ANTI-BALDWIN CAMPAIGN.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18489, 10 February 1930, Page 9

ANTI-BALDWIN CAMPAIGN.

Reply To Lord Rothermere. EX-PRIME MINISTER HITS OUT. (United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) (Received February 9, 5.5 p.m.) LONDON, February 8. “ The Daily News” discloses that after his Colliseum speech on February 5, Mr Baldwin took the opportunity at a semi-private Conservative dinner, to make a slashing retort to the antiBaldwin campaign, which Lord Rothermere is conducting in the “Daily Mail.” The ex-Prime Minister declared that he did not desire the “Daily Mail’s” support, nor would he give up the Conservative leadership. The newspaper attacks were personal and unfair. As for Lord Rothermere’s reputation for efficiency, it was Lord Northcliffe who made the “Daily Mail.” Lord Rothermere muddled his job as Air Minister in 1917-18, and he resigned because an attack on his administration was pending. Probably he would not have got the post except for Lord Northcliffe’s influence. Interviewed by the “Daily News,” Lord Rothermere said he had just returned from America, and had no knowledge of what Mr Baldwin said, and was not concerned with what he said. “Mr Baldwin is a completely incompetent person, who by accident of post-war politics, fluked his way into high office.” Mr L. C. M. AmeryC speaking at Birmingham, said that Mr Baldwin’s speech had given the Conservatives a clear and definite issue on which to fight, with a certainty of victory. Safeguarding will henceforth be their main constructive policy in dealing with unemployment. The ex-Prime-Minister’s declaration against food taxes, however, if literally interpreted, would preclude a substantial advance in Imperial preference, and cut off the hope of progress towards the goal of the economic unity of the Empire. Mr Amery said he could not accept a flat negative as meeting the urgency of the situation at home and in the Empire.

(In his speech Mr Baldwin said: — “We must have a free hand safeguarding the country’s manufactures. Safeguarding has. been successful beyond all criticism in the limited sphere in which it has been employed.” He did not know whether the day would come when the British Empire would become one unit like the United States, guarded by one tariff with a vast area of free trade within, but he was assured that the course that he had recommended would be the safest and surest to take if it was wished to reach the common goal of a united Empire. He was convinced that the proper method of approaching the question of unifying the British Empire lay primarily through the industrial side. Every effort should be made without delay to bring about arrangements between the industries of this country and corresponding industries in the Dominions and India. It was most Important that nothing should be done to diminish the value of the limited preference that Britain accorded the Dominions.)