THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1903. PREFERENCE AND THE COLONIES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XL, Issue 12402, 26 October 1903, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1903. PREFERENCE AND THE COLONIES.

The fiscal campaign in the , United Kingdom necessarily circles about two vital questions: the effect of foreign trade upon the British manufacturing interests and the possible effect of preference upon the relations of Britain and the colonies. That'; British trade has bsen considerably affected by foreign tariffs does not appear to be seriously questioned, and we have had Mr. Winston Churchill's assertion that had ; retaliation been the only proI posal of Mr. Chamberlain there J would have been no split in the Bal-

four -Cabinet or in the ConaorvativeUnionist party. It is against'the socalled, food tax that the free trade parties: are'^uniting;;. and this is- certainly beiag seised upon, because. as the situation develops, the weak.ness J of the free trade position as a whole becomes obvious. In connection with this, there is the declaration of Mi*. Chamberlain that Mr. Ritchie was perfectly willing" to keep the recent corn tax in, his last Budget, but would under no circumstances agree; to remit it to the colonies while maintaining it against foreign nations. To, colonists unacquainted ' with s the, unreasoning and unqualified manner in which the vast majority of .'Englishmen, of a generation since, accepted certain narrow and pedantic ■ fiscal dogmas, as the be-all and end-all of economic truth, such a position as that for ' which; Mr. Ritchie has been willing to sacrifice himself, his party and . his political future, is incomprehensible. The immediate shifting of the fight from the outward bulwarks of these dogmas to the innermost keep of "foodtaxation" is evidence of the general recognition of their weakness and wbrthlessness under existing industrial condition. Sir Henry Camp-bell-Bannerman's assertion that were it not for Mr. Chamberlain not a hundred men would be talking protection reminds us of the peculiar conceptions of the Liberal leader. He has always held that those who differ from him are weak and irre-sponsible-minded people, who take their cue, under mesmeric influence, from Mr. Chamberlain. He cannot and never could understand a national movement, a patriotic inspiration, such as flamed up when the Boers attacked a British colony and annexed British 'territory and is working in the preferential movement.

But even in the Mother Country, as in the colonies, the question of a food tax, preferential to colonial produce, is mingled with- the.underlying question of inter-Imperial relationship. In this connection it is well to note that Mr. Chamberlain has entirely explained his idea of colonial reciprocity, which antagonistic critics, anxious to discredit him, tried to persuade the public meant that the colonies should not protect any new industries against Britishgoods. He thinks that " the colonies are inclined to frame future tariffs on natural and not on artificial lines." To some extent everybody will agree with him. Colonial life is become more balanced. Even in New Zealand, when .nominally there is no comparison between the strength of the Parliamentary" parties, there imperceptibly arises a " balance of power" which is powerfully influencing legislation. This is so economically as well as politically. People gradually become tired of paying extravagantly through the Customhouse for an industry :of doubtful value and still more doubtful vitality. So that every com-, munity gradually looks with caution upon protective proposals, holding in the mature years of protection that the burden of proof lies entirely with the "promoters of a hew industry, and that unless there are reasonable prospects of ultimate success, demands should be refused. This brings us very much to Mr. Chamberlain's point of view. We should still do fiscally as we would, putting on duty where and when we liked, but always levying against the foreigner more than against our fellow subjects of the Empire, whether to the latter any specified import from the latter were taxed or free. "'■■ Of our free will and our goodwill, we should not be opposed to the British import trade, since Britain was encouraging our export trade, and would therefore be extremely un-1 likely to be extravagantly and un- ; reasonably protective. This is Mr. ; Chamberlain's view of the effect of : reciprocity upon the local colonial Customhouses. In our opinion it is an exceedingly incisive view and an eminently reasonable one. It is not perfect, hut then it is not com--plete. It is practicable; it will serve the immediate purpose ; and it will lead to a nearer and closer com-; mercial relationship.

We are pleased to note from his later speeches that Mr. Chamberlain does not forget the importance of preference and reciprocity as a factor in settling the surplus population of the crowded United Kingdom upon the great colonial domain of the Empire. He told his Tynemouth audience that "it would be possible to stimulate British immigration in a manner advantageous to the colonies," a hint which must not be lost sight of by our colonial statesmen. For in spite of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's laudation of the "pleasant" ties that now unite the colonies and the Motherland, ties which he and his party would have acknowledged by leaving the South African loyalist to the mercy of the Boer, Greater Britain should aim at such a business partnership with the Mother Country as will strengthen the' Empire and advantage us all. That we should keep our British within the Empire where it is possible to do so and not lightly see them go to strengthen with their muscle, their brain and their ; capital the industry and commerce of business rivals is sound policy.. In fact, from the colonial point of view, it should be one of the principal articles in the preferential creed. As we have urged, the colonial Governments should be ready to find land for all capable British settlers, while the allied colonial and Imperial < Governments might well consider the more effective organisation of cheap transport. Mr. Chamberlain's hint may not unlikely have reference to arrangements by which the old age pension, which is part of his domestic programme, might have its conditionsj modified to meet migration within the Empire. Whether this was in his mind or not, the old age pension could undoubtedly be made of great value in strengthening the tendency to prevent British emigrants going to any foreign country when migrating. In a few years it will be established in every British community, including the United Kingdom, and it would be a very simple matter to have a mutual arrangement that it should not' be forfeited by any migration from one British community, to another.