Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

26 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

_DI_. ..SIR WM. HARCOURT.…

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

_DI SIR WM. HARCOURT. r Great Free Trade Speech MR CHAMBERLAIN ANSWERED. I "It Is Not a Fact!" ,<r-<- SPiRnED DEFENCE OF i hADE UNIONS -ù< LIBERAL UNITY. Objects of the Party of Progress. At a. Liberal meeting held on Saturday after- noon in the Theatre, Rawtenstall, in the Rossen- /!ale Division of Lancashire, tho principal speaker i(. ^ras the Right Hon. Sir W. V. Harcourt, M.P. Alderman Trickett, chairman of the Liberal r^Cotxncil, presided, and supporting him were Sir Wm. Mather, M.P. for the division, Mr L. V. *Sarebort, and the leading Liberals of the divi. sion. The theatre was packed, and hundreds were unable to gain admission. Sir William Harconrt, who was enthusias- tically applanded, saidLadies and Gentlemen, —■-Itrisf-ar great vleasure'and pride to me to meet this great assembly in this populous district. I r""im here to discuss that question to which the ba, so well alluded, but I am also here lo pay the honour which is due tomv friend, Sir William Mather. (Cheers.) The chairman has *aid—and said, I think, truly—that this ¡ "$seal question was not a party question, i it is not we who have made it rparty question. How was this question in- troduced to the country ? Why. on a certain day, May 16th, we were informed that there was ro be an issue at the next election, and the words itas remarkable, and I should like to read them to you. Mr Chamberlain informed a deputation Birmingham, and pointed out to the people of We country what were the tremendous issnes "ftdW in their hands, and implored them to consider -before the next election that "our opponentia- ihatis the Liberal party-will find that the issues I iliay propose to raise—education taxation of ground rents and a few other questions of that "sind-are not the issues upon which we wish the Judgment of the country." That is to say, they ,uform their opponents that they choose to settle the issue which you are to determine. and that 3he issue would be the consolidation jo the Em- pire by relations of interest as well as of senti- ment. We know very well now what that means. (That means preferential duties and the taxation iif British food. That is announced to their oppo- nents as the issue which is to betaken at the next election, and he informs us that Mr Balfour, the Prime Miniater. is a party to that arrangement, <md that he annonnced It on the same nay when he told the country they would not maintain the shilling duty upon corn, while his colleague was announcing at Birmingham that he intended to put two shillings on at the next election. (Cheers.) They had agreed upon it audit was to be fire issue at the next election. Who made this A earty Question ? tsft we who wanted a non-party discussion, or I ihey who say that matters should not be dis- missed except as a party question V Well, as ihey would not allow us to discuss it in the Souse of Commons, the country took up the latter, and they were not very long in making 'their decision upon it. By the end of the Session there was an overwhelming feeling against the tax on food in the country, itu3 so it was-arranged that Mr Chamberlain left the Government. The Government could not make ttp their minds to take the great plan of prefer- snce duties and taxes upon corn, though it was proposed to them apparently on September 14th, and the consequence was that the Cabinet was divided amongst itself, and as I say the author of ihe plan of Colonial preferences of taxes on food left the Government, and the vessel, tossed by the storm of public disapprobation of these food ■ taxes, had to go on as best it could. It- fact, the ship was dismasted, and they were obliged to get in a scratch crew and go on as best they might. They hauled down the old ensign of Free T/ade apd hoisted in its place the tiag.of Retaliation, and went on a roving commiwion in order that they may raise hostile tariffs Kgainst all the "^Ortti. That is the situation in which we find 'oturaelves. Now, you must understand that it is said that there are two policies, the policy of Mr Balfour, which goes by the name ot Retaliation, aaid the policy of Mr Chamberlt.in, which is the taxation of food with preferential duties for the Colonies. Now, it is not true that there are two Separate concerns-(hear, hear)-though it is pretended there are two separate policies. "■K^Sfeally a very difficult question what this business affair is. The retaliators say, Oft, we aran't going in for this tax upon corn just yet." But it really is, when von come to look at it, the same concern, 2 A Joint Stock Company, ~witb a humble set of articles of- association. (Laughter.) The unsleeping partner is a man of unlimited mobility, but the ostensible manager v-is » limited company. That is the concern which is called a Government to-day; that for the present—until we have some more revelations .