Every day brings further proof that Mr. Chamberlain's pro- jects
are not going to be accepted offhand and at their face value. In the Morning Post of Monday, for example, there is an excellent letter on the new fiscal policy from the Duke of Manchester, who points out how very much we have to' lose and how little to gain from preferential duties. His letter, the arguments of which are supported by plenty of statistics, is clear and sensible. The same issue of the paper contains a report of a speech by Major Seely, the Conservative Member for the Isle of Wight, made at Belvoir Castle last Saturday to an audience of Primrose Leaguers, in which the stock arguments of the Protectionists are met with admirable clearness and brevity. Very happy was his answer to Lord Lansdowne's plea for a revolver with which to threaten foreign Powers. "Nearly all great Englishmen who had lived in disturbed 'countries had come to the conclusion that it was wiser to do without the revolver, because of the great danger that you might do more harm to yourself and your friends than to your enemies." We could not expect to obtain from the Colonies under a preferential system more than about £2,250,000 a year of trade. Was it worth while for this to run the risks of a great tariff war P That the plan, even if it did not give us trade, would give us closer union with the Colonies he refused to admit. It would bring trouble instead of union. There was a danger that every poor family would curse the Colonies owing to the increase in the price of bread. When in times of depression a cry arose for freeing the food of the people from taxation, consider the ill-feeling which would arise in the Colonies over the change in our policy. He objected to a bond of exclusive dealing and Imperial boycott.
Previous page
