EMPIRE TRADE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20988, 29 March 1930, Page 19

EMPIRE TRADE.

MR AMERY ON PROTECTION. A FREE HAND. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, February 13. In a speech at Birmingham Mr L. S. Amery, M.P., expressed some disapproval of Mr Baldwin's pledge not to tax food or raw materials. . “ I wish Mr Baldwin could have in* stated on demanding a free hand in the matter of Empire trade,” said Mr Amery. ' If the safeguarding of the Home market is the most urgent and effective measure for dealing with unemployment, in the long run the development of the Empire trade is of even greater importance to the employment of a growing population aiid to the steady raising of our standard of living as well as of vital and immediate interest to those industries which look mainly to the export market. "Mr Baldwin rightly declared the economic unity of the Empire to be the goal that lies before us. I feel bound, however, to add that the goal is not a fixed one which will wait for ns, how ever long we may loiter on the road towards it.” KINDLING DOUBTS. Mr Amery added that the declaration Mr Baldwin made against taxing food, if interpreted in a literal sense, would preclude substantial advance in Imperial preference. If they were to rule out anything that could enter the human mouth ■ or be utilised in any_ process of industry, they ruled out practically everything the Empire sent to us. He realised the responsibilities of the leader of a great party, he knew the tremendous power of the dear food cry, but to cut out of their P™ lC 7 for an indefinite period all hope of substantial progress towards the goal of economic unity of the Empire, would damp down enthusiasm and kindle doubts as to their sincerity. FREEDOM TO PREACH THE FAITH. “ I cannot accept,” he continued “as meeting the urgency of the situation at Home and in the Empire, a flat negative pledge of so sweeping and unqualified a character as to deprive a Unionist Government beforehand of all freedom of action in endeavouring to advance the welfare of our own people or the strength and unity of the Empire.” He felt bound to reserve his " freedom to preach the faith that is, in me" in the hope and belief that long before a general election public opinion might have so advanced that, in the judgment of their .leader, it might be possible for him to make his policy on Empire trade as positive as his policy on safequarding, and to ask, with whatsoever assurances or reservations he might feel to be necessary, for, at any rate, such freedom of action as would make real progress possible. EXPLANATORY LETTERS.

A certain section of the press read into tj üßp-e.u ßp - e . , el^ er a repudiation of Mr iJaldwm s leadership or a move towards the disruption of the Conservative Party. Jj6 j HTt 8 . ve P a ®sed between Mr Baldwin and Mr Amery on the subject, and these mbL, b S. " b, ”“ tel l ° *»

Jnthe course of his letter Mr Amery ; * "j that I fully appreciated the possibilities of misinterpretation which this question of ‘food taxes’ presents. But I expressed the hope that education of the public on these issues might, be so far advanced, before we are committed to the fortunes of the next general election, as to make it possible for l he e - cercise of your judgment as our leader, to ask, with whatever assurances °r reservations you might then still think necessary, for such freedom of action_ as would enable real progress to be made in the next Parliament towards the goal which we all wish to see attained. To forward this process of education I claimed for myself, not for the first time, the right, in my personal capacity, to advocate a more positive policy on the whole question of Empire Trade

UNWARRANTED INTERPRETATION. “What is of importance, and makes it necessary for me to write this letter, is the wholly _ unwarranted interpretation which is being placed upon ray action in certain quarters in the Press. No fairminded person could read into my speech either a repudiation of your leadership, or a move towards the disruption of our party, and I can only regret and resent the mischievous character of an article which I have just seen which speaks of a split in our ranks and of the imminent formation of a new party. You yourself will certainly not need irora me any assurance of my loyalty to your leadership. Nor will you regard my claim tor a reasonable attitude of opinion °"n! riethods a ? 111 , an - v "’ay inconsistent with my profound conviction that the tundamental unity and corporate spirit of our great party is essential, not merely to \ictory at the polls, but to the achievement of all the things we both care for, lint if you think there is any possibility of real misunderstanding you may think it useful to make this letter public." Mr Baldwin’s letter in reply was as follows: *

My dear Leo, —I have always understood your point of view, and feel no doubt of your co-operation in the future as 1 have enjoyed it in the past. “As there has obviously been deliberate misunderstanding of your intention, I think it advisable that your letter, together with my reply should he made public without delay."