Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

11 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

THE FISCAL QUESTION.I

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

THE FISCAL QUESTION. FINE OLD ENGLISH NAMES. Mr August Zimmerman has been writing in support of free imports for the foreigner in the most convincing style; and Mr Chiozza-Money is likewise eloquent in the same behalf. When people bearing such fine old English names as these con- descend to show us the benefits of allowing the foreigner to supplant our own countrymen even the most stalwart John Bull must be convinced.- Vanity Fair. "SILK TRADE WITH AMERICA." Silk. Thrown Twist Silk or yarn. Manufactures. £ £ 1890 234,503 992,467 Before McKiuley Tariff. 1892 140,625 425,3171 Under stringent Protec- 1894 143,800 208,073 5 tion of McKinley Tariff. 1895 147,478 207,331 "> TT 1896 125,362 179,575 ) Under Wilson Tariff. 1899 220,077 197,516 1900 201,665 222,724 f Under severe Protection 1901 73,774 203,699 C of Dingley Tariff. 1902 74,170 201,756) The great havoc wrought to the silk trade between England and America is disclosed at a glance in the above figures. There is only one point in which these figures differ from those of the Bradford worsted trade. The silk trade seems to have received a deadly wound at the first blow -a wound so deadly that the Wilson Tariff, with its slightly more liberal treatment, had in this case no healing efficacy. In twelve years the exports of manufactured silk have fallen to a fifth of what they were. WHY AMERICANS DUMP. The Inquiry Blue Book includes some highly in- teresting quotations from the report of the United States Industrial Commission. Among many instructive witnesses summoned before that tribunal, perhaps the most frank and informing was Mr Schwab, then President of the great Steel Trust. Mr Schwab said, "It is quite true that export prioesare made at a very much lower rate than those here (i.e., in America), but there is no one who has been a manufacturer for any length of time who will not tell you that the reason he sold, even at a loss, was to run his works full and steady. We will take orders at low prices even if there is some less in so doing in order to keep running." This is one of the foundations of the American workman's prosperity. He has no reason to fear tho evil days of half time. Bat how does it affect the English mechanic ? Dumping has done much to deprive him of work in the past. There is grave reason to fear that it will do much more in the future. The warning contained in the Blue Book should receive timely attention. It is to be remembered, however, that the last few years have been years of active trade in the United States, when the inducement to reduce export prices in order to maintain output is less than would be the case in times of depression." There are ominous signs that America will not require in the immediate! future so much of her manufactures for home use. If that be so, the British worker will be taught a bitter lesson in trade policy when the dumping process begins in earnest. Let him demand the remedy while there is time. Tariff attacks," said Mr. Balfour the other day in a striking sentence—" Tariff attacks can only be met by Tariff replies." THE NECESSITY FOR TARIFF REFORM A remarkable letter in the Times on Monday, from Mr A. B. Markham, Liberal member for the Mansfield Division of Notts, deserves the most careful examination from all thoughtful students of the fiscal question. Mr Markham writes as a coal ex- pert who "passes his daily life among working men"; and expresses his astonishment that the FreeTrade Union leaflets, witk which he has been requested to educate his electorate, appeal to the working classes of this country to support Free Trade, because the German workman's fare consists of thin beer, horseflesh, &c." This appeal, he says, is very much to be regretted. Briefly summarised, his points are these :—Lord Rosebery's increased and abounding prosperity does not exist. I have told my constituents that the exports of manu- factured goods are declining, and show a decrease per head of the population." In 37 years the population has grown from 29 to 42 millions, yet politicians studiously ignore the fact that increased population requires food, clothing, and employment. EXPORTS PER HEAD. £ s. d. 1866-70 5 14 8 1871-75 6 19 4 1876-80 5 9 1 1881-85 5 17 8 188690 5 15 0 1891-95 5 2 7 1896-00 I- 5 4 6 Incidentally, we may note that these figures pul- verisa once more the quibbling attacks made on the 1872 figures. Mr. Markham, however, has One more remark of the highest importance. Our prosperity, our manufactures, our shipping trade, our cheap food, have all been due, not to Free Trade, but to the invention of the steam engine and our steam coal. No foreign competitor requires say soft coal, and, mark the conclusion, within 30 years the thick steam coal seams in this coun- try will be exhausted." Mr. Markham thus agrees entirely with Mr Chamberlain as to the symptoms. The only difference between them is this: Mr Markham, though he disagrees with the Cobdenites, yet, like them, cannot, or dares not, suggest any remedy. Mr. Chamberlain, on the other hand, has offered a" palliative." It is for the British electorate to say whether they will advance blindly to the ruin foretold on every side, Or use the means now offered them to stem the tide of advancing disaster. SIR MICHAEL AND THE SUGAR TAX. There is an astounding statement in the mani- festo published a few days ago by the so-called Unionist Free Food League. The policy of Mr Chamberlain, we are told, would impose perman- ently on the consumer a burden far greater than the yield of the new taxes to the Exchequer, or than the benefit he could receive by the suggested remission of part of the duties on tea and sugar, which were raised to their present amount primarily for the purposes of war." It may be pointed out in passing that no proof is offered of these assertions, whieh are put forward with total disregard of Mr Chamberlain'sreal argument, but the truly remark- ablelfeatcr • If the pa; ma-,e quoted is the allusion to the sugar duty. The inference; to be drawn from it is that the sugar duty was put on as a war tax, and ought to be taken off when the other war taxes are taken off. But the fact is, of course, that the sugar duty of 48 2d per cwt was imposed not as a temporary tax to meet the exigencies of the war, but as a permanent impost designed to enlarge the basis of taxation for the purpose of meeting the yearly increasing normal expenditure. We rub our eyes when we see that the manifesto was signed, among others, by Sir Michael Hicks- Beach, who himself imposed the sugar tax, and de- fended it on the second reading on May 20th, 1901, by saying I have proposed-and this the right honourable gentleman has blamed me for—an ad, dition to our system of indirect taxation of a per- manent character which will go on beyond the war, and will, therefore, be available towards the form- ation of a Sinking Fund in order to pay off the money which has been, or may be, raised for pay- ment of the cost of the war.

« THE JEWS IN RUSSIA.

MINISTERS RE-ELECTED.

El. JMHLR.

Advertising

NEWTOWN.

MONTGOMERY.

BERRIEW.

I'.GARTHMYL.

COUNTY TIMES AGENTS.

Advertising