PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference -
[ [ [ [ ; [ C.O.885
18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
Thirteenth Day.
8 May 1907.
COASTWISE
TRADE.
(Mr.
12
should close our inter-Imperial trade to the vessels of foreign countries which deny similar privileges to us. I will give the reasons why I do not think it is advisable that we should, at any rate at the present It will be moment, challenge these countries on this particular point. found on detailed consideration that the matter is not quite so simple as it looks, and that, in fact, these proposals, framed undoubtedly in the Lloyd George.) interest of British ships and British trade, involve a great complication of difficulties, which may well make us pause before we give our assent to them. It is convenient, in the first place, to discuss this proposal on its merits, quite apart from any complication introduced by treaty engagements or the limits of legislative power. The object is either to exclude foreign ships from our coasting or inter-Imperial trade, or by the threat thereof to put pressure on foreign governments to admit British ships to the corresponding trade in their dominions. In either case the object is to benefit British shipping. It could have no other beneficial result. On the contrary, the exclusion of foreign ships or any class of them from the right to carry goods between the United Kingdom and a British Colony, or between the Colonies themselves, must, if effective, tend pro tanto to handicap the buyers and sellers of those goods, by restricting their choice of transport facilities and probably raising the cost of carriage. The Australian exporter of wool and meat would hardly wish to be restricted to British* ships to carry his goods to the United Kingdom in competition with the Argentine exporter of wool and meat, who could select British or foreign ships as best suited his purpose. Moreover, if goods can only travel direct between different parts of the Empire in British ships, while goods from foreign countries may travel either by British or foreign ships, a positive advantage is given to trade between the Empire and foreign countries as compared with trade within the Empire. If merchandise can be sent from Hamburg to Australia in ships of any nationality, but from London only in British ships, the result would hardly tend to benefit the port of London in its competition with Hamburg, or to maintain the entrepôt trade of the United Kingdom. Unless these disadvantages to the trader are compensated for in some way, the proposed reservation would operate as a discrimination adverse to direct trade within the Empire. If, nevertheless, the proposal is advantageous, it can only be because of the benefit to be conferred on British shipping. But is this benefit certain? If confined, as proposed in the resolution, to the exclusion of vessels of countries which do not give reciprocity, it will produce but little practical result. The great bulk of the foreign shipping which actually engages in our inter-Imperial trade is Norwegian or German, and neither of these countries exclude us from their coasting or inter- Imperial trade. The only countries whose vessels would be excluded under the resolution are those of Russia and the United States, whose participation in our inter-Imperial trade is at present negligible.
Mr. DEAKIN Do not the Germans give some special advantages to the trade with their Colonies?
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: No.
Mr. DEAKIN: Not as regards shipping?
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE : No, none.
Mr. DEAKIN: They tried to in the Marshall Islands. They shut us out and a vessel of ours had to go back twice because they were not allowed to trade in the Marshall Islands. The question of compensation for that is now under consideration.
13
Sir WILFRID LAURIER: Surely it was illegal?
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: That was a question of duties I understand.
Mr. DEAKIN: A question of payment for the privilege of trading at all, a question of heavy duties, and also restrictions as to the cargo they could obtain. It was a deliberate attempt to throttle trade, which succeeded to the extent that a vessel was driven back twice at the cost of many thousand pounds of trade. The Captain offered to pay the exceptional fee in order to be permitted to trade, and then was blocked again. It is a very strong case indeed.
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I know the coasting trade of Germany is open to us.
Mr. DEAKIN: They have not any coasting trade, to begin with, worth speaking of.
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I am only dealing with your resolution which does not propose to hit a country which extends the same opportunities to us for what they are worth. The trade between Germany and her colonies is just as open to us as to German vessels. About the Marshall Islands I do not know. I am told that they have admitted they were wrong in that case and have set it right.
Mr. DEAKIN: But have paid no compensation yet.
Mr. F. R. MOOR: What is the position with regard to French regulations?
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: France reserves its trade to Algeria, which is not, properly speaking, a colony, because, I believe, it has representation in the French Parliament. It is treated almost as if it were a French Department.
Mr. DEAKIN: They treat all their Colonies nominally as Departments.
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Not their oversea possessions, such as Madagascar, Senegal, and Tonquin. There we can trade without any restriction at all.
Sir JAMES MACKAY: And Pondicherry.
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Yes.
Mr. DEAKIN: They give tariff advantages to their goods in their own Colonies, and also subsidies.
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: That is another point. It has hit French shipping much more than it has hit us. The whole system has been a ghastly failure, and the result is, that even Germany is now beating French shipping, although Germany has hardly any coast and consequently few sailors. France has native sailors, especially in some parts of her coast, and there is no reason why she should not be second to us, except for her very protective policy.
i 49270.
D
Thirteenth Day.
8 May 1907.
COASTWISE TRADE.
1