TOPICS OF THE DAY.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN AND TARIFF REFORM.
WHEN last January the Unionist leaders wisely decided that they would not make Colonial Pre- ference through Food Taxes an issue at the next General Election, in order that there might be a full concentration not only of the Unionist forces, but of all the forces working to guard the nation from disruption and to prevent the forcing of Ulster under a Dublin Parliament, we, as Unionist Free Traders, felt that a special duty was imposed upon us. We recognized how great was the sacrifice that had been made by the Tariff Reformers, and also that it was largely made owing to the repre- sentations of Unionist Free Traders like ourselves. We held personally the view that it would have been better policy, and really would have involved no greater sacrifice, for the Tariff Reformers if their leaders had boldly decided to apply their temporary self-denying ordinance to the whole fiscal programme, and to declare that till the Union was safe and the constitutional issues involved in the Parliament Act decided, Tariff Reform would be postponed. But in spite of that we felt it was not we who could rightly urge such a development. A compromise had been arranged, and it clearly would not have been fair for Unionist Free Traders to use it as a stepping-stone for making further demands. If the Tariff Reformers should themselves reach our conclusions, well and good, but any movement in this direction must come from them and not from those who felt as we did on the whole question. Till the Tariff Reformers moved we were bound to act upon the assumption that they had made all the sacrifice they could, and that what we must do was to support them whole-heartedly and without any arriere pensce, without grumblings or misgivings or the utterance of any words that might be a cause of internal troubles and difficulties to our leaders. There are conditions under which it is better loyally to support a defective plan of campaign than to cause confusion by protests, or even suggestions of amendment. The very remarkable speech of Mr. Austen Chamberlain at Manchester on Monday has, however, completely altered the situation, and enables us to say what nothing short of that speech would have induced us to say. Though we hold that we have no right to demand further sacrifices from the Tariff Reformers, we have a complete right to endorse and support suggestions for sacrifice when put forward by the leading representative of the Tariff Reform movement.
If we examine Mr. Austen Chamberlain's speech in detail, the examination will, we believe, justify the deductions we have drawn from it. Let us remember, to begin with, that the speech was made at Manchester, which is the very centre of Unionist Free Trade feeling. Next, the chair was taken by Lord Derby, who, though the most loyal of Unionists, is well known to share the views of those who desire the most complete concentra- tion of Unionist forces at the present crisis. Mr. Austen Chamberlain began his speech by declaring that be entered fully into the spirit of Lord Derby's remarks (remarks in regard to the necessity of the two sections of the Unionist Party working together and " playing the game"), and that in anything be said that night his object would be to promote union, to gather strength, to reconcile differences, and to secure success for the party to which they belonged. Mr. Austen Chamberlain then went on, in that spirit of sincerity and plain speaking which is hereditary in him, and which does him the greatest possible credit as a states- man, to declare his unflinching adhesion to the full policy of Tariff Reform. Without mincing his words, he stated that never in his public life had he been called upon to make so deep and bitter a personal sacrifice as when, for the sake of union in the party and to avoid adding to the difficulties of his friends and leaders, Lord Lansdowne and Mr. Boner Law, he submitted to the conditions laid down at Edinburgh ; but, having submitted to them, be would abide by them, and he did not think that, on that account, any one of them would question the sincerity of his convictions or the ardour of his pursuit of Tariff Reform. Let us as Unionist Free Traders assure him that he is not mistaken here. No sane person has ever imagined that he has weakened in the slightest degree in his support of the full policy put forward by his father in 1903. With so much of preliminary, Mr. Austen Chamber- lain made a statement which, in our opinion, is of capital importance, and must be quoted in full :- "Keen Tariff Reformer as he was, he found it difficult at a moment like this to concentrate his thoughts upon Tariff Reform. He could not banish the Irish question from his view. He was a Unionist before he was a Tariff Reformer. He looked forward first and foremost to the maintenance of the existing Union of the United Kingdom as the necessary basis, the very groundwork andfoundati", of that larger union which he hoped we might evolve."
Mr. Austen Chamberlain went on to point out that the Home Rule Bill was the very negation of Tariff Reform, and that no Tariff Reformer could accept it. Next, he dealt with the perilous position in which Mr. Asquith has placed himself. He then turned to the Ulster question again, and insisted that they should tell the people 'of Ulster that " we will not forsake them for any possible advantage to the cause which we are immediately met to consider," i.e., Tariff Reform. Mr. Austen Chamberlain concluded his speech to what, remember, was a mass meeting called for the special discussion of Tariff Reform, and which was in close connexion with the Tariff Reform Conference which bad been held earlier in the day, by dealing with the details of his policy, special reference being made to the Indian Customs duties.
If Mr. Austen Chamberlain's speech was significant, equally significant were the words of Lord Derby in replying to a vote of thanks passed to him as chairman. He would, he declared, have liked to see Mr. Chamberlain's remark, " I was a Unionist before I was a Tariff Reformer," put up over the bed of every Unionist—a proposal which we desire to endorse to the full, for the text represents exactly the spirit which at this crisis should inspire every Unionist, and does, we believe, inspire ninety-nine per cent. of them. After these words who can doubt that the issue at the next General Election will be the question of the Union and of justice to Ulster, and that no other problems, however great and important in themselves, will be allowed to distract the attention of the electors ? No Unionist can- didate now will have the slightest hesitation in calling for a concentration of Unionist effort by declaring : "I am a Unionist before I am a Tariff Reformer." if for doing so he is challenged by some fanatical adherent of Fiscal Reform, he will be able to say that he is only adopting the attitude of Mr. Austen Chamberlain, and that it is absurd for anyone to pretend to be more loyal to the cause of Tariff Reform than the son of the man who placed that policy before the country.
