CO885-(16-18) — Page 724

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

།།

| | | | Į Į | | | | | | | | | | | ||

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.

REVISION OF

COMMERCIAL TREATIES.

28

Mr. F. R. MOOR: I am guided by my colleagues. We are not directly interested, but I think those other Colonies know their minds, and I vote with them.

CHAIRMAN: Have you any opinion to offer, General Botha ?

General BOTHA : No.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: There is no coast trade for the Transvaal. We cannot accept the resolution.

[4

Mr. DEAKIN: We affirm it, and you dissent.

CHAIRMAN: Yes, we dissent.

REVISION OF COMMERCIAL TREATIES.

That the Mr. DEAKIN I presume there is no objection to the next:

: Imperial Government be requested to prepare for the information of "Colonial Governments, statements showing the privileges conferred, and the obligations imposed, on the Colonies by existing commercial treaties, and that inquiries be instituted in connection with the revision proposed in "resolution No. V." You have presented most of this information.

C

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Yes.

Mr. DEAKIN I presume that will be carried.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: That is a very proper thing.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Would you mind explaining the last sentence of it?" to ascertain how far it is possible to make those obligations and

"? benefits uniform throughout the Empire

Mr. DEAKIN We quite recognise that in many cases there must be special treaties which will only affect parts of the Empire and not the whole of it. But surely it is desirable that these differences should be reduced to a minimum, and that, wherever possible, treaties should have sway if possible over the whole extent. In many cases they are relatively immaterial. Minor treaties are proposed to us, and we say no to them because we have no interest one way or the other; but if it was represented to us that the Commonwealth was the only place in the Empire which was not agreeing, no doubt for the sake of uniformity we should say: "Very well, we will fall in with it." It does not mean very much, but it clears the way by encouraging general action instead of partial action. It is not intended to go further.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I do not see any objection to that.

Sir JOSEPH WARD: Nor I.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: What is the meaning of resolution No. V.

"That the for the

40

"

Mr. DEAKIN: It is at the end of the one we have just had : Imperial Government be requested to take the necessary steps for revision of any commercial treaties which prevent preferential treatment

20

being accorded to British goods carried in British ships." I did not move that at this stage, because I proposed to refer to it very briefly in connection with the question of the treaties raised by the resolution of the Government of New Zealand.

ti

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: Will you read it, and move it?

Mr. DEAKIN: I have only moved the resolution lower down: "That the Imperial Government be requested to prepare for the information of "Colonial Governments, statements showing the privileges conferred, and "the obligations imposed, on the Colonies by existing commercial treaties, "and that inquiries be instituted in connection with the revision proposed "in resolution No. V., to ascertain how far it is possible to make those

obligations and benefits uniform throughout the Empire."

40

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: You refer in that to resolution No. V. What is resolution No. V.?

Mr. DEAKIN : That would not stand yet.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: We had better have that in blank.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Yes, that goes yet.

Mr. DEAKIN: Take out the words "with the revision proposed in "Resolution No. V." When that is done I think we should either bring up the part of resolution No. V. alluded to under the resolution of the Govern- ment of New Zealand, or if Sir Joseph Ward prefers, I will move it now independently.

Sir JOSEPH WARD: I will move my resolution because I want to say a word upon it and give my reason for moving it. I have no objection if Mr. Deakin prefers to move his first.

CHAIRMAN: They are both before the Conference.

Sir JOSEPH WARD: Then perhaps Mr. Deakin will move his.

Mr. DEAKIN: I hope to detain the Conference a very few moments in connection with this proposal: "That the Imperial Government be requested "to take the necessary steps for the revision of any commercial treaties, "which prevent preferential treatment being accorded to British goods "carried in British ships." This prefers the direct request that freedom of action shall be obtained for us, not only to grant preferential treatment in regard to British goods, which is undisputed, but also the power to provide that any preference shall be specially extended to British goods carried in British ships. The question has already to some extent arisen during the course of the remarks of the President of the Board of Trade this morning. But our experience is, that treaty obligations, particularly with regard to the Dominions beyond the Seas, have been wrapped in a good deal of obscurity, even if we may judge by some of our experience with the Colonial Office. For instance, it is not long since only at the close of last year-that we were considering a proposed reduction of duties in the Commonwealth in favour of goods produced by British residents in the New

í 19270.

H

Thirteenth Day.

8 May 1907.

REVISION OF COMMERCIAL TREATIES.

(Mr. Deakin.)