—}athe situation in which we are engaged to- day. Now we are told by the Times news- paper, which I suppose may be regarded as the principal organ of the Government, that this is < very adroit proceeding—these are their words- by two skilful card players. I think that is not --at aU a bad description of the thing, but I.doubt ..whether they are going to win the odd trick. (Laughter.) But of this I am quite sure, they won't gain the honours of the game. It really is a more simple game thhn thftt. It is a game tbat might be described as the two card game. -(Hear, hear.) You may put your money on .Retaliation, or you may put your money on a food tax, but whichever you choose to back you .tre pretty sure to lose. (Laughter.) That is the result of this particular card game. We have just had <« sort of war in South Africa, and we are now to have a war of tariffs 10 be carried on by a sort of Government and with aboat the same J sagacity and foresight that the last war was carried on. (Cheers.) And I venture to say that jby the time you have done with it the war will cost you a great deal more than the last. (Hear, hear.) Talk of responsible Government, we are supposed to live under a responsible Government in this country well, what sort of responsibility does this Government take in this matter ? (Hear, hear.) The oniy man in it who had a settled conviction at all has found it necessary to leave the Government. And that is the sort of Government that we have to live under at present. Now, the arrangement is a remarkable one. We are not to settle retalia- tion till after one dissolution, and we are not to settle the food tax until after two dissolutions. A most curious septennial arrangement. (Laugh- ter.) We are to serve seven years for Leah— (laughter)—and another seven years for Rachel. (Renewed laughter.) But you will find that Rachel is the true love. (More laughter.) That is the meaning of that double arrangement. I've seen in my lifetime- A Long Lifetime- many Governments, some good, some bad, some indifferent, but I have never seen a Government so ridiculous as this. (Cheers.) It seems to me incapable of having a mind of its own end utterly undeserving of the confidence of the country. (Cheers.) Then they call it fiscal reform, or whatever else they choose, but when you come to look into it you will find that it is • nothing else but an anti-Free Trade war— (cheers)—and a Protectionist crusade. That is the meaning of the whole thing. They pre- tend that there aise two policies, one a Colonial policy, which appeals to Imperial sentiments- you 'know the style of thing—aud a self-sus- tained Empire. Then there is the other policy— retaliation it is called. That in the more ver- nacular way you may describe as a hit 'em back policy. That is a very old policy. It is, indeed, anterior to the Christian era it is an eye for an eye. a tooth for a tooth. This policy has nothing imperial about it. It does nothing for the Colonies it does nothing for the self-sustenance of the Empire. It is a policy which only professes to be in the private interests of a particular trade. Do not allow yourselves, if you are wise, to mistake the wolf of the food tax disguised in the sheep's clothing of retaliation. If you do Oli will suffer the fate of Little Red Riding Hood. I observe that the foremost Whips are extremely anxious to assure the members of Par- liament that they won't have a. dissolution for two years. Wei', I am not very much surprised "'il-tbey wish to postpone taking the opinion of the country upon the subject of their policy and their conduct, with all its fine pretensions, its magniloquent piofessiona, its reckless promises. When vou cane to find the scheme that is put before you it is shallow and hollow anJ indefen- sible. But they say, Ob, we must wait the fruit is not ripe. (Hear, hear.) No. sir, this has not been a favourable season for ripening frtyt. (Renewed hear, hear.) There is one kind of fruit—ou!y one kind that I know-w-hich in its nature is rotten before it is ripe, and that is appropriately called The Medlar— (tnore laughter) — and .ibat seems to me to be the condition of this great i'ir.ri which is not yet ripe. I gather that on account of the violent vexation which was exhibited a day or two ago by the author ot this plan at Liverpool. He seemed very angry with ail the world. (Laughter.) He sur- veyed all classes and all interests. He disposed