CO885-5 — Page 583

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference

.0.

8855 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

the price of the bread of the poor man very much, especially as the poor man would get breadstuffs duty free from all the Colonies, from Canada, Australia, and India; and the grain-producing power of those and various other Colonies might be developed to an almost unlimited extent, so that ultimately hardly any rise in price would be observed. I have no doubt that if the labouring population of England were polled upon the subject, they would not consider this an insuperable objection, especially if it were explained to them that the scheme might result in the development of a better market for their own manufactures in the Colonies.

There is another objecti n which I believe to be of a somewhat more vital character. It is this, that the tax would be one upon the raw materials required for British manufacture. But it would be a tax not on all raw materials, but only on those not coming from the Colonies. The Colonies might develop their producing capacity to such an extent that after the lapse of some years the tax would hardly be felt at all in England. In this respect also the tax might be considered less objectionable, if the English people found that the chances are that they would be indemnified for any loss they suffered by reason of a tax on raw materials by having a better market in the Colonies than they have under the present system of free competition between foreign goods and their own all over the Empire.

Then I have heard it said that an Imperial tariff would lay additional burdens upon the already over-burdened British taxpayer. I believe that it would not lay additional burdens upon the British taxpayer, but that on the contrary it would relieve the British taxpayer of some part of his burdens. The British taxpayer at present has to pay for the maintenance of the army and navy single-handed, alone, by himself. Under my plan he would share that burden with the Colonies, and he would know at the same time that whilst he contributed something under the heading of a new tax, he at the same time obtained a better market for his industry in the Colonies.

Then it is attempted to frighten us with the threat that foreign Powers might retaliate. But how would they retaliate? They would retaliate, I suppose, by levying duties on British trade; but they do levy duties upon British trade already (hear, hear); they do levy Protectionist duties on British trade. Supposing, however, that they did proceed to levy even higher duties than at present upon British trade, the result might, of course, be that the consumption of British goods in foreign countries would decrease. But does not the consumption of British goods in foreign countries decrease even at present, and has it not been decreasing for years and years past, while it has been and is increasing in the Colonies? (Hear, hear.) I will give only one or two figures bearing on this subject, figures which I obtained from an authority which by Free Traders would be regarded as unimpeachable, namely, Sir T. H. Farrer's book, "Free Trade and Fair Trade." The exports of produce and manufactures of the United Kingdom to foreign countries in 1871 amounted in round numbers to 171,800,000, or to 77 per cent. of the whole of the exports of British merchandise. In 18-0 they had decreased to 147,800,000%, or to only 66 per cent. of the sum total. The Colonies on the other hand took British goods in 1871 to the extent of 51,250,000l., or 23 per cent. of the whole; and in 1880 they took 75,250,000, or nearly 34 per cent. of the whole. There was a loss on foreign trade of 11 per cent.; there was a gain on Colonial trade of 11 per cent. ()

(Hear, hear.) Whilst the British exports to foreign countries decreased by 11 per cent., British exports to the Colonies increased to the extent of 11 per cent. Sir Thomas Farrer reinarks, as against this, that the period of ten years is too short, and that it ought to be a longer periot in order to be conclusive. Well, then, I take a longer period.

I add another six years, and compare the year 1885 with the

What I find is this: British goods 1980. year and merchandise exported to foreign countries in 1880 amounted to 147,800,000%; British goods and merchandise exported to foreign countries in 1885 amounted to only 135,000,000%, showing a falling off of over 12,000,000. Although those six years were a period of very great depression in most of the Colonies (I know they were so at the Cape), the Colonies took British imports in 1880 to the extent of 75,000,0004, and in 1885 to the extent of 77,900,000/., giving a further advance of 2,750,000/. in the five years. This shows that the increase in the consumption of British goods in the Colonies as compared with the decrease in foreign countries, was not a mere temporary inatter, not a mere flash in the pan, not a mere back eddy in the stream, but something which is permanent, and which is likely to continue.

Another objection might be this: supposing that this plan is adopted how are you guing to work it?

