THE CONFERENCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13482, 8 May 1907, Page 7

THE CONFERENCE.

PREFERENTIAL TRADE QUESTION. SPEECH BY MR, LLOYD GEORGE. RESOLUTION BY DR. JAMESON. By Telegraph.—Press Association— Copyright. (Received May 7; 9.57 p.m.) -.' . London, May 7. The : Imperial \; Conference resumed its sittings yesterday. Dr. Jameson (Cape Colony) said lie hoped Mr. Lloyd George would give a more sympathetic answer than Mr. Asquith's decisive refusal. He moved a further resolution, "That while affirming the resolution of the 1902 Conference, it is considered that :as British goods through the South African Customs Union are allowed preference against foreigners, also ira Canada, Australia, and New Zealand and all other British possessions which have granted reciprocity, the British Governments should now take into consideration the granting of like preference to all portions of the Empire on present dutiable articles in the British- tariff." > '

Sir Wilfrid Laurier said he thought consideration of the resolution might be postponed until the main resolution had been considered.

Mr. Lloyd George delivered a very elaborate and able speech on the question 0? preference. It occupied three hours, and another day's dei bate was necessitated to enable Mr. Churchill to speak. It is believed I the Government will propose a vague, non-committal resolution. " BRITAIN AND HER RIVALS. ! Mr. George adopted the interrogative form of address, and Mr. Deakin frequently replied, the others occasionally. .He said the Government ! was willing to consider other sugges- ; tions, but nothing would induce I them to change their position reI garding the United Kingdom's tariff. He challenged the statements of Sir W. J. Lyne and Dr. Smartt, and reviewed the United Kingdom's position as gauged by the test of the growth of exports -f and the exports of Britain's protectionist rivals. He admitted that "while British trade with the rest of the colonies was satisfactory, that with Australia was unsatisfactory, and he had called for a full inquiry as to what action could be applied, since it alone showed a considerable decline in British imports. He contrasted the labour conditions in England with those in Germany and France, and maintained that in England the highest wages were paid to workmen, who worked the shortest hours, and British skilled labour was yielding goods of the highest value. '~ •■ ■ The United Kingdom's exports of manufactures were much (higher. per head than „ those of France, , Ger--hi any, or the United States, and her tonnage of shipping was enormously greater. ; 0;;.r ' . AUSTRALIAN SHIPPING. Referring to Sir W. J. Lyne's remarks regarding foreign shipping in Australian waters,; Mr. George said the total entrances and clearances in oversea trade in Australian ports in 1905 of foreign ships were under two million tons, whilst,the shipping under the British flag was five and ahalf millions. The Imperial Government might have ignored the mandate given to Mr. Deakin at last election in favour of protection and preference, and might have endeavoured to induce the Conference to adopt a: policy of free trade within the Empire, which some could not have approved without proving false to their principles. Sir W. J. Lyne.had urged commercial union of the whole of the Empire, citing precedents'; but in all these cases all tolls and tariffs were removed. Had a free trade reI solution been proposed and refused j the press might have declared that | the colonies had refused to listen to the Motherland's appeal to be put on equal terms with her children who had "slammed the door in their old"mother's face." - The Government did not adopt that course. Recognising the unfairness of ignoring local conditions and exigencies, it did not wish to attempt to manoeuvre them into false positions, since all were in perfect accord regarding the objects desired. ".■■•'■ WHAT THE GOVERNMENT PROPOSES. The Government favoured a scheme for the development of interImperial trade, which did not inflict sacrifices on individual communities, thus creating discontent, discord, and impairing true unity. ; He heartily agreed that the Empire would be a great' gainer if much that was now bought abroad could be produced and purchased within the Empire. Then part of the surplus population now going to foreign lands might be kept within the Empire, thus adding a strength to such federation of free commonwealths that was worth some sacrifice. He only differed with the Premiers in regard to ways and means. H e was convinced that to tax food meant the casting of an undue share of the sacrifice upon the poorest part of the population. The taxing of raw material would fetter the manufacturers of the United Kingdom in ; a severe struggle with their foreign competitors. Such a sacrifice would weaken Britain's j power to make further sacrifices, and Great Britain ought not to be called upon to make it. Mr. Deakin had asked if the Government would do what no protectionist country would do, namely, tax the necessaries of life or livelihood, which England could not produce herself, and which the colonies could not supply sufficiently for many years. • ADVANTGES OF PREFERENCE. | He acknowledged the considerable j advantage from the colonial prefer- | ence conferred on the British manufacturers. The Canadian - tariff had satisfactorily affected Great Britain's export trade, which had ap- ; parently benefited from the ' South .