of the House oi Loro -1 hat was not difficult— (laughter)—of the ;u:i.Jtocracy, of the middle classes, of the of the officials, of the .Board of Trade, wuo drew np the statistics a.nci he found no satisfaction in any of them, v' arid bfl appealed to the gentiles but, unfortun- ately the Gentiles of-the Trade Unions had Jebofted already against 11111). Well, what 113 he to do then? He said that ti>ese representatives < dfid not represent the constituents. Well you would be a little astonished if somebody came- here and told you that Sir William Mather did not represent your opinions. And be said another curious thing. He said that the working'classes vjMMrfrnot confscHted at-the time that Free Trade introduced. Well, they had not the franchise at the time, but if he had known Lancashire as ".1 ■ kuew it in the forties, he would know! that the working elapses spoke • out, and hail reason to speak .out. (Cheers.l If he had seen, as T saw, starving mobt marching about Lancashiro- a very different Lancashire from what it is to-day--and when I • wan at schcrol in Preston, when people were. dawri'by the military—I think the last people that ever-wereshot down by the military la this country—well, the working classes de- manded Frco Trade, a.nd they got it. (Cheers,) Now, happHy. they have the suffrage, they can speak by their representatives. Why, we know that every Labour leader ia the lionuc of Com- I mons is hostile to this policy of taxation (Cheers.) Yet Mr Chamberlain says that the representatives of Trade Unions do not represent the opinions of the Trade Unions. (Laughter.) What business has he to say anything of the I kind ? What business has be to suppose that he represents the opinions of I Trade Unions- better than that, the Trade Unions themselves ? I Who has done most for wages of this country ? (Hear, hear.) Is it Mr Chamberlain ? ( No.") Or is it the Trade Unions ? (Hear, hear.) And 1 yet he professes to bea man who is going to show j you how wages are to be raised in this country. j (Laughter.) He has not a high opinion of the j middle classes. I do not know why he should not i have a high opinion of the middle classes. He I says that manufacturers were the authors of j Free Trade, and that their object was to cheapen I labour. Well, they wcto very stupid mahu- facturers. if that Was their object, because the j immediate effect was to raise wages—(cheers)-- and also to enable them to pay the higher wages. j Why ? Because the moment things becama cheaper more of them were sold and the conse- quence was that trade was better, profits were I better, and wages were better. (Cheers.) Then about the middle classes; He tells wi now that | there is nothing so bad as cheapness. The demon j of cheapness is the phrase hensed. A country isthe better off, it is said, in proportion to the dear- J ness of everything that it buys. I don't think i that it is the opinion of the middle classes of I this country that the dearer that which j they buy the- better are they off. (Laughter.) As to the working classes, 1 think they know very ( well—they cannot go back in their recollections so far as I can-r-happily for them -but theu for the time they can go back they know what pro- gress has been made both in the wages they receive and in the produce which those wages-will buy. I find in Mr Chamberlain, I must say, a most satisfactory opponent. He saves yoa such a great deal of trouble, because the answer to all that he says is to be found not only in his former speeches, but actually in the very speech he is delivering to-day. That saves an oppouebt, I needed say, a<gre&t deal of trouble. Now he 8'\YS that Protection raises 11 11 Wages, and we all know by these returns that the wages of Free Trade England are the highest in Europe, and greatly the highest, higher than the wages of Germany, and higher than the I wages of France. Then he wants to keep out foreign manufacturers because he says they are the outcome of cheap labour and sweating. Well, that must be in the protected countries. The cheap labour and sweating of Germany are^o be kept out of the country, and yet he tells you that Protection brings high wages and no sweat- ing. Ask the German working man what he thinks of the results of Protection. If you have read the results of the last elections in Germany you would know what they think in Germany—the great majority of the working men-about the system and the tariffs under which they live. This Blue Book which has been supplied to us gives us a few facts, and I know I nm speaking to men of business and experience who like to have a fact or two on this subject. Now the average income of a family given in these tables in the cotton trade in 1900 was for