As proof that we are not making too ranch of Mr. Austen Chamberlain's speech or—what we admit would be a detestable act of bad faith on our part—. trying to seize on an unguarded phrase to represent Mr. Austen Chamberlain as taking up a position which he did not mean to take up, we desire to quote from the words of one who cannot be accused of any sympathy with Free Trade or of any weakness in the matter of Tariff Reform. Everyone knows the views of the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette and the passionate earnestness and devotion with which he has urged the full policy of Tariff Reform. Yet he has drawn from Mr. Austen Chamberlain's speech conclusions similar to our own. After recalling to men's minds how fiercely he fought against the Edinburgh compromise, he uses the following words :— " That being frankly said, let us add something equally frank. The Unionist Party cannot deal with Tariff Reform merely by way of evasion and suppression. When the Irish question is out of the way and the Opposition comes to the necessity of consider- ing upon what new bases its future is to be founded, it will have to take up once for all a more decisive and logical attitude for ca against Tariff Reform. But in the meantime Tariff Reform is not the issue. Ireland is the issue. In dealing with the plain people who do not understand wavering and finesse, the words of faith are beyond price. But there is no possible good to be got by trying to drag out faint words on Tariff Reform from reluctant lips at as undesirable moment. Until the whole struggle en the Home Rules Bill is decided, and with it the fate of Ulster, there must be no division in the Unionist Party on other subjects. Afterwards, as any far-sighted politician can already see, the Unionist Party as a whole will have to face the alternative of restoring the constant advocacy of Tariff Reform in Mr. Joseph Chamberlain's broader spirit—if not in the precise terms of his doctrine—or of abandon. ing that policy altogether."
Surely we cannot be wrong if we say that these words
mean that at the next General Election Tariff Reform must be kept in abeyance and the sole issue be the Union and Ulster.
What are likely to be the consequences of this new development on the policy of the Tariff Reform Party ? The first consequence will be that all balancing electors and Free Trade Unionists who, unlike ourselves, were not willing to say that rather than sacrifice the Union they would acquiesce in a policy of Tariff Reform, will feel free at the coming election to concentrate upon the Union. They will know now that a vote on that occasion will not be used for Tariff Reform purposes. We shall be told that Tariff Reformers have not said so. We admit it. Nevertheless, if the words of Mr. Austen Chamberlain and Lord Derby are not explained to mean something different from what we and the Pall Mall Gazette have interpreted them, the assurance that votes for Unionist Tariff Reform candidates at that election will not mean votes for Tariff Reform is implicit in the declaration that the issue before the electors is to be the Union. The proof of our con- tention is easy. During the past six months the Unionist leaders in every part of the country have insisted that Mr. Asquith had no right to pass Home Rule without a fresh appeal to the country because Home Rule in the true sense, certainly such Home Rule as is contained in the present Bill, was not before the electors at the last General Election. Now clearly, after taking up this position so openly and so unreservedly, and also after declar- ing that the issue before the country at the next General Election is to be the Union and Ulster, they could not possibly introduce Tariff Reform without a further appeal to the country—could not, that is, use votes given to save Ulster to bring about the fiscal policy which, as the Pall Mall Gazette insists, is not the issue. Lord Lansdowne, Mr. Bonar Law, and Mr. Austen Chamberlain are not the men to follow the bad precedent set by Mr. Asquith and his colleagues. That this result will be a deep disappointment to many Tariff Reformers we do not doubt, but they, at any rate, will recognize that it is the force of circumstances which has operated to postpone their scheme, and not any undue yielding on the part of their leaders. With an issue so tremendous as that of civil war before the country, every lesser issue must, by the very nature of things, fall into abeyance. When we say that a Parliament elected on the Home Rule issue could not turn itself into a Tariff Reform Parliament, we do not, of course, mean to say that the hands of such a Parliament would be tied on every fiscal issue. That would be utterly unreasonable. It is clear that very shortly Parliament will have to deal with one of the most embarrassing financial situations that have ever arisen. The profligate financiers of this Cabinet will have left a terrible bill to their successors to pay, and it may very well be that, much as we regret as Free Traders to say so, there will be no way of meeting that bill except through fresh indirect taxation. In other words, though Fiscal Reform in the sense in which Tariff Reformers use the phrase—that is, a tariff intended to have certain political consequences—will be barred out, a tariff for revenue clearly will not be excluded. We merely enter this caveat lest later some partisan Radical may pretend that the legiti- mate proposals for raising revenue by indirect taxes rendered absolutely necessary by the wanton extravagance of the so-called Free Trade Party involve a breach of faith.
We have one more word to say. We trust that the Unionist, or rather in this context we should. say the Tariff Reform, leaders will consider very carefully the advisability of making their position clear to the ordinary man. What we want to avoid is that the great sacrifice they have made should not have its full effect, and that the Unionists as a party should not get the full benefit therefrom. We may be quite sure that our opponents will not help us here. Indeed, we note already with amusement that the mot d'ordre of the Liberal Party is to neglect the new development in the Unionist Party. It would clearly not suit them, and we shall be told, of course, on every platform that no man can support the Union at the next General Election without pledging himself to support Tariff Reform. In a word, every effort will still be made by Liberals to represent Tariff Reform as the true issue before the electors. If they are allowed to do this the sacrifice made by the Tariff Reformers will be, we will not say in vain, but will lose half its momentum. This plea, however, though we are certain it is one of great practical importance, had better come from almost anyone rather than from us. We shall therefore say no more about it, but commend it to the special con- sideration of the Pall Mall Gazette, which has already dealt with the matter with such prescience and good sense.
Previous page
