CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CONGRESS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2609, 17 September 1909, Page 5

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CONGRESS.

PREFERENTIAL TRADE RESOLUTION CARRIED. FREETRADE SPEECH BY SIR ALBERT SPICER. - Rnitri* Punna Association— rTomtioiiT SYDNEY, Sept. 16. Sir Albert Spicer announced that he would give his chamber vote in favor of the preferential resolution, but as an individual he would vote against it. Britain had not the slightest desire of interfering in the trading conditions of the great self-governing dominions. Each part of the Empire must be left to work out its own salvation in matters of trade. Britain was extremely grateful for the preference the colonies had give-* »er, but if the colonies now asked for some preference in return the Old Country could not say where she could give it. It had been admitted that it could not be given on raw material, and, whether they liked it or not, it came to a question of preference on the food which different parts of the Empire were producing in large quantities. Any country which had a surplus of food production could consider the question of protection in a very different way to a country which had to import food supplies as Britain had to do. The British Empiro was not ring-fenced like the United States, Germany, or Australia, but scattered over different parts of the world. He felt satisfied that what would be food for one part would be poison for another, and that a binding system would lead to difficulties, and probably to ultimate disaster. What had the Mother Country to offer in the way of preference? He would mention some preferences that had been already given. The Old Country had given the dominions ' preference in some way on the question of defence, as wag shown by the difference in the cost per head to Britain and her dependencies. Preference had been given in connection with colonial stocks and lands. It had been said that opinions were changing, but if the next general election produced a result which led to a system whereby preference would he given to colonial wheat, and there followed higher prices, the greatest blow would be dealt at the unity of the Empire. He wished them to look at it in a broad light, in the light of our international relations. The Empire had been allowed to grow with comparatively little jealousy on the part of other great European nations, because Britain had treated them all exactly on the same lines. There had teen an open door wherever she had gone. In the Crown colonies, protectorates, and India all foreign countries were allowed to send their goods in on exactly the same terms as were British goods. He believed that had made for the world’s peace, it had been said that England had got behind, hut if so the colonies would not be doing themselves the greatest service by buying something from England that Was not best suited for their best work?. He believed that during the last 15 or 20 years Britain had been adapting itself, in the manufacture of articles, to the needs of new countries, and he believed the visit of Enalish delegates to Australia, in the observations they made and their results, would do more than any attempt to bind the different parts together in a way that might lead only to disunity. Mr McPherson, Melbourne, declared » that Australia wanted to give England preference in all things she had to import. Mr Peate (Leeds) declared that the Leeds Chamber of Commerce decidedly favored tariff reform. Tariff walls had been raised so high, against British goods that no machinery, however efficient, would enable British manufacturers to climb over them. They would soon have either Imperial unity or Imperial disintegration. The time had arrived when the fiscal policy of England should be carefully reconstructed. At the Commerce Congress the speakers this morning included Messrs Lark (Canadian Commissioner), Hathar way (Canadian), Sullivan (Tasmania), Harwood (Blaokbourn), Hedges (Kalgoorlie), Fernley (Cairns), Knox (Melbourne), Palliser and Martin (Bristol), and Harkness (Wellington). All with the exception of Mr. Sullivan strongly, and some eloquently, advocated preferential trade in the interest of the Empire. t , Mr. Sullivan declared it was purely a Canadian demand. In the other colonies and the Motherland no such demand existed. Mr. Harkness said he voiced the wishes of the people of New Zealand in demanding one policy for the Empire —one flag, one throne, one policy. The present fiscal policy of Britain had broken down and impeded her development and the development of the Empire’s trade. THE LONDON CHAMBER’S RESOLUTION ADOPTED. (Recevied September 16, 5.5 p.m.) The congress, by 81 to 31, adopted the London Chamber’s resolution in favor of preferential trade, with the addition of a recommendation for the appointment of commissioners to inquire into the question and report to the respective Governments. (Received September 16, 10.30 p.m.) Mr. Harwood said that, while the British pepole had been waiting for this policy of preference, they had seen what the Germans had done. Ail honor to the Germans for the way

they had pushed their trade, and all -disgrace to the English for allowing them the opportunity to do so.

CABLE NEWS.

Mr. Hathaway said he - would show the conference how (preference should be given. A duty amounting to six millions sterling was imposed on tea, and one of about 13 million® sterling on tobacco. Let them sweep away the duty on tea, which did no good to anyone, excepting; that it brought in revenue. Take about Is preference from tobacco from India, South Africa, and Australia, and there would bel a deficit of about eight millions altogether, which meant that the working men of Britain would he saving that much money in a year. Let them then impose exactly the same amount in other directions. Put a penny a pound on two different kinds of meat. That would keep Canada, Australia, and South Africa. Put 2s a quarter on wheat and corn. That would assist Canada, Australia, and India. Put a penny, or even twopence, on rice. The result would be nine or ten millions, and increase tea from Ceylon, assist British investors in Indian rice fields, and increase trade between Australia and Britain. He would like to see preference by the colonies to goods brought in British ships to British ports. Mr. Harkness (Wellington) considered free trade impracticable to-day. Prohibitive duties were not proposed, but the imposition of light duties on certain goods. Let commercial instincts overburden all others, and they would lead them in the path of right, integrity and power.

A VOTE BY CHAMBERS—PREFERENCE AFFIRMED.

In addition to the individual vote, a chambers’ vote was taken. The result was: For preference 60, against 8, neutral 14. Palmerston, Canterbury, Nelson, Dunedin, Auckland, Westport, Wellington, and Masterton voted for preference, Invercargill against it. Melbourne, Sydney, Geelong, and Fremantle remained neutral. A WELCOME FROM THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT. A cable of congratulation and welcome to the delegates was received from the Hon. J. Carroll, ActingPrime Minister of New Zealand. NEWSPAPER COMMENTS. The "Herald” ®ays that judging from yesterday’s discussion there is no greater unanimity as to the promise and fulfilment of preferential trade than there has been since Mr Chamberlain first invented the tariff reform platform. The "Telegraph” declares that the case for preferential trade was put with signal ability and admirable frankness, hut the ability was insufficient to enable the Congress to disentangle the proposition from the confusion that entangles it, and frankness was unequal to discovering what the scheme really means between two contradictory ideals. LONDON. Sept. 15.

The "Pall Mall Gazette” says that ail Imperialists are following with intense interest the proceeding® of the Sydney Congress, which is perhaps performing its most useful function in determining to have its say upon the question of national defence and interimperial trade.