THE EMPIRE'S TRADE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7817, 29 October 1903, Page 1

THE EMPIRE'S TRADE.

SIR CHAMBERLAIN AT LIVERPOOL. HIS APPEAL TO WORKING MEN. LONDON, October 28. The Earl and Countess of Derby and many peers and members of the House of Commons were present at Mr Chamberlain's address at the Hippodrome at Liverpool, under the auspioes of the Working Men's Conservative Association. Mr Chamberlain received a splendid ovation. He spoke for an hour and a half, amidst growing marks of approval and outbursts of prolonged cheering. He opened by comparing the injury done to British trade by foreign dumping and the injury done to small shops by the gigantic emporiums' surplus sales below cost price. His well-grounded fear had been described as "dumphobia" by a lawyer trying to be humorous about business, although he knew nothing whatever on the subject. "It seemebj a curious thing to Mr Asquith, bnt not to us. Sir Edward Grey, at Alnwick, has admitted that much might be said for the idea of an empire within which there were no barriers* or' which imposed duties on foreign, goods only. That is my ideal, but as a practical statesman I know that it cannot be realised in a twinkling. If Sir Edward Grey is unable to follow me, it is because my proposals are only a step, though. 'a great one, towards the ideal he and I share. The whole problem, as affects the workers, is coofained in tie one word 'employment.' . However important were cheap food and higher wages, if workmen lost their employment nothing could compensate them for the loss." An interesting thing had escaped his opponents' attention. When freetrade was car,ried, the workers were neither represented nor consulted in the. movement. It was a manufacturers' and middle-class movement. The leaders anticipated that wages would be maintained at a reasonable level. The freetrade movement was one to give cheap food. If the labourer had chea£ food it was considered that he would be able to work for low wages, thus enabling the em•ployers to compete with foreigners. John Bright, in 1888, writing to a friend in America, declared that if Americans were protectionists they were compelled to give higher -wages and Bhorter hours. Mr Chamberlain, said: "The leaders of freetrade, anyhow, believed that a. big loaf meant lower wages. The Chartists were entirely opposed to freetrade,- describing it as a red herring across the path ( pf electoral, reform, but, thanks to Mr Bright, the workers were enfranchised and have a majority. They can say yes to my proposals or crush them. I have an- idea that the workers, on '-this question; are in advance of their leaders. *If so, we will win. The Oobderir Club may rage furiously in all the languages of the world, and free-fooders may imagine a vain thing, but we will win. I appeal from the Trades Union Congress to you, against the officials to the -men appointing them. These officials circulated a manifesto through the Cobden Club. Why, the Cobden Club declared that trades Unions were based on brutal tyranny and monopoly!" Mr Chamberlain added that from, his standpoint it was quite impossible to reconcile freetrade and trade unionism. "Mr Keir Hardie," he said, "agrees with. me. Mr Hardie declared' in the House of Commons that no member of the House supporting trades Unionism could, be a consistent freetrader, and added that trades Unionists do not intend to allow sweating and the underpaid labourers of Continental nations to compete with them. Is that your opinion? (Cries of "Yes.") Then you will not be freetraders. You must consider besides the consumer the producer, who is more important. The legitimate purposes of trades Unionism are to secure higher wages consistent with the. conditions of each trade, to raise the standard of living, prevent unfair competition, provide for the health and safety of the employed, and for the care oi their fellows who are suffering from temporary illness or misfortune. The Factory, Mines and Truck Acts, Compensation to Workmen, Fair Wages and Prohibition; of the Sale of Prison-made .Goods are all opposed to the doctrine of freetrade, which, is against interference with individual freedom. It is too late mow to call me a heretic for declining to oonsider sacred the doctrines which my accusers have long since abandoned. What is the use of prohibiting sweating in England if we allow sweated goods to enter? The limitation of hours and precautions for safety add to the cost of production, and increase the difficulties of selling. Unless the manufacturers are given a compensating advantage they will be unable to compete, and you will be workless. Could we calculate the cost of precautions to England over and above j similar precaution^ in other countries, we would be justified, without infraction of freetrade, in imposing a chity corresponding to that cost."