TURNED DOWN

Southland Times, Issue 19275, 20 June 1924, Page 5

TURNED DOWN

THE PREFERENCE PROPOSALS A NARROW MARGIN DEBATE IN HOUSE OF COMMONS. (By Telegraph—Press Assn. —Copyright.) (Australian and N.Z. Cable Association.) LONDON, June 19. (Received June 19, 11 p.m.) The Preference proposals were defeated in the House of Commons, the first four only being voted on. The others were withdrawn. That in favour of Empire-grown wines was negatived by 285 to 268, sugar by 283 to 263 and tobacco by 284 to 271. The intervention of all the party loaders, except Mr Lloyd George, partially atoned for the dullness of the opening day's debate. There were’ many comments on Mr Lloyd George’s absence but it is announced that he had an engagement and paired n favour of the first four resolutions but against the rest. The main point in Mr Baldwin’s speech was his appeal to separate the resolutions into two categories and agsce to the first four as imposing no new duties, but Mr Asquith rejected the appeal in the open ing phrases of his speech, confessing irankly

that he could not flog himself into exc.tement over any of the resolutions. The most telling passage in his speech was the following analysis of the ten resolutions: “Three of them deal with dried fruits, three with apples, honey /Ad limejuice (laughter) and one with various forms of canned peaches” (more laughter). Mr Asquith said: “When I read them in all their pompous array on the Order Paper, I am reminded of the Bagdad vendor Who perambulated the streets of Bagdad shouting ‘in the name of the Prophet, figs.’ ” (Loud Liberal and Socialist laughter). Mr Asquith continued that Mr Baldwin had said the rejection of the resolutions would imperil the Empire. If this were true what a conception the people must have of the stability of the Empire. Later in the debate it was evident that, apart from Mr Lloyd George, the Liberal leader did nor carry all his party with him. Mr Fisher, ex-Educstion Minister, said that Imperial Preference on a grand scale was a practical impossibility, but he proposed to vote for the resolutions which imposed no new duty. Major Church (Labourite) advanced similar arguments to Mr Fisher’s. Rev. Campbell Stephen (Labourite) promised Mr Baldwin the support of all Labourites if he would give an assurance that his Empire policy would be one of national buying and marketing of all surplus colonial produce to the exclusion of the parasitic middleman. Captain Brass said that, although a Free Trader, he proposed to vote for the first four resolutions. He thought they should make a gesture to the dominions to help Empire settlement schemes. Mr H. Spencer said he had served as a Tommy in the Australian Forces, but never heard his fellows base loyalty to the Empire upon Imperial Preference. Mr Spencer, who is a Bradford woollen manufacturer, continued that he had a new suit made of Australian Botany wool in order to enforce the argument that when he endeavoured to sell some of the cloth, he found the Holland and Denmark tariff on it 5 percent., Switzerland 6, Sweden and France 10, but in Australia it was 30 per cent, on cloth made from their own wool.

Mr Philip Snowden, Chancellor of the Exchequer, declared that the Budget made the greatest reduction in food taxes ever known. He did so intending ultimately to abolish them altogether, but if the Preference resolutions were adopted, they must say good-bye to the remission of food taxes during their Parhament ary career.

Mr Austen Chamberlain, winding up the debate, contrasted the attitude of the members of the Treasury benches. Mr Thomas, be said, felt that they were doing an ungracious thing and did not like it in the least. Mr MacDonald felt it was necessary but ungracious. Mr Snowden did the disagreeable thing and loved it. The controversy, however, was emerging from the party stage and support no longer was confined to the Unionist benches. Amid Opposition cheers he demanded to know if the Government would dare face the consequences if the dominions to-morrow sent an ultimatum that every preference would be removed if there was no response. The divisions followed and were greeted with cheers and counter cheers. Mr Baldwin’s abandonment of the remaining resolutions evoked Labour cries of “Oh,” and an unanswered question from Captain Benn: “Are we to understand that all these resolutions are shams?” The House then speedily rose. The Daily Express says that the excitement in the closing scenes of the debate were intense, and many thought Preference had just won. There was a gasp of surprise when the figures were announced. “Three cheers for the Little Englanders,” shouted someone. The Daily Telegraph says that among the Unionists alone there was unanimity, and 250 voted out of a possible 257. It is estimated that between 20 and 30 Labourites favoured the four resolutions and voted accordingly, and the rest abstained. The Daily Chronicle, commenting on Mr MacDonald’s speech, points out that he blew hot and cold, and seemed to fear to be misunderstood in the Dominions. He added: “I will not be happy in resisting these proposals, but I must.”