England £127 6s, in Germany X74 5s, and in France X73 14s and yet Mr Chamberlain tells us that if you will only have Protection you are certain to have higher wages. Now, besides that, ther3 is this fact given to tls-the cost of living in Germany has fallen very much less in the last 25 years than in the United Kingdom. The average wages inGermany and France to-day are22s 6d a week, against 36s a week in England, yet we are told that the German is so much better off under Protection than the British labourer is under Free Trade. The real answer to Mr Chamberlain's statements and arguments is a very short one, and I will give it it is not a fact. That is a very conclusive argument, that can always be proved- by figures, and the cir- cumgtances when they come to be examined. Well, then, he holds up to scorn the unfortunate class of people who now go by the name of Free Fooders. Well, I am a Free Fooder myself, and something more, but the Free Fooders are the majority even of his own Unionist party, be- cause a very, very small percentage of them dare to come before the public and say they are in favour of the taxation of food. (Cheers.) Why, the Prime Minister himself is a Free Food re- taliator. A fine political profession of faith Free food retaliation is one of the most compli- cated denominations I ever heard of. The re- taliator, you know, intends to get—and it is a very good thing if he can get it-reciprocal cheapness, and therefore he is not one of the men who, like Mr Chamberlain, considers that cheap- ness is tho greatest misfortune that could befall any nation. I will not add anything to what has been so well said by Mr Chamberlain on the sub- ject of Dumping. He has explained it with a knowledge, a prac- tical knowledge, of business to which I cannot pretend But there was never greater nonsense than has been talked about dumping. If you get; a high Protection in this country don't be too aura tbat you won't have opportunities for dumping, like those which exist abroad, the basis or which is to charge the highest price to your own people and sell at a, cheap ratoto-Abe people abroad. (Cheers.) Well, now, he affirmed that trade, the important trades of this country, are being destroyed, and be gives examples of it. Well, he is, if possible, wawiii?- fortunate in his examples than be is inaccurate in his figures. The iron trade—I am speaking in I the presence of Sir Wm. Mather, who knows something about iron-I should like to know, perhaps be will tell us, whether he considers the iron trade is being destroyed. There are two other great magnates in the jron trade—Sir I James Wilson, of Leeds, and Sir Lowthian Bell, of the North. Thev have spoken out in the strongest possible way against this policy. I have in my hands the answer given in the House of Commons to the question of the value and the quantity of the iron exported in the six months ended 1901 and 1903. In the six months ending June, 1901, it was £ 12,617,000, and in June of this year, 1903, it was £ 15,590,000— (cheers)—or an increase in the six months of £3.000,000 and more of money, and tba.t is the trade which is being destroyed, or, at all events, is stagnant That is one. Then he picks out another. There is the tinplate trade. Well, I know something about that, because it flourishes inSouth Wales, where I have the honour of sitting for a county. Now, there is no doubt that the Tinplate Trade was injured by the American tariff-very much injured—but the tinplate trade set to work, just as the chairman described in another trade, and improved its operations and got assistance from the dumping of plate from America at a cheaper rate, and the tinplate trade has been entirely revived in South Wales. I am told the shipping trade is in a sad state. I should like to know a country in the world which does not envy the shipping trade of England. The last discovery is that of watches. There ha\e been 20,000 watches dumped down in this country, and I find that, as stated in a newspaper the day before yesterday, the importations of watches in 1901 were 1,700,000, and in 19031,100,000. If that is correct that is a diminution of 600,000 in that time, and as the people do not want leas watches, but more, I take it that it is the watches in Eng- land which have supplied the deficiency. How- ever, I take that as accurate from the newspapers. Now, as to the basis of the whole of this agita- tion. It is the assertion of the decaying condi- tion of British trade. Now, is there any truth in that assertion ? (Cries of No.") I avor that there is not. When you have to judge of a system of trade, as you judge of a system of busi- ness, you look at the results and you judge of the profits over a long