PREFERENTIAL TRADE

Otago Witness, Issue 2604, 10 February 1904, Page 22

PREFERENTIAL TRADE

LONDON, February 1.

'A convention held in Manchester, representing 35,000 Conservative working men and 65 towns in the Counties of Lancashire and Cheshire, endorsed Mr Balfour's and Mr Chamberlain's retaliatory and preferential trade proposals.

The Tariff Commission has circularised 100,000 factories, and it expects a anillion replies to its questions. It is also circularising merchants, bankers, Bhippers, and labour associations.

He-plying to a circular from the local Jewellers and Silversmiths' Association, 87 Birmingham firms stated that the Australian tariff hindered the sale of their goods, 15 stated that it had not affected the sale, 78 considered that if Australia imposed a higher duty on foreigners it would beiiefit English shippers, while 24 thought that no benefit accrued.

Mr James Wanklyn, Unionist member ■for Bradford, in the course of a letter to filr Balfour, claims that the non-aceept-iance by Mr Harold Cox (secretary of the Cobden Club) of his challenge to contest Central Bradford is equivalent to allowing him a walk-over. Mr Balfour replied that at least one general election was necessary before anyone was competent to pronounce confidently as to the country's ■opinion on the fiscal problem.

The American Bureau of Commerce Btates that Australia takes one-ninth of Vmerica's exported boots and shoes. February 4.

Eighty-six out of 123 members of the Liberal Unionist Council met at Westminister. Of the 86, 65 were elected as representing the association, while the remainder are ex ofncio members. Lord James of Hereford, the Duke of Devonshire, Hon. Arthur Eliot, Lord Goschen, and Sir M. Hicks-Beach were absent.

Mr Chamberlain, who presided, hoped that the Duke of Devonshire's and other resignations would be reconsidered. He thought that the constitution of the council was too aristocratic, and insufficiently representative. He a-dvised free organisation. Every loyal Unionist was bound to support Mr Balfour's fiscal policy and his anti-Home Rule policy, but he was also free to support or oppose any fiscal policy going beyond Mr Balfour's.

Mr Chamberlain added that the question of funds was not important, although the funds at present were not large.

A resolution in favour of the continued existence and activity of the asso-

ciation was carried, with three dissentients. The Duke of Argyll, in the course of a letter to The Times, says that it would be unwise to minimise the efforts of the colonies to promote Imperial preference. It would be bettor to acknowledge their hearty brotherhood, and to ctiltivate their priceless goodwill in times of peace and war. If preference proved hurtful to the Motherland, the colonies would not resent its withdrawal. February 5. Mr Chamberlain goes abroad on the 11th inst. for two months' rest. The Tariff Commission begins the examination of witnesses in a fortnight. Lord James of Hereford, presiding at the Metropolitan Liberal Unionist Federation, stated that it was resolved to make every effort to maintain the federation on existing lines, regardless of the fiscal question. February 6. At a meeting cf the Chamber of Shipping the resolution passed by the Colonial Premiers' Conference in 1902 dealing with the promotion of the Imperial j trade in Bi'itish vessels was largely ap- i proved. The meeting recommended the abolition of light dues. At a dinner given by the chamber Mr Gerald Balfour promised to propose the election of a committee to inquire into the inequality of the working of the regulations applicable to British and foreign ships. OTTAWA, February 5.

The Premier moved in the Manitobau Legislature a resolution strongly endorsing Mr Chamberlain's policy of preferential trade.