The New Zealand Times. TUESDAY, JANUARY 29, 1924. THE CONFERENCE

New Zealand Times, Volume LI, Issue 11739, 29 January 1924, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. TUESDAY, JANUARY 29, 1924. THE CONFERENCE

Meeting the citizens of Wellington yesterday, Mr Massey gave them what may fairly be termed a preliminary account of his stewardship as their representative. The Mayor, in his introductory remarks, stressed this point of representation, as a thing entirely outside the realm of party politics. The mission from which their representative had returned was an Imperial mission, about which men of all shades of political opinion can think alike without disturbance of party issues, and so thinking, those present, setting aside their political proclivities, joined together unanimously in the National Anthem. Thus the meeting, which had heard the Mayor’s statement of the facts of the Conference, all of Imperial importance, created the right atmosphere for the moment. In that atmosphere all present realised the exceptional position held by Mr Massey at the Conference, and appreciated to the full his efforts from first to last. We congratulate our Conference representative on the warm reception accorded him. In his reply, Mr Massey had, of course, a good deal to say about the work of the Conference, and of its possible results. That the Conference was the most important yet held of the series, he had no difficulty in showing. That is the general aspect. As to details, these are very numerous, and in due course Mr Massey will give as full information as is possible, regard being held to all the surrounding circumstances—such regard, indeed, as does not appear to be accorded in some quarters. For the present, at all events, the general aspect is sufficient for the public understanding which has appreciated Mr Massey’s efforts. In the ground travelled over so much since the Conference ended, one fact does not soem to have been realised. Mr Massey made it clear. His statement as to the extent of the preference agreed upon in the Conference resolutions is indeed a revelation. This because the extent was misrepresented. In the general election that followed the Conference, the Conference resolutions became the main issue. That was right, of course. But to exaggerate them, as they were exaggerated, was wrong. The resolutions asked for preference on very small and minor produots of the oversea dominions. But the electorates were made to believe that the preference was asked for on the whole of the millions of tons of food supplies which Mr Baldwin had carefully explained before the election were left entirely and absolutely free. Nevertheless, in the fierce election contests

the preference was treated as applied to all, not to an insignificant minority, and thus the great issue of protection and free trade was raised, with all the bitterness that always follows in its train. The misrepresentation was serious. It would not be going too far to stigmatise it as even monstrous. It will no doubt be said that the point was not so much concerned with details as with principles, and the tendencies of principles to develop in the wrong direction when improperly attacked, however small the scale of the attack. But this hardly excuses the persistence of misinterpretation in the face of specific authoritative explanation. For, after all, whatever the tendency may be, developments in the direction of tendencies are in the control of the electorate, not of the men who may appeal to the electorate in the dim future that belongs to tendencies. Whether the general realisation of the misrepresentation in Britain will facilitate the acceptance of the Conference resolutions by the Commons remains to he seen. At all events, the fact of the misrepresentation adds to the reasonableness of any hope that the Commons may, after all, pass the resolutions. Tho plea that a very small breach of principle may be excused by the large amount of the consequent good is still plausibly valid. Mr Massey did not leave this subject without giving his reasons for the protection faith that is in him. He did that in several places during his absenoe, and yesterday’s repetition of the effort enabled his audience to realise the strength and temperamental vigour which characterised his advocacy. He was, it must be remembered, advocating, not a general academic principle, but an established policy embodied in the Statute Book of the Dominion. The outline is simple. Under protection, Britain acquired industrial supremacy; free trade increased that supremacy, but to-day, after all nations have set up protective walls, that supremacy is gone. The proof is In the great number of commodities imported into England at prices which overwhelmingly defy the British industrial competition. These facts Mr Massey, and all protectionists agree with him, thinks the Empire must face. The Empire, he hastened to add, is capable of being made selfsupporting, but no one wants to make a watertight compartment, shut off from intercourse with the great world. The Empire is more capable than any Empire the world has seen of supplying its own various needs, and every effort should be made in that direction, even if free trade principles are abandoned. But care should he taken that development of Imperial resources does not prove fatal to trade with the world, through a policy of narrow isolation. Mr Massey lias not proved that the Commons will adopt the Conference resolutions. But he has proved that a vigorous development of Imperial resources is necessary for the welfare of the greatest and best thing on earth, which is the British Empire.