period of time. Now, what was the condition of England at the close of the Pro- tection era ? Here is the description of it by a body which bad some knowledge of the trade of England, and this was at a meeting of the Com- mon Council, held in the chamber of the Guild- hall in December, 1842, and that was a time when Protection was in full operation and just before its happy decease. What they said was this The continued and increasing depression of the manufacturing, commercial, and agricultural in- terests of this country, and the widespreading distress in the working classes are most alarming. Manufacturers without a market, and shipping' without freight, capital without investment, trade without profit, and farmers struggling under a system of high rents, and corn laws to restrain the importation of food, are inducing the starving people to reject the laws under a. I Deep Sense of Their Injustica. That this court anxiously appeals to the fiisfc Minister of the Crown to give practical effect to his declaration in favour of Free Trade by bringing forward at the earliest possible period such measures for securing an unrestricted supply of food and the employment of the people, ana effectually removing the condition of depression, the distress so widely prevailing to co-exist with the safety and preservation of our social and political institutions." You may judge a tree by its fruits. Those were the fruits of Pro- tection in what are called the good old days to which you are invited now to return. lean vouch for the accuracy of that description. I have seen in the course of my life, first of all the state of this country into which it was reduced by. Protection. I have been spared to see the position into which it has been raised by Free Trade. These-are convictions which cannot, as you may suppose, pass away from my mind or p«6s away from my conscience, and these are the i rAn^Anci tvhv F fin iiAa> onrJ oholl tltA last moment of my power, to resist Protection. J (Cheers.^ That was a description of the country j under Protection. What is its condition now ? Don't take it from me, don't take it from any- body who may be supposed to be prejudiced on the other side of the question. These are the words of the pamphlet of the Prime Minister. He says, Judged by all the available tests both the total wealth and the continuous well- being of the country are greater than they have ever been. We are Dotonlydch and prosperous in appearance, but also, I believe, in reality. I cannot find any evidence that we" are living on our capital, though In some respects we may be investing it badly. Why, then, may it be asked, (io we trouble ourselves to disturb a system which has been so fruitful in happy result ?" Why. indeed ? But no. answer is given to the question he puts forward in that respect. At all events there is his testimony to the present con- dition of this country as compared with that which I have read to you in the days of Pro tection. Now, gentlemen, it' is very difficult to say anythVpg r>6W on this subject, nor indeed is ic desirable—^what is new is not true—ihear, hear) and what is true is not new- (cheenJcand laughter)—and therefore you have to Rive, and ydumustgiye.t&eoldanswectotbe i Old Fallacies when they are reproduced as "they are reprodneetl to-day, and we do give, and we shall give the answcrs with which we confounded them before, and by which we shall confound them again. (Cheers.) Mr Cha:nberlain said at tiiverpool in his drat speech that the test of the wealth of the -0.> nation was its exports. Well, he had to correct that, of course; it really was so obviously a blunder that it was impossible to imagine that anybody could have uttered it, and the real fact is that the exports of this country are only about one-sixth part, or one-fifth part, of the whole of its manufactures and of its productions. How is the home trade of this country being employed ? j Is there less money being spent in this country upon what this country employs ? Why, every- body knows that the opposite is the fact. I have got a. whole list of persons empioved in different trades formerly, and in those trades now. I will only mention two. As between 1871 and 1901 there had been an increase of 362,000 in the build- ing trade and 362,000 in the coal mining trade, They always want to exclude coat minine. I don't know why, because there is no trade of which that course in proportion is greater in respect of labour and if you want, therefore, to cultivate the employment of labour and produce wages the coal mine is the most important of all. But I will take the building trade. What does the build- ing trade mean ? I have just come across a good part of England I passed