free-traders. However, free trade is upon its trial, and the final verdict has yet to bo givttn."