PREFERENCE.

Timaru Herald, Volume XC, Issue 13311, 13 June 1907, Page 5

PREFERENCE.

FEDERAL PREMIER'S OPINIONS. Press Association-By Telegraph-Copyright • SYDNEY, June 12. The following interview -wfi-h Mr D«fciii in England has been telegraphed from Eremaiitle: —. -V i- - _ Dealing with the attitude of the Imperial Government, Mr Deakin says: "I think Minivers acted.-' consfstehtlv, but argued throughout j with inconsistency. They absolutely refused any. and every kind of fiscal preference, either, on their 1 existing :tariff, or by any modification of. it. In that direction there was no thoroughfare, but they suggested that in regard to modes of preference other than fiscal;, they had an open.mind..,. They invited propositions of any character,' althoughthev, refrained from making any themselves, "yet when I "submitted a gentry! suggestion for the purpose of.provid-. ii:g: a, basis which might lead to some definite -arrangement, I was attacked in the most;: contentious spirit, and my opponents '.'.'dealt, with details- in spite of my repeated - protest at the time that; detail* , were-matters, of indifference,, and that Ministers ; were evading the real... purpose, of the proposal. What I sought was practical action,, and.a resolution necessary io allmv. such action to be taken.• The'outcome was that I was offered, but declined a general .and indefinite resolution 'in favour of some such notion * .being taken hereafter at some indefinite time." He instanced the case of Sir Wilfrid Lauder's mail service proposal, which, met, he said, certainly with less aggressiveness, • but with almost equally determined opposition. Sir Wilfrid Laurier was, obliged to consent to liisi motion being whittled down before he ■ could get its acceptance., .There, was' little prospect of Sir 1 Joseph ... Ward's* desire for,a rapid service receiving.: anything like adequate support from the British Government-. .The total, practical result of their endeavour's' to ascertain'what co-operation, other than in fiscal preference, t" which the Impevial Government was. willing to agree,'was nil. It. would' -have been more consistent if Miiiis-fens with -a. .mandate agahiF't preference,' bad fiven their rWj. ?ion at th" outset of the 'OonfereTir.<\ We were met in ment with a pi min '" non possimrns " ..quite irrespective of the merits of the or. in fact, of any discussion w. could hav<? maintained. Excnt, 'there-fore, as a dialectic exercise for Ministers, the whole debate, so far a*--they wer° crnic o rnwl, was r.?rideri 3 d meaningless..- Tfc had a 1! been decided beforehand —derided for them as much as by them. While, therefor*-, they were perfectly consistent in refusing t.n accent- our proposal, they .were quite inconsistent when they encouraged «s to mrsue- our .■lrgnmcjifc <"-.t great length -without a- nrospect of such argument lending to any thing. ■-.■' ... " -'.