The Taranaki Herald. PUBLISHED DAILY. THURSDAY, APRIL 29, 1909. MR. ASQUITH AND TARIFF REFORM.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LV, Issue 13946, 29 April 1909, Page 2

The Taranaki Herald. PUBLISHED DAILY. THURSDAY, APRIL 29, 1909. MR. ASQUITH AND TARIFF REFORM.

The latest English mail luifl>roup,"l\t full U']kii(s of the speech delivered at (juoen's Hall, London, on March f) by the lit. Hon. Mr. Asfjitith, when he vigorously defonded his own fiscal creed and trenchantly attacked the tariff reform movement. Dealing with the assertion that Free Trade diives capital out of the country he showed that not more than twenty per cent, of British capital is actually invested abroad, or 3000 millions in all, and that of this sum rather more than half is invested in British colonies and possessions, M'hile no less than 2300 millions is invested in countries from which the only imports into the Fnited Kingdom are food oi raw materials. Thus the country pains what it wants most — the cheap, abundant, world-wide supply of the food which forms the life-blood of her working population and the materials which form the life-blood of her commerce. To the question whether the export of this enormous capital had sterilised British industry he grave a flat denial. In the first place a large amount of foreign capital had kept on coming in for profitable investment, and the amount of British capital invested in British industry ■was steadily on the inciease. The income tax assessments were quoted to show that the national income was increasing much faster than the population. The gross income reviewed in 1898-9 was 762 mil-j lions and in 1906-7 it was 943 millions — an increase of 24 per cent., whereas the population hnd only increased 8.3 peT cent. British capital, he claimed, had not only exploited British industry at home, it had also built up the Empire abroad, and the return was in the supply of food and raw material with which British industrial supremacy can be maintained. One of the chief arguments used by Tariff Reformers is to the effect that Free Trade admits foreign manufactured goods, which oust British goods out of their own home market. Mr. Asquith asserted that the whole range of manufactured goods which come into the Fnited Kingdom, excepting in times of dumping, fall into one or other of three classes. They are (1) raw material to which finishing processes are going to be applied by British manufacturers by the expenditure of British capital and labour; (2) articles which cannot be produced in the Fnited Kingdom at all ; and (3) those belonging to the category of articles in the production of which foreign countries, either from natural advantages or other reasons, enjoy a preponderating advantage. With regard to the first two, he said, no being outside a lunatic asylum would tax them at all. In regard to the third, a tax placed on them would not only fine the British consumer, but remove from British manufacturers the main and only incentive to the improvement of their processes. Dealing with tariffs, Mr. Asquith pointed to what has been done, and is being done, in. the case of Great Britain's three great industrial rivals — Germany, France, and the United States. The experience of all three in this matter has been the same, namely, that once you start a tariff, and under the wall of that tariff create a seed bed of protected industries, you can never stop. Neither Free Trade, he concluded,, nor any other fiscal system whHch the wisdom of man has devised can secure a country against cyclical periods vf adversity and prosperity; of over-em-ployment and under-employmcnt. whose causes and operations are deep-seated and world-wide. But Free Trade has given Great Brijtain a higher standard with regard to wages and hours of labour. It has helped to develop the fabric and resources of the Empire. It has made the British marine the chief carriers of the world's traffic. Last, ami by no means least, by excluding fiom politics the sinister pressure of selfish forces and of artificially I fostered and manipulated inter- 1 eats, it has maintained the standard of public life. In an article on Mr. Asquith's speech, the Daily Xews refers to the incident of the British Government using Norwegian granite for its naval works at Rosyth. A great deal of capital has been made out of this by the Tariff Reformers, who argued that the Government had made work for Norwegian j quarrymen and masons, and to that extent caused unemployment a- home. The Government, however, saved £30,000 on the contract, and British industry did not suffer because the Norwegian granite was not paid for in money, but in kind, in cotton goods, for example. "Stop the granite," says our contemporary, "thereby impoverishing Norway, and you diminish the demand for English cotton. We might, by hewing all our own granite at a heavy price, make work for quarrymen. But to that extent we should diminish the work which Norway herself makes for the

cot lon Ij'ir.le ot LiUicashin 1 . The itUm lliut woik r;ui !>«■ (lc.itrd ami excliano'e slopped, without .it (lie same time .ilteiin" our mdii 1 --! tiy ami manufactures in othet direel i'M»s, i^ meie ( In'hlishness. Free e\ehanp;e means ih.tt every- 1 Iliinfj we use i* pioihieed with the minimum ol' ettoit at the lowest co<-(. l'rofw t ion iepie«enls not merely an el'l'oit to produce ;it home with much labour and at :i hiftli price ju'iicles which can be obtained more e<|onomically elsewhere; il repiesents also the sacrifice of a market sibioiid."