African and New Zealand tariffs, and doubtless it would presently show similarly happy results if the same were applied by Australia. x Great Britain felt grateful, not; only for the 'actual;concessions, but for the spirit of comradeship and affection these concessions showed. If asked, :"What are you prepared to dc in return V he replied Great Britain was the best customer for colonial products. The exports of all the autonomous colonies in" 1905 to all foreign coun- ; tries were worth £40,500,000; the exports to the United Kingdom were worth ■ £65,750,000, ,; exclusive of bullion and specie worth £21,750,000. He would be sorry if th© Conference parted without carefully considering every suggestion for developing inter-Imperial commerce. SIR JOSEPH WARD'S PROPOSALS. Regarding Sir Joseph Ward's valuable practical suggestions he admitted the undoubted advantage • if traders could cable an order ■ quickly at unprohibitive rates.; Regarding the appointment of commerical attaches or consuls in the colonies to assist British trade, he admitted that enough had not yet been done, and he was doubly glad that Sir Joseph Ward had raised the question, for Mr. Asquith had ungrudgingly acceded to every request for improving the equipment of the Board of Trade's commercial department. j. -He' was considering the appointment of "Imperial commercial travellers " to investigate the trade conditions and requirements of the colonies and report on all such matters to the Board of- Trade, who would disseminate the information confidentially. These travellers would visit the great industrial centres of Great Britain and ascertain what colonial produce there was;; in real demand. Sir Joseph Ward's third suggestion regarding improved transport passenger communication between the Motherland and the colonies was the most important and most momentous of all. The experience of France and ; other nations showed that merchant shipping subsidies did not "benefit shipping. The late Government had appointed a committee, chiefly of tariff reformers, to investigate the matter, and they had reported adversely to the policy of subsidising shipping. He was unable to consider any suggestion for a system of subsidies as a means of i improving inter-Imperial trade. ! FREETRADERS CONVERTED. ... London,' May 6. Mr. W. Hayes Fisher, Conservative member for Fulham from 1885 to 1906, and Mr. R. A. Yerburgh (formerly Conservative member for Chester), both of whom were amongst Sir Michael Hicks-Beach's followers who in 1903 urged the .-eed for cautious inquiry, and resolutely objected to the protective taxation of food imports, now write to the Times that the preferential ' case submitted to the Imperial Conference has so strongly impressed them that they are prepared to recognise that a moderate corn - duty will not infringe | sacred principles, and may be an ini strument of the greatest .Imperial I utility. ■■ ,'■' -:'- : .; : Lord Stanley, formerly PostmasterGeneral and a Unionist freetrader, has joined Mr. Yerburgh and Mr. j Fisher on the question of preference. ■ ■ I The Times in ,a special article on I the preferential trade debate at the [ Imperial Conference says Mr. AsI quith's'tone was frankly that of a | local particularist, prepared to con- | sider practical proposals for the im- | provement of the channels of inter- ! Imperial trade, but apparently not | realising that it is the duty of the country rejecting proposals whereon j all others are agreed to formulate I counter proposals. | " '..'' '.; '";''.,■'"'"' ' —-— ~ '',;' -■■■-' I AUSTRALIA AND PREFERENCE.-' i Melbourne, May 7. At a meeting of the. Chamber of Manufacturers, of Melbourne, yesterday, Mr. Joshua (president) said that if, as their, ! opponents said, preferential trade and proj tection could not exist together, then they were not preferential traders. If preferen- , tial trade were dead he did not think many I people in Australia would pass 'sleepless ; nights in consequence. It was quite true they would howl at a proposal made to rei duce duties/because the present duties, in | many respects, were a mockery of protec- | tion. They had reason to be proud of the | manner in which Mr. Deakin was repreI senting them in London, but it might be | he was a shade too enthusiastic, and had | slightly overstepped the question if he had | led the British'people to believe the Aus- ; tralians were hungering and thirsting for !. preference from Great Britain. .AUSTRALIAN LABOUR LEADER'S VIEW. PREFERENCE A CAPITALIST ' SCHEME. ' ' (Beceived May 7, 11.10 p.m.) Melbourne, May 7. Mr. Prendergast (Leader of the State Labour party), in a speech yesterday, said the people were the creatures of those who were pleading for preferential trade, the same people who had led them into the Boer, war. Of all the resolutions submitted in favour of preferential trade, not one was designed for the benefit of the people; they were all for the traders. The sort of preferential trade the English capitalists wanted was the kind they sent their soldiers out to get for them. They had their hands on nearly everything in Australia,/ and every time they got a' show they cut down wages and increased the hours of labour, so as to create bigger dividends. If the.people put up with that sort of foreign government they would be doing an injustice to themselves. NEW ZEALAND FUNCTION RECEPTION BY THE HIGH COMMISSIONER, . , (Received May 8, 12.9 a.m.) . London, May 7. The High- Commissioner for New Zealand (Mr. Reeves) gave a brilliant reception at the Imperial Institute yesterday in honour of Sir Joseph and Lady Ward." There were a thousand persons present, mostly New Zealanders resident in London.

