THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, AUGUST 30, 1923. IMPERIAL PREFERENCES.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18954, 30 August 1923, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, AUGUST 30, 1923. IMPERIAL PREFERENCES.

Fiscal preference within - the Empire was one of the subjects cursorily treated by Mr Massey on the eve of his departure from the dominion; and, though he dealt with it in rather gingerly fashion, it will doubtless, inter alia, engage his attention during the salubrious sea voyage which, as he tells us, will be marked, on the part of himself and his staff, by strenuous studies and preparations. The question has been discussed, and more o/ less tentatively pronounced upon, at more than one Imperial Conference. As far back as 1902, when (as it is pertinent to recall) Mr Joseph Chamberlain was Secretary of State fo'T the Colonies, resolutions in favour of a system of preferences were passed; and there were some practical results, albeit of no conspicuous magnitude. The General Election in the Home Country in 1906, turning largely on the issue of Free Tirade, which Mr Chamberlain had raised and with which Mr (now Lord) Balfour, as Prime Minister, had trifled, gave a set-back to the preference movement; but the Imperial Conference of 1918 unanimously adopted the following resolution:

The Ijime hem arrived when all encouragement should be given to the development of Imperial resources, and especially to rnaking the Empire independent of other countries in respect of food supplies, raw materials, and essential industries. With these objects in view, this Conference expresses itself in favour of— The principle that each part of the Empire, having due regard to the interests of our Allies, shall give especially favourable treatment and facilities to the produce and manufactures of other parts of the . Empire. Nothing much came of that resolution; but at least one statesman in the Empire is determined to push the question beyond the semi-academical stage. The first draft of this year's agenda paper contained the item — "Puller development .of natural resources and inter-Imperial shipping and communication generally." Mr Bruce, Prime Minister of the Australian Commonwealth, an ardent preferentialist, is not satisfied with the terms in which this item is expressed. Speaking in the Federal House on July 24, he said, after quoting the drafted words: That, of course, is sufficiently wide for the discussion of anything, but it did not give any definite indication that preferential tariff within the Empire, would be considered. We pressed very hard indeed for the inclusion of that subject in the agenda, and on theft 17th May the British Government informed all the dominions by cablegram that "Government of the Commonwealth of Australia has expressed the intention of raising the question of tariff preference accorded by the United Kingdom." The obligation is thrown upon the Australian delegates of sustaining the appeal for a reasonable taiiff preference from Great Britain. Mr Bruce makes no" secret ■of - the decked attitude which he intends to assume at the Conference, and he is convinced that a system of all-round preference will be arranged at no distant date. It may be, however, that he> underrates the difficulties of the problem, even if he does not overrate the cogency of his own arguments. The preferentialists contend that objections based on the British tradition of freetrade are obsolete echoes of "the Cob-, denite shibboleth"; but certainly it has not yet been proved to the satisfaction of the populace in the Home Country that preference on a thorough scale might not increase the cost of living. "British economic unity"—the subject, by the way, of an interesting article in the Nineteenth Century for July—is a telling phrase, with a genuine idea behind it; and, though the dangers of disintegration may have been exaggerated by Colonel Philips in the letter to The Times which was summarised in yesterday's cables, it must be admitted that there is distinct disadvantage in the negligent policy of laissez-faire. At the same tir 3 it cannot be questioned that the question of extended preferences is rife with possibilities of thorny controversy, and Mr. Massey may be expected to exercise scrupulous ca;|.ion before committing (in so far as he is in a position to commit) the dominion to a definite line of action.