PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 885
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE. LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
130
out that there is no fear of the abstract resolutions staying as abstract resolutions without practical results, because whatever may be the final decision of Canada and of Australia, we have the definite assurances of New Zealand and the Cape, and of Natal, which give us the practical result of the resolution which I am sure it would be very desirable in any case to place on record. I think Sir Edmund Barton's is a useful suggestion that the Prime Ministers should meet and consider the matter of the form of the resolution, and in doing so I would only ask them to bear our position in mind, as well as their own. We have endeavoured in all that we have done to take into account the political conditions and the several interests of the various Colonies, but in our turn I am sure that they will have some regard to our political position, and they will recognise that a recommendation for preferential trade in this country would come with very much greater force if it were regarded as tending towards a freer intercourse between the Colonies and the Mother Country than if it was stated merely as a question of sentiment and principle and individual preference. It is because we regard it as, at all events, a step towards that free intercourse which we desire as the ultimate goal between the different parts of the Empire that we are able to assent to the principle of the resolution. And if that were altogether dropped out I am not emphasizing any particular words--but if the idea were altogether lost sight of, I think our position would be rendered rather a difficult one. Then under the circumstances, perhaps Sir Wilfrid Laurier would call the Prime Ministers together on Sir Edmund Barton's suggestion.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER: We might meet, this afternoon, if it would be convenient.
Sir EDMUND BARTON: Three o'clock this afternoon.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER: Have you any engagement, Mr. Seddon?
Mr. SEDDON: I have a meeting this afternoon at half-past two.
Sir ALBERT HIME: Monday, about mid-day.
Mr. SEDDON: This is more a matter for you gentlemen to settle who disagree with the draft resolution.
The SECRETARY OF STATE: Or to amend the draft-resolution. I beg your pardon, but there was one other remark that I wishe to make in order that the respresentatives of the Colonies might have it in view. It has been suggested and offered by some Colonies that a proference should be given in the shape of an additional duty upon foreign goods. Now, in such cases as those of the Cape and Natal, where the duties are very low at present, and not protective, there is no doubt that that would ensure to us practically the same result as would the reduction of duty as proposed by New Zealand; but where the duties already existing are strongly protective, as against the manufactures of the Mother Country, then I need scarcely say that the proposal to give us a preference, by adding to the duties of foreign countries, would not be quite so valuable. I do not say that it might not be of advantage to us; but, at all events, if we are shut out, it does not matter at all what the duty is with regard to foreign countries.
Mr. SEDDON: I may say that this is what I intended to submit as far as New Zealand is concerned-(a) general preference of 10 per cent. in favour of British goods carried in British ships, or, as suggested by Mr. Chamberlain, that it should be an equivalent reduction on British manufactured goods, or an equivalent on the lines suggested by Canada by further reducing the duties in favour of the United Kingdom; (b) by increasing the duties against foreign imports; (c) by imposing duties on certain foreign imports now on the free list as far as New Zealand is concerned. I am quite prepared to go upon those lines and submit them to Government
my
if we were
t
131
and to our Parliament, but I desire to say for the information of the Secretary of Stato and those present-and I have mentioned in my remarks upon the question-there are industries in existence, and to materially interfere with those industries in the Colony it would bring about trouble without giving any correspondent advan- tage, in my opinion, to the Mother Country. But there are, on the other hand, for instance. on boots and shoes, particularly which America makes. Within the last five to seven years New Zealand has imported of these goods an increase of 58,000l. a year. There is a class of American manufactured boots and shoes, and French boots and shoes which are manu- factured here in the Mother Country, and the prices at which they are introduced into our Colony are such as to take the trade from the Mother In Country in these same class of goods, and send it to foreign countries. a case such as that, raising the duties against those particular items would help the Mother Country, because it would give her the position and chance to come in, particularly when we have got, in such a case, a very low duty against them, leaving our present duty so far as New Zealand is concerned- that is, materially on boots and shoes generally—as it is. That is the reason why I think it is advisable that there might be cases in which we should increase on the foreign manufactured goods, leaving the present_tariff as it stands in respect to British goods, and yet that would be an advantage to the manufactures of the Mother Country. There may be in the list other articles of the same kind.
Mr. PATERSON; Is that 10 per cent. off your general list, or do you mean
to give the Mother Country 10 per cent. ?
Mr. SEDDON: All round rebate of 10 per cent.
Mr. PATERSON: That is to say 25 per cent. against foreign countries, and 15 per cent. against English goods; is that the idea; or 10 per cent, of 25 per cent. ?
Mr. SEDDON : 10 per cent. off 25 per cent.
Mr. FIELDING: 10 per cent. of the duty, or 10 per cent. of the value?
Mr. SEDDON: 10 per cent. off the amount received as Customs duty.
Mr. FIELDING: The duty being really 20 per cent. or 25 per cent., the preference would be 2 per cent. or 2 per cent. I would like, sir, to say, from a Canadian point of view, we think that an additional preference in the shape of a higher duty may give the British manufacturer a greater advantage than perhaps Mr. Chamberlain is disposed to think possible. We do not profess that we want to introduce British goods to displace the goods made by the manufacturers of Canada. That is a point upon which we must Whether or speak with great frankness.
not it was a wise policy for Canada to foster her manufactures by high duties is a point hardly worth discussing now; we must deal with things as we find them.
We had very high duties under the former tariff. The present Government have reduced those duties very materially, especially in the case of British goods. Many things of British manufacture paid 40 per cent., 50 per cent., or 60 per cent., but we have reduced these down now to 23 per cent. from Great Britain, and we think that in these cases we have gone about as far as we can without sacrificing our own manufacturers. The interests are very large, the interests of the capital invested, the labour and the banking interest, and the many other interests which cluster round a great industry. Therefore, if we are asked to reduce our duties and bring in British goods and displace Canadian manufactures, we must frankly say it is not possible for us to do so; but we say it is quite possible to give an advantage to British goods in some cases by raising the tariff. The statistics show that our tariff is not prohibitive; it is a moderately protective traffic. We say it is inci dentally protective. The statistics show we are importing from abroad vast
R 2
170