THE "ALL-RED" ROUTE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13997, 2 September 1907, Page 6

THE "ALL-RED" ROUTE

OPPOSITION BY "FREETRADERS." UNFOUNDED REPORT OF ABANDONMENT. I'bom Our Own Correspondent.) ■ LONDON, July 19. v There appeared in a leading London daily paper the day before yesterday the following, statement."lt is reported on trustworthy authority that tho Government Committee, consisting of Mr Llovd-George, Mr Sydney Buxton, Mr Runeiman, and Mr' Churchill, have dccided against the Imperial or All-Red route from Great Britain to Canada,, Australia, New Zealand, and Hongkong. There is every probability of this decision being endorsed by the Cabinet. Tho, great difficulty is said to bo financial—the large amount of money which would be required for the maintenance of the route."

Apparently this was merely another would-be "scoop" by an enterprising penny-a-liner," for at the earliest possible opportunity there appeared a hasty and vigorous denial of the reports's truth, the "dementi" being accentuated by the further statement that thero had been as yet no opportunity for the committee to or even hear, all the evidence upon which its decision must, be based.

This denial elicited two slightly different comments. Under the heading "Playing With lire" a'leading Ministerial journal said:—"An authorised announcement has been issued denying that the Cabinet Committee, over which Mr Lloyd-George presides, has decided against the ' All-Rod' route between 1 tho United Kingdom and Australasia, via Canada, to which we referred the other day. We are sorry to hear it. It is, however, right that t.hc matter, having been raised at. the Imperial Conference, should be fully investigated, and the more it is examined the more decisive, we are convinced, must be the refusal of a Liberal Government to bolster up by artificial means, at. the exponse of the taxpayers generally and for tho_ benefit of a low individuals, a route which is inherently inferior to that which competition has pronounced 'the lxst. and will undoubtedly maintain against all rivals."' On the other band, a prominent. Opposition journal, referring to the original rumour of abandonment, says:—"We sincerely (rust that tho rumour has no foundation. For if it proved true the position would be that ' for the time being the Government of tho Mother Country had slammed the door not only upon preferential trade, but also upon the only other means to closer. Imperial union, whioh has the unanimous approval of the younger nations. Beyond the seas tho improvement of maritime' communications, in the form of steamship and telegraph services, has always ranked next to preferential trade as the most practical means, of increasing the 'e.bonomic solidarity of' the 'Empire. , . . At tho recent cnce Sir Wilfrid Lauricr found an eager ally in Sir Joseph Ward, the Prime Minister of Now Zealand.. Together tlicy put forward a. comprehensive plan, whioh Australia also promised to support. Tho present mail route to Now Zealand is by way of New York and San Francisco (sic). whence an American steamship company carries on the service via Honolulu to Auckland. British ships are excluded from this service by the American law, which restricts ooastal shipping to American vessels, the Sandwicli Islands being technically regarded as part of the American coast. The new proposal was that all the British Governments concerned should combine to establish a new and accelerated servico by way of Halifax or Montreal and Vancouver, ajid Ihcnce via. Fiji to Auckland, reducing the time to Auckland from four weeks to. three. The present Government at .first seemed disposed to fair in with this proposal, which afforded them a moans of showing that, although pledged against preferential trade, they were not indiflei'ent; to the policy of st-ron.frthening tjie economic'ties of the Empire. : Mr LloydGeorge oonimended the policy of improving communications as one which would result in 'mutual benefit' to all parts of the Empire, and by reducing the disadvantages of distance would serve to foster Imperial trade. But when tho concrete proposal came -before the conference the Government had already begun to waver. " Sinco the conference dispersed," continues the same journal,; "thero have, been abundant signs. that the 'All-Red' scheme lias oreatod dissension, not'only in the main body of the Liberal party, but also in tho Cabinet itself. In the Liberal press a controversy has been going on as to whether or not, tho subvention of this mail servico would be contrary to the principles of Free-trade-in which'case, of course, thero would be nothing more to be said. The stalwarts of tho Cobdon Club are up in arms, and in their pamphlet tho ban is pronounced against the scheme. ... If the scheme is now to bo negatived a unique opportunity will have passed away. It so happened that the New Zealand contract with the-American company had lapsed ,just .before, the conference, and' that tho Australian Commonwealth was aleo in the position of .having to make fresh arrangements 5 for a mail servico to Europe. Sir Joseph Ward announced his. determination to pay as much as £100,000 a year.for the new sorvire. as compared with £20,000 hitherto paid linder the American contract. But he explained that timo was pressing, and that if the ' All-Red 1 scheme fell through the American ' service would have to he renewed for a further term. Sir Wilfrid Laurior declared that ■ his Government would not be behind any of th" others in finding the necessary money. Mr Deakij; admitted' the interest of Australia in tho new mail service/assuming that it' would be ouickcr than the present service through the Stiez Canal. But alreadv the Commonwealth Government is calling for new tenders, while New Zealand is exnorienoint; eerious disabilities. Should last night's rumour unfortunately iprove true, thero is only too much reason' to fear that at tho next, conference tho 1 Australasian Governments will no longer have a free hand, aiid a great Imperial project will have been indefinitely postponed." To-night's Globe says, about- the "AllRed" route:—"Wo have always favoured the idea, not because wo consider that the results 'arc ever likely to bring about colonial preference in its entirety, butbecalise wo recognise that it is,' at least, a slight recognition on tho part of his Majesty's Government that the colonies do exist, and are deserving of some little consideration. At the lale conference the Government accepted a resolution by which it agreed to do its utmost to link-up the different portions of tho Empire by mail communication, travel, and transport. Further, it was decided that to such ends financial support should be forthcoming from England and the various colonies interested. It is on the financial basis, however, that the scheme, from the very beginning, seemed likely to break down. Already thero arc rumours that the Treasury k unwilling to help the Government in its policy. Until, however, we have a direct pronouncement by a responsible Minister on the subjcct we shall refuse to believe that the project is to be dropped." It may bo observed that virtually tho only tangible objection raised to the scheme is the curious one that it is "contrary to tile principles of Freetrade." Apparently any step in advance which does not suit tho party in power is "contrary to the principles of Freetrade." Unfortunately, no authoritative dictum ie offered as to what these so-called "principles" really are. The nearest approach to a declaration consists in citing what is a mere rule of practice and no "principle" at all—najnely, that taxation should only bo levied for purposes of revenue. It is not explained how this will apply to the "All-red" service, but this absence of definition is the weapon now so largely employed in all modern controversies, whether political, commercial, • social, or religious. The algebraic "unknown quantity" is never resolved into plain, practical figures. Meanwhile, the scheme is being materially damaged in reputation in the eyes of tho undeflning public and of the obedient Ministerial majority in tho House of Commons by tho appalling but indefinite accusation that it is " contrary to the princij)los of Freetrade." But I hope that Sir Joseph Ward mil see to this.

I may mcntiqn that'.so far from the work of the committee having-* bcani completed, I am informed on the highest authority that the committee held a furW meeting to-day.