through out. Bir- mingham and I passed outside Derbv. What I did I see, and what do I see everywhere I go ? Masses of new buildings rising, some large and extensive, some miles of the middle-class, and whole streets of now buildings for the working classes. Does that show the diminution of em- ployment ? It is not merely the men who are building the houses, but that those who live in the houses must have the means of paying for them. It means that these men are getting every day more and more employment, and are saving more and more money; and that it is all out of ia trade which is extremely advantageous to the employer and the employed. Then they come forward and say, Mr Chamberlain says, Oh, it is not the cheapness of what you buy, but the money you have to buy it with.' Well that is perfectly true, but still if people buy the things then they have got the money and whera do they get the money ? They get money from higher employment, and better employment, and more of it. Now, we have been supplied with a quotation from Mr Gladstone, which he thought would be a great surprise to us all and would entirely confute us. What was the quotation ? Mr Gladstone pointed out that it was not merely the cheapening of commodities that has brought this great change in the posi- tion of late years. "It is that yon have set more free the course of trade, it is that you have put in action processes that influence the widest field and the highest remuneration." And that was to surprise as. Why; anbyody who knows the A B C of the Free Trade controversy knows that that is exactly the point, and he at last discovers that and thinks that it will entirely overwhelm us. Why, what was the thing that Mr Gladstone was thinking of ? He was speaking about the French Treaty of 1861, which was not to put on tariffs, but to take them off. We are told that the exports of this country are diminishing, or at all events stagnant. I meet that by the answer I have given already—it is not a fact. (Cheers.) Our exports have not diminished in the last ten years. In 1892 they were 227 millions, in 1902 they were. 278 millions. That is an increase of 51 millions. In manufactured goods they were 195 millions in 1893 and 222 millions in 1902—an in. crease of 27 millions. The same thing is true, if you do not take a number of years which may de- ceive you, and which deceived Mr Chamberlain when he took the year 1872. I will take an aver- age, because it is said our exports are falling off. Taking the average of the years 1890 to 1894 the exports were 234 millions 1895 to 1899 they were 288 millions; and already this year, in the nine months, they are eight millions iu excess of the corresponding nine months of 1902. (Cheers.) These are your exports which are decreasing, and at this moment the exports are higher than ever they have been in the history of this country, and higher, I believe, than an v nation in the world. Now, I go back to Mr Chamberlain's favourite period of the seventies, and here are the figures. In 1873 the exports were 225 millions; in 1883 they were, if you take them at -the price of 1873, 295 millions in 1893 they were 329 millions and this year they were 418 millions. Therefore they have in 20 years increased 150 millions, and taken upon that basis they have itl the last ten years increased 100 millions. I think that pretty well disposes of the question of exports. It is sail, Oh, but other countries have increased their exports, and have increased them more rapidly in proportion that you have." Well, of fourse they have. A baby grows more quickly han a grown man, and thoy are infants in trade as compared with us. We Are an Old-Mtablished Firm, and if a firm' dealing in millions adds to it another million you cannot say it has increased 100 per cent. as you could in a firm which in- creased its trade from JE100 to E200. This is what the report: says after carefully examining our relations with Germany and the United States. It says There is nothing in those figures to suggest that while the export trade of our neigh- bours has been increasing our own export trade has been diminishing or even standing still that is pretty conclusive as compared with Germany and the United States." And then this further: The exports per bead of the United Kingdom are far in jexcess of what they are in either France or Germany, and are still more in excess of what they are in the United States, and while it is clear these figures do not show that there has been any material displacement of our home ,3 manufactures in oar home markets by Germany they show that the great increase of United States exports have been mainly agriculture and foodproducts) and only to a small extent of pro- duets