PREMIER AT MANCHESTER. THE FUTURE OF PREFERENTIAL TRADE. . London, May 7. Sir Joseph Ward, speaking at Manchester on Saturday, where the reception and addresses were of an enthusiastic character, stated, that New Zealand was anxious to increase trade in its natural products with Manchester. The fact that there were ten millions of people within 40 miles of Manchester showed the possibilities. Direct communication between New Zealand and Manchester offered invaluable advantages. Everything possible was done to save money for the producers, and thus enlarge the earnings of the hard working settlers of New Zealand. Wherever expense could be avoided their duty was to help in doing so. He urged that the British shipowners and the '.British- merchants should join hands, and work with determination to help the ships flying the British flag fo compete on successful terms against their active up-to-date German competitors.

He referred to the work of the Imperial Conference and said that any rumour circulated that there had been feeling exhibited in the deliberations was entirely incorrect. The delegates present were not the men who appealed to the passions of anyone, but to the reasoning powers, and though the British Government had not been able to agree to the proposals of the colonies for preference, they were not dismayed or in any way deterred in urging that mutual cocperation between England and the colonies" which was desirable for strengthening the -■ bonds uniting all portions of the Empire. All recognised the right of the British Government of to-day to carry out under a policy of self-govern-ment what the colonies maintained as a right themselves, viz. complete independence in regard to decisions in matters of domestic policy for their own countries. He was of opinion that preference to the colonies upon certain articles and necessary products could be given effect to, and hoped to see it established in the future, though the present British Government did not entertain this view. He was persuaded in his own mind that it was the right policy to pursue, and though it might be slow of being accomplished, it was worthy of the consideration of the statesmen and the Parliaments.in British countries. : :':.:■ •

He said the honour of the freedom of the City of Manchester; one of the greatest cities of England, was deeply appreciated, and would be cherished by him, and regarded by the people of New Zealand as an honour to their representative, and a compliment to that country through its representative, in England.

Sir Joseph Ward's speeches at the receiving of the freedom of the city and at the reception were both received with loud cheers and enthusiasm, which, indeed, characterised the whole of the proceedings. ■;.: : , ,