413

A—6

Mr. Asquith, the preference was not a universal preference, such as we gave in Canada for everything, but simply for 8 per cent, of the importations into Australia from Great Britain. Mr. ASQUITH : It was what Mr. Deakin called a fore-runner. Sir WILFRID LAURIER : That is to say the preference has been given on some articles and not upon others. In Canada we did it differently; we gave a preference upon everything except those articles which are subject to excise duty. New Zealand, as I understand, has given a preference also, not exactly universal like ours, but covering, as Mr. Asquith stated, 20 per cent, of the British importations. Why was this ? Why was not a universal preference given ? The economic conditions in Great Britain are not the same as in the different Dependencies beyond the Seas, which are all young nations, and even their conditions are not all alike. They differ in Canada from what they are in Australia, they differ in Australia from what they are in New Zealand, and they differ in New Zealand from what they are in South Africa. That is to say, we are young nations with different local interests in every particular community. In Great Britain the conditions are these, that you have an old settled community, the wealthiest in the world, largely developed, having nothing new to do, but only to press on with what, is being done; whereas in our communities we have everything to create; we have manufactures which are new and in a different condition of development. We feel strong enough in Canada to give a preference upon all our manufactured products, and if I understand the theory rightly of the preferential treatment adopted in Australia, and also in New Zealand, they do not feel strong enough to give a preference even on the lines of their own manufactures. I think that is the reason why New Zealand and Australia do not give to the Motherland the whole preference which we give in Canada. I make these observations just to show that it is essential to leave to each community the extent and measure of the preference which it wants to give. Mr. Deakin has introduced another resolution, and one to which, I, for my part, would subscribe with both hands, and I would like, with some modification to make it the subject of a special resolution, and not an amendment to the 1902 resolution. It is this : " That it is desirable that the " preferential treatment accorded by the Colonies to the products and " manufactures of the United Kingdom be also granted to the products " and manufactures of other self-governing Colonies." I should subscribe with both hands to this, and on behalf of the Government I represent here, and the people of Canada, I would be prepared to enter into an absolute arrangement. Any preference which we give to the Motherland we will give you, expecting that any preference you give to the Motherland you will also give us, and with Sir Joseph Ward's Government and the other Governments we will do the same. That is, so far as it goes, an excellent principle. The communities which you and I represent here have no free trade tariffs. We all levy our tariffs in the same way, by Customs duties, and therefore it is easy for us to extend to all parts of the Dominions of the British Empire, here represented, the treatment which we give to the Motherland. Speaking on behalf of Canada, we have offered it to Australia, and are prepared to offer it to New Zealand and to the others here represented. I am coming to a point which was made the other day by Dr. Jameson with regard to our intermediate tariff. We have revised our tariff this year and have adopted a new principle. We had a two-column principle — a

Twelfth Day. 7 May 1907.

Preferential Trade. (Sir Wilfrid Laurier.)