which compete with the export trade of the United Kingdom. Germany and the United States may have progressed more rapidly, but there has been'no displacement of the export trade of the United Kingdom by any one of her three principal competitors, What case is there then on the question of exports for demanding a reversal of the established fiscal policy of this land ? I want to say a word about imports, but I have very little to add to the admirable state- ments that have been made already by your chairman upon that subject. If your exports have not increased, they fall back upon imports. Those terrible imports, if we could only get them out what a happy people we should be. Why are we alarmed at the imports? What are they? As the chairman has said, and truly, they are things which we want and which you would not take if you did not want, and which you cannot have unless you have got the money to pay for them, and.the money you have to pay for them is your exports. No England is the great creditor nation of the world. At this moment, in conse- quence of her wealth, she has not only had wealth of her own, bat she has had wealth which she has been, able to lend out at good interest to foreign countries. Well, of course, these things are not paid for by gold. The only real1.1rofessor of political economy that Mr Chamberlain can call on his side is MrSeddon, and he has adopted him as his text-book in support of the suggestion that these imports are paid for in gold. No, it is a trade transaction it is a Transaction of Exchange, and in this exchange what you give is your export and what you receive is your import, and if what you receive is better than what you give then that is a good trade. It really is the whole question of imports. And what are these im- ports ? They go to pay the creditor nation first ot all for its exports, secondly for the interest on the money that has been lent to them, thirdly for the carriage of goods—which is done for all the world by the shipping and the mercantile marine of England, which is estimated at £ 90,000,000 a. year. It has to pay besides that for the interest, as I said, upon these moneys abroad aud tbe investments abroad, which is estimated at about £ 70,000,000 more. No wonder then that the imports exceed the exports if it was not so it would be a terribly bad thing. It is suggested that that is paid out of capital. Well. that has certainly not been paid out of capital, which is proved by the returns of Inland Revenue, which show tbat those investments are larger and not less every year. Most imports come as a man might come to your house and say be has come to pay hi^ debt. What wouid be thought of you if you said, Get you gone out of that place. I will keep you out by a tariff ?" He might take you at your word, and he might pay you out, and he might get your exports, I suppose, and not give you any imports at all. Just'let me, in a few words, give you Mr Chamberlain's budget. He is going to put a tax on food to the extent of £ 6,000,000. Well, taxes of that kind have this pecuiiarity.-that besides the £6,000,000 they give to the revenue they increase the price of the commodity both at home and in the Colonies. And this is esti- mated at £ 9,000,000 more. Therefore the cost of this tax is £15;000,000. Ha says he will remit taxes on sugar and tea to the amount of £ 7,500,000. Thank You for Nothing. We are entitled to that off without any new tax. (Cheers.) But even ao, the loss to the consumer would be S8,000,000 sterling. Then he is going to put a tax on manufactures, which is estimated at £ 9,000,000. What the increased price of that will be. to the consumer by raising the price of every mftllufacturesotaxed it is really impossible to calculate, but it will be enormous. That is the budget which he professes to lay before the country for its acceptance. He says it is only a transfer of taxes. Yes, but it is a transfer of taxes from those which at present yield only revenue to a set of prohibitive taxes which coat the consumers a gieat deal more than their yield to the revenue. (Cheers.) There is one last fallacy I want to deal with. They say, Oh, this ifl a capital plan; we will make the foreigner pay." That is a fallacy that can only deceive the roost ignorant people it has been refuted admirably by Lord Goschen. Why, the whole object of the transaction is to raise the price. If you do not raise the price of corn the Colony gets no good, and the British farmer gets no good, and, therefore, the price must be raised, or the whole of your plan fails, and then be says, "I will not raiae it upon maize or upon bacon." Why? If the foreigner pays, why is he Dot to pay on maize and bacon, just as much upon corn or manufactures, or anything else ? And, then, I. why should not foreigners pay ? Why not raise the whole revenue of your country by a. scheme 1 whereby the foreigner will pay it all, and the Eng. whereby the foreigner will pay it all, and the Eng- lish taxpayer will pay nothing at all ? (Laughter.) 