" ' WHY NOT A GENERAL TARIFF ? '
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE DAILY EXPRESS!]
Stri,—I am afraid ion have done the Spectator an injustice in your subleadcr of this morning. I have carefully read through the Tariff article of Saturday, and I find in it no recantation of Free Trade principles. It advocates a Tariff, first of all for Revenue, and then for the purpose of setting shipping free by excluding certain kinds of imports ; but this Tariff is to endure for the period of the War, and no longer. It may be the Thin End of a Tariff Reform Wedge ; but that is not the Spectator's desire, and I for one, if I live to see the end of the war, will resist the Wedge with all my might. So, no doubt, will the Spectator.—Yours, etc., E. S. ROBERTSON.
14th February, 1916
[If we have erred, we have done so in good company, as most of the London newspapers accept the Spectator's conversion to Tariff Reform principles.—En. D.E.]" [Mr. Robertson's interpretation of our contention is entirely correct. We advocate a general tariff for revenue purposes, and not on grounds of Protection. We support it also as a means of keeping down imports when shipping must be freed for muni- tion and transport work. We fear, however, that a tariff Will be needed for revenue purposes for many years after the war. It must not be regarded as merely " for the duration." Colonial Preference will be a privilege rightly accorded to the Daughter States. It will also be an advance towards the Free Trade ideal.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
