TARIFF REFORM DEFEATED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 14925, 24 February 1912, Page 7

TARIFF REFORM DEFEATED.

MOTION IN THE COMMONS. ATTITUDE OF DOMINIONSDEMANDS FOR PREFERENCE. MAJORITY AGAINST, 65. By Telegraph.— Vrvs*. Association.—Copyright (Received February 24, 12.5 a.m.) London, February 23. In the House of Commons Captain Tryon (Unionist member for Brighton, and author of "Tariff Reform") moved an amendment to the Address-in-Reply, declaring that the Government's refusal to modify the fiscal system imperilled the advantages of overseas preference, deprived the country of fair treatment from foreign countries, and adversely affected labour conditions.

Dr. MacNamara, Secretary to the Admiralty, said it was eight years since Mr. Chamberlain's doleful predictions that the country was heading for the rocks, all of which had been falsified. Unemployment and pauperism had considerably declined.

Mr. Alfred Lyttelton (Unionist) claimed that it was not unnatural that Canada's sacrifice of American reciprocity should have suggested some requital. It had become important to fortify the cohesion of the Empire. Already Canada, Australia, and New Zealand had almost completed preferential negotiations. A policy of independent commercial action overseas would cause friction. The time had arrived to end futile academic objections to colonial preference.

Mr. J. M. Robertson (Liberal) did not know what advantage the colonies would get from foreign countries which they could not get through Britain. If Britain entangled herself with colonial preference, she might in turn loso the advantages of the "most favoured nation'' clauses in foreign treaties. It would ill become the colonies to make proposals that would render food dearer in th© United Kingdom. The harvests had failed in Australia and India before now.

What, he asked, would happen if Britain reversed her fiscal policy and placed her dependence on wheat sent by three Dominions. Tariff reform was merely an exploitation of one part of the population in the interests of another. That was a simple explanation of the protectionists' policy with regard to the selfgoverning colonies. The amendment was negatived, the voting being: Against the amendment ... 253 For the amendment ... 193 Majority against ... 65