1 suggest that Mr Chamberlain could improva hiB scheme by introducing that. (Laughter.) No, sir, at all events, Mr Balfour, the Prime Minister, knows better than that. He warned Mr Chaplin, who is, ot course, for raising the price of corn in this country, when he came to protest against taking off the shilling duty on corn to take care what he was about. He says he has appealed to the Chamber of Agriculture to oppose the abolition of the tax upon corn in their interest, a.nd the only inference that can be drawn from this is that a shilling duty on corn is a benefit to British farmers, and if it is a, benefit to the British farmer, it COd only be an t injury to the Hritjini cousumM. rhere is no escape from that dilemma. And if you compare I the prices of wheat in the countries which have these taxes with tbe prices in England where there arc no such taxes yod will find, practically À speaking, that the payment'by tue cvnsuuier r corresponds to the tax which has been put on. We are told to look at this from an Imperial Point of View, of course, we look at it from an Imperial point of view. We are as mach for the Empire as yon are, who lecture us upon Imperialism, but we have onr views as to what is for the good of the Empire, what is for the consolidation of the Empire, and what is bad for it. In my opinion, you will not consolidate or unite the British Empire by patting a tax upon the food of the British peopie, leaving the reat of the Empire untaxed. A policy of that kind is utterly unsustainable. In conclusion. I have no fear that this gospel of universal dearness of everything will prevail. (Hear, hear.) It is being propagated with appeals to the prejudice of every class. It is founded on fallacious arguments, supported by baseless alarms and statements which cannot be proved by inaccu- rate figures am] perverted facts it is contrary to common sense; it is contrary to common experience, and the common practice of man- kind. (Loud cheers.) AsK any householder what it is be wants dearer—that is tbe practical test- and you will find that the scheme will break down before it. The wage which the man receives and the employment which he gets will, of course, if it is large, from the cheapness of the commodities enable him to obtain greater com- I forts and greater enjoyments, If he is less fortunate it will diminish the pinch of his life in obtaining the necessities of life. Gentlemen, the object of the party of progress is not to make things dearer it is to make life easier and more comfortable to every class of the com- munity. The aims of the party to which we belong are not directed to taxing food. They are not for a war of tariffs. They are, as the chairman so well said, for education, for just principles- (cheers)-in the hands of a people and not of a sect. They want redaction of that expenditure which wastes resources of the people and robs the fund from which they find employment and wages they fdemand, as the chairman well said, land reform. (Hear, hear.) They want temperance reform. {Hear, hear.) They want labour reform. (Cheers.) Tbey want ec- clesiastical reform. (Cheers.) They want electoral reform—(cheers)—and they want that social reform which has been promised so long by this Administration, and which has not been given them. That, in my opinion, is a nobler creed and a higher faith. This hankering after Protection is the nature of the party of reaction. The cause of Free Trade belongs to the party of progress, and to that cause I rejoice to know that the Liberal party to-day is more united than it has ever been, and that it is resolved to that cause to send its missionaries to fight and to win. (Loud cheers.) A resolution, protesting against the reactionary proposals of Mr Chamberlain, was carried with enthusiasm.

ROMANCE OF THE TINPLATE TRADE.

---------.--PUNISHMENT OF…

...--.--.-- ------AFRAID OF…

HUSBAND'S LIABILITY.

:-----.--'"' LICENSING AT…

[No title]

ELECTRICAL STORM.

PRANKS OF THE SUNSPOT.

RESOURCEFUL IN EMERGENCY.

---.---..-------.--ARMED BURGLARS…

[No title]

11111"...«L. Preachers Put…

CARDIFF MUSICAL FESTIVAL !

,_.-SOUTH WALES DIRECT LINE.

._-PLAYING WITH GUNPOWDER.

--------.---_.------SWANSEA…

lORD KELVIN.

[No title]

—"—t TUBERCULOSIS IN CATTLE.…

SIR CHARLES DILKE. ! ---)

SHIP-SAVING INVENTION.

_.-...--_'_--4------FARMER…

-----.---.-.----CADOXTON PONY…

SMUGGLING AT BARRY DOCK-

IMAIN BURSTS AT TROEDYRHI^-