Is it to be a voluntary or a compulsory system? May each Colony come in as it likes, or are you going to apply coercion ? Of course coercion would be out of question. But supposing that some of the Colonies refused to come in, and that

other Colonies did come in, is England going to levy a differential tariff as against the recalcitrant ones, that is, against some of its own Colonies? Is it going to give some of the Colonies in the United Kingdom the benefit of a differential fiscal tariff, whilst from other Colonies that benefit is to be withheld? This, I believe, is one of the most serious objections which might be raised. But most of the difficulties in the way of great movements are overcome as you go along, and the possibility is that if the plan should work, and that if the Colonies should find that there is really a very great advantage and benefit to be derived under the scheme, even the last one would come in, and there would be none left outside.

Then if all these difficulties are overcome you would require some body with legislative, and to some extent also administrative, powers; a body that would fix upon the amount of the tariff, and a body that might amend the tariff from time to time, either raising it or reducing it, and which at the same time, in consultation with the British Government, might have something to say about the administration of the funds. In other words, you would have a sort of limited fiscal Parliament by the side of the British Parliament and the various Colonial Parliaments. This would be a difficulty. It would be difficult indeed to delimit and describe the rights and powers of a fiscal Parliament as compared with the rights and powers of the Imperial Parliament, and of the various Colonial Parliaments. But I wish those delegates who are great advocates of Imperial Federation to understand that this after all is a much smaller difficulty than you would have to grapple with if you entered into a larger measure of Imperial Union or Political Federation. This small body which would have to be created would perhaps be the germ of an Imperial Federation afterwards; or, if it failed, Imperial Federation itself would have to be thrown overboard for good as utterly hopeless.

Ihave briefly gone through the most salient difficulties. I have a great deal more to say, but I do not want to detain the Conference longer. My excuse for bringing this subject forward must be that, as it is a most important one, and as it has been discussed outside this Conference repeatedly, it may be as well, now that the delegates from the various Colonies are assembled together, that they should give some attention to it. The plan, as I bave already said, may perhaps not be feasible at present; but I think that a great deal will be gained if the attention of the Imperial Government and Parliament, and of the Colonial Governments and Parliaments, be directed to it. If no attention were directed to it, if it were not discussed, we should find that the difficulties standing in the way of an Imperial Fiscal Union, instead of decreasing in number, would become greater and greater, If there are treaties standing in the way, those treaties, instead of lapsing in course of time, would be renewed, and other treaties would be added to them, increasing the looseness of the Empire instead of promoting its solidarity. But if this matter be discussed, and if it be continually borne in mind, it stands to reason that in future treaties which may be entered into between the Imperial Government and foreign countries, the fact that the Colonics are not foreign countries, but are inseparable parts of the British Empire, will be remembered, and the most-favoured-nation clause will not be brought to bear against England's own kith and kin. At this moment the scheme may be Utopian, but even as Utopian venture to lay it before the Conference. I can only regret that it has not been taken up by an abler delegate than myself, and more especially by a delegate who is a greater master of the English language than I um. (Cheers.)

Mr. Service (Victoria).—I have really very little to say upon this subject, except that I would like to express my admiration of the most able speech made by Mr. Hofmeyr, The manner in which Sir Samuel Griffith introduced this subject to the meeting was one calculated to make us all consider it, at first sight at all events, in a very favourable light, and Mr. Hofineyr has gone into the subject so exhaustively, that so far as I can see he bas hardly left a point untouched. He has obviously thought the whole subject out, and the information he has given us is most valuable. Still there are one or two points that, as a learner, I would like to remark upon.

To take the first point that occurs to my mind, I must say that whilst the question of a common tariff throughout the whole Empire has been mooted again and again, it has always seemed to me impossible, probably because I did not think it out. I knew it was impossible for the Australian Colonies, for example, or for Canada to accept the principle of commercial intercourse which exists in England. But, Sir, I must confess that a remark which fell from Sir Samu. I Griffith the first or second day after he came here awakened a new set of ideas in my mind; and that was—that it was not necessary that all the component parts of the Empire should have the same tariff in order to carry out this idea; that is to say, that if you placed a differential duty as between the Imperial products and the foreign products it would not matter what the precise local tariff A 4

p. 471.