"THE SIGNAL HOISTED"

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11665, 1 November 1923, Page 4

"THE SIGNAL HOISTED"

In his speech at Plymouth last wool;, the British Prime Minister, Mr Stanley Baldwin, touched tile great tariff issue with so light a hand that it was by no means clear whether he intended to “hoist- the signal for a great autumn protectionist campaign,” as the London “Daily Express” fondly declared, or merely to send up a ballon d’essai to find out which way the wind was blowing. It seemed more like the utterance of an engineer who feared to be “hoist by his own petard.” 'While the “Express” plunips boldly and with all its force for the “great campaign,” it is noteworthy that the aspect of the matter which appeals to the “Express” is not Imperial preference but protection of the Home markets. We fancy, indeed, that there is a good deal of danger of the dominions finding, as was the case ih the “raging and tearing tariff propaganda” conducted by Mr Joseph 'Chamberlain from 1903 to 19th5, that, while dominion preference will be the camouflage, and a very thin cambuflage, too, the real objective of the campaigners, especially of those who find the sinews of war, will fee sheer, unadulterated protectioh, including as it must a certain amount of protection for the British agriculturists even against nieat, wool, butter, cheese, and so forth from the dominions. We say advisedly, “including as it nuist,” because the powerful agrarian interest still forms, as it always has formed, the backbone and the main fighting strength of the Conservative Party at Home; and it is very wire that the agrarian interest would never dieam of Consenting to protection for British ihahnfactures, which would mean higher prices for the farmers to pay, without demanding something like an equivalent in the way of protection for home-grown food and Other farm produce.

Mr Baldwin's speech was notably vague; and very little, if anything, has yet been done by either himself of his colleagues, in the way of dotting the “i’s” and crossing the “t’s” of his speech. The gist, if, hot the whole, of the British Premier’s reference to the matter was evidently the following passage, qUoted vefbatirrt in the cable message, and which we think it well to reproduce in full:

The visit of . the dominion Premiers brings, to mind - the illimitable . re(icoufees of the: Empire. That .field must be,utilised tp the,utmost of our pndeavour. I have great hopes that m\ieli may result from thp. work of the Economic Conference, whose conwill be exainijibd by. tlie Gbyerfimeht and later fey the House, of Commoris.. Unemployment is the moot, acute nrobleUi in the country, I can fight .it. I ani willing to fight it. But I canrtot fight it without weapotis. .We have found since the war that there is liardly a country of importance that has, riot raised its tariffs and riiade it more difficult foi: us to sell, arid this has dirniiiished our profits in competing, find me have to suffer, with ribthfrig iUUch with which to bargain. I have felt it only a right and hdnest thing, as leader of tire Democratic Party, to tell the party at the first opportunity what 1 thought, and submit it to their judgment.

fet-eh the “Haily Express’s” Plymouth correspondent admits that the utterance is a vague one; though he tries to comfort himself, in somewhat amusing fashion, fey suggesting that it was purposely vague, while yet constituting the “hoisting tif the signal for a grbfit ailtumn protectionist campaign, retriied especially to ulleifipldyffieht, and designed to iehd to ri (general elec-' tion on this issue.” “Mr Baldwin’s reference to the protection of home markets,” decjdreS the 'correspondent; “brought the only really enthusiastic cheer of the evening; then followed ri Sudden silence. Everyone expected Mr BSlwiri to flevelbp d tariff scheme, feiii he switched oil to anothef -subject, and iefi liis hearers to interpret liis words fbf theniseiveß.” The “Morning Post” rit Once.made ri ferrive attempt to hriil Mt “sigiml” to tlie insist by baying that he has made the great decision and means to stand or frill hy the issue tb protect British industries. Brit such a declaration cannot gbt over the fact that Mr Baldwin .himself did not. and has not yet, definitely declared any sUch ihtentioh. Ohe fcrin quite believe, with the “Daily Telegraph,” that a great majority of the Conservative PAftsi will cordially Welcome the Prime Minister’s declaration, such as it is. But that in itself is an adiriissibh that eveh the Cbrisefvative Party is hoi unariimbiis on the matter; and already, ari Mr. J. H. Thoriiris, M.P., the well-known Labour leader, fids pbinted out, tivo Cabinet Ministers arfe contradicting each other as to what Mr Baldwin's speech meant. Sir W. Jby neon Hickls declares, on the tihb hand, thrii it Wbtild he criminal to trifc fdbd j while Mr Neville Chamfeeriain, bn the other hand, welcomes the speech as a sign that the country it going at last to adopt his father’s policy.

Even thb Chamberlain faffiily itself is net quite at ottb bn the matter, for Mr Austen Chamberlain, Wfe nbte, declared at Birmingham that the Premier had raised a great issue, but had left the world doubtful regarding what he meant to do. fie had baid enough to raise His opponents to fullest activity, hut not enough for the guidance of his friends. If Mr Baldwin rOrilly fftbdttt business; he Wbuld be with him unreservedly to the end. Mr Austen Chamberlain was right through the previous tariff reform fight, and he knows right well that shell ah indefinite call—if call it be—as that uttered by Mr Baldwin caniiot rouse the GoHserva tive “backwoodsmen” to the pitch of enthusiasm required for a successful “lightning protection campaign,” as this would have to be; while already the signs are abundantly evident, ih both Liberal and Labour speeches, that nothing could possibly do more to unite the two anti-Conservativb parties solidly together than the raising of the food-tax issue.

If put forward on its Own merits, as a means for -developing and strengthening the Ehipite on its economic side, the policy of dominion preferences would make a great appeal—possibly an overwhelming appeal to the British people; more cujecially if the prefer-

ences were given by way of subsidies in reduction of freight and other charge.': on colonial produce, thus decreasing, instead of increasing, the cost cf food and wbolleh goods for the workers at Home. But, if the policy of preference be complicated by making it the occasion rif, and only too possibly a mere camouflage for, “a great protectionist campaign,” then, frankly, we fear the result. If food tuxes are the only thing that- can keep the British Empire together, it is, we are afraid, a very poor look-otit for the Empire v If dominion loyalty needs to he bought, the Empire is, surely, in a parlous state; and, if it lias tb he bought, the price must mbfet certainly he somewhat in excess of the rather less than a penny per head per week for every White person in the dominions, which was all that the Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain’s proposals would have amounted to.