A-5

260

an instalment only. It was not to be confounded with proposals for preferential trade even of an unilateral character which it was part of our policy to submit. The present Bill included merely that portion of our preference scheme which was pertinent at that time, which we could fairly ask Parliament to accept, although it was approaching not only the close of its Session under a great burden of work, but also approaching the close of the Parliament, and precluding an immediate appeal to the people. Neither the time of the Session nor the circumstances in wdiich our Parliament then stood would have permitted us to launch a complete preferential scheme, even unilateral. As it was, this minor subsidiary proposal attached to the New Zealand Treaty was only put through in the last hours of the Session, and we were obliged under those circumstances to accept it. We were not only obliged to retain our own proposals in regard to British ships which we had proposed to remove from the Bill, when the Imperial Government unexpectedly pointed out to us that they involved a breach of treaty relations—we had to allow those to remain in spite of ourselves after that admonition, because one of our Chambers refused our request to withdraw that portion of the measure—but there was also another condition made in connection with white labour, which appeared to us and appears to us to be anomalous and out of olaee. Mr. ASQUITH : That governs the whole, does it not ! Mr. DEAKIN : In what sense? Mr. ASQUITH : The proposal only applies in so far as it is preferential to British goods, to British goods which are imported in British ships manned by white labour. That governs the whole 1 Mr. DEAKIN : Yes. The proposal as to British ships was inserted in good faith without any suspicion that any treaties by which we were bound —and I am reserving that subject for further special consideration—would prevent its adoption. We would not have asked to withdraw our own proposal unless we had been moved thereto by a communication from the Imperial Government. Then, in regard to the condition as to white labour which was inserted, 1 think by a single vote, I pointed out at the time the impracticability of applying that restriction to this very limited proposal for preference; that it would be almost impossible to administer it, and asked the House to remove it; but in the last days and last hours of the Session, in circumstances with which all members are familiar, it became a question of taking the Bill as it stood—and even to get it to that stage had involved some fierce political fighting —or to abandon it altogether. We chose to retain the Bill. But it has to be remembered that the addition as to the white labour is not ours, that the requirement as to British shipping was introduced in good faith, and was an intentional limitation, it is true, but one which we adopted and approved, and still approve, because it appears to us another form of preference affecting British trade and fostering British shipping. Sir WILFRID LAURIER: What do you mean by saying that this addition of the white labour was not " ours " '. Mr. DEAKIN : Was not that of the Government.

Ninth Day. I May 1(107,

Prkfehknti v Traiik. (Mr, Deakin.)