H Dee. 9.
The growing feeling on the Continent against Britain's intention to restore a Tariff will be watched from this distance with no little interest, chiefly because it serves to show how quickly a set of cixeumstances can influence 'a state of mind, Great Britain up to 1842 had a most elaborate tariff, so elaborate that from that year until 1860 the British Par-lament was engaged in abolishing duties on no less than 938 imported articles, leaving eventually no more' than 48, is true that on a large number of those articles revenue thus produced was insignificant, but the fact is quoted to show the great scope of the British import duties in those days. The first abolition by, the Act of 1842 under Peel's leadership was signalized by the introduction of the income tax as a means of raising money lost! by the disappearance of the revenues from those imports the taxes on 503 of which were merely reduced and 390 abolished. Four years later the second of Peel's Acts reduced 112 duties and abolished a further 54, while Gladstone's Acts of 1863 and 1860 accounted for 494 abel tions, leaving only 48 taxable commodities imported. By that' time what was practically Free Trade had been reached. But to go somewhat further back in the history of Britain's tariff, it is interesting to note that when in 1786 Pitt sought to modify the rigid protectionist system which had grown up during the eighteenth century, it was by means. ofa commercial treaty with France which sought to effect large reduction in both countries, Unfortunately the outbreak of the Napoleonic Wars swept the Treaty away and. the old system remained in fore until the first important modifications were introduced urder the policy of Huskisson. Brief as the above outline must of necessity be, it is cient to suggest, when the hi tory of British trade for the last century is taken into consider tion, that, the complete change to Free Trade was not in fact adopted until British industries were independent of protection, in fact the strong point the dustrial' situation hi undergone such drastic change it seems rea~ 10 believe that reversion stem which provided the first assistance to the growth of Britain's eminence in this mal for, is not without justification.
'With France so intimately connected with the history of the tariff in Great Britain, ig pertinent to consider' the situation now created by the decision of the National Gov-clearly commits it. There is no doubt that the introduction of import duties on goods from any country exporting to Britain must have some effect upon the trade so constituted. In the case of France there appears to exist 'a loophole of which, with its usual directness, the French Government has taken advant-ge. The most favoured nation treatment which has been accorded to Britain for the past we generations was never com-wilted to paper and it is now, apparently, the French tion to Suspend hat, of course, they are perfectly entitled to do, even if it does go further than anything contemplated under the Anti-Dumping Act which is applicable equally to the imports into Great Britain from all countries. That Mr. Runciman, in the circumstances, should speak as frankly as he did was but to be expected. In the past when other countries strengthened their tariffs in a interests, the invariable reply }was that the adjustment w: purely domestic question and, no /matter how regrettable the effect, injury of other interests was not the design behind the changes. That seems to be now a good reply to the remonstrances which have already been Jand those which it is believed [will be forthcoming from those countries who appear to have looked upon Free Trade Britain jas a market exclusively for their lown development. Britain's position' in the matter is perfectly clear, The state of affairs which permitted it to depart from a highly protective system no longer exists and consequently i is just as entitled to return to it, as it is to jettison the gold [standard if it wishes, There is in neither move anything more than a perfectly proper step to protect its own interests, and if ithe British Government failed in this juncture to do whatever is Inecessary to regain the position it once held, it would be betray-the very people whose trust they hold.
That reprisals from _other countries were to be expected was clear from the outset, That certain amount of discriminatory taxation against British ex ports will be instituted in the intial stages of universal tariff adjustments is but natural: the prospect should create no dismay, for the tariff omelette will' not be made without. the breaking of a considerable num: ber of eggs. That, however, is different thing from the com mencement of tariff hostilities by resort to matters ordinarily out side the scope of such a subject. Hence Mr. Runciman's pointed remarks with regard to the manner in which Britain is being hit by the French Decree. 'There is something Indicrous in the sug. gestion that Britain may not make what, after all on precedent quoted, is' but a domestic decision without the consent of oth countries. It may also be tragic for those who s0 contend, for the greater the discrimination against the Home Country, the easier will it be. to secure that. imperial preference the prospect! lof which under tariff reform has been a predominating factor in its ultimate acceptance. 'The. struggle to throw off an economic and financial helotry which has: simply grown upon Great Britain'
naturally be a painful one, painful to Britons, probably, much as to those who seemed to think they had a hold in perpetunity upon the British market, it seems quite clear that the operation has to be faced with all its concomitant complications, with the confidence gained from {the knowledge that imperial preference may ultimately prove a lasting cure to the ills with which the Empire is afflicted.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.