A.—s.

"to be identical with that as regards coasting trade. Thus, our treaties " with Austria-Hungary, Greece, and certain other countries would have " to be ' denounced ' before steps could be taken by legislation in the United " Kingdom to reserve the trade between the United Kingdom and any "of the Colonies. The carrying trade between Canada, India, and New " South Wales could apparently be ' reserved,' if desired, without breach of " any treaty, and, generally speaking, the "treaty restrictions on the reser- " vation of the inter-Colonial trade would seem to be less formidable than " those applying to the Colonial trade with the United Kingdom, always " assuming that inter-Colonial trade could, without breach of treaty or fear "of retaliation, be assimilated to Colonial coasting trade. The restriction " of the trade between particular Colonies to British vessels would naturally "be a matter for Colonial rather than Imperial legislation," and the question is raised whether it would not.be possible even under all existing treaties to restrict the trade between the United Kingdom and any particular Colony to British^vessels "by means of a colonial law, in cases in " which the Colony passing such a law is not bound by treaty to admit " foreign vessels to its coasting trade." That suggestion may have rather an important bearing upon a subsequent question we may be called upon to discuss. Speaking for the Commonwealth, it appears to us that attention having been invited to this question in 1902, it is possible that in the future the exercise of some of the powers referred to in that memorandum, or the occasion for their exercise, may arise suddenly. It would be well therefore to ascertain from the British Government what has been the result of any further inquiries which have been made in this direction either as to local powers or practical advantages or disadvantages of such reservations. If that be not a complete statement we can again re-affirm this resolution, so that further attention will be called to it in the hope of our obtaining some clear and precise understanding of what our powers are in this connection. We require knowledge which would guide us in forming an opinion as to what extent it would be judicious for us to exercise those powers. For the purpose of bringing this matter to a head, equipping ourselves for practical solutions when these may be necessary, and for bringing up to date the very interesting and valuable information contained in the additions to the Conference of 1902, the resolution before you is submitted for re-affirmation. Sir WILFRID LAURIER : I quite approve for my part. Sir JOSEPH WARD : This resolution, as Mr. Deakin has said, is a similar one to that moved by Mr. Seddon at the last Conference. I want to say what New Zealand did after his return. We introduced legislation affecting the whole coastwise administration, so as to insure that British ships had to a very large extent the advantage in our country. We did it by the altering, among other things, of our law as to the payment of wages and the general control of the ships. We do not allow outside ships to come down to our country and engage in coastwise trade at all. We have stopped that. We have done as America did. Mr. DEAKIN : Do you allow them if they comply with the conditions ? Sir JOSEPH WARD : We do not allow an outside ship to trade on our coast. Since the resolution moved by Mr. Seddon in 1902, referred to by Mr. Deakin, we in New Zealand have gone in the direction of it to a very large extent. We have done it for a reason referred to by Mr. Deakin, because we felt keenly in our country the extraordinary position of

Thirteenth Day. 8 May 1907.

Coastwise Trade. (Mr. Deakin.)

58—A. 5.

449