, 1888-06-27
THE SUGAR CON-
FERENCE.

tocol, with the draft Convention, has been
signed. It would perhaps even now be
pre- mature to ASSUME that all dItl3uitleS
have been overcome. There are numer-
Gus Preserves" intended to leave perfect
freedom of action to the different Govern
ments, but there is reason to belleve tnaC,
so far as the Continental Powers are con
cerned, they will be prepared to instruct
their Delegates to ratify the Convention
when they meet again in August. 1t was
at one time thought possible that the
French Delegate would withdraw from the
Conference, not OH account OF any change or
opinion on the part of his Government with
respect to the Bounty question, bnt Ill re-
Observation-Disclosures OF - i've shll-
ling dtBtyienlERfrnvlI wines. Fortunately,
Mr.. GOSefHH9I b~erSilNded to modify MS
proposal iauid the1 Erench Government,
accepti1ggf1VqarlO b0QnceSSion, made no
change in its attitude upon the Bounty
Question.
If the Convention is rejected it is un-
likely that the rejection will be due to amy
backing out on the part OF th3 Comtlnen-
ral Powers. The danger, if there is any,
lies in Parliamentary opposition ut home.
There is q clause in the Convention which
stipulates that Bounty fed sugars are not
to enter the English market on equal
terms with unfavOured sugars. II
Times says that this question was first
raised in December by the Spanish Dele
gates; but however true that may be. 1T
was not thoroughly discovered until last
month, and the British Government then
found that the success Of the negotiations
depended upon their acceptance of this
condition, and it was accepted according
". Upon it, two remarks may b. made.
The first. tina the Immediate practical
effect will be small; the second that the
principal of exclusion is just. All the
great sugMr29SRdaQ0iUg countries, with the
exceptioI df1tdIeIIUpiitel States, which
sends buti5ftle sugg2fFif tA4; England are par
may be. the cas9in yydefr%s to come, the i'm
mediate eff'ctgot prohibition will be insig.
~nifcant. Nor capllit be denied that the
prohibition is in itself fair. The object OF
successive Governments has been to Sc
cure fair play, and no favor, alike to beet
and cane grower. 1t has always been
maintained that the imposition OF a cOun-
Prevailing duty is in no way opposed to the
principle of Free Trade, and it will be eS-
sentiaIly unfair to allow Bounty ted sugar
to enter the English market on equal
terms with the sugar from other countries
where Bounties are no longer paid. The
object and aim of the Conference would be
defeated if this were permitted, so the
Continental Governments were we'll with
in their rights in insisting upon the exclu-
sion Of such sugars.
None the less it is certain that the lea
ders of the Opposition will try to make
political capital out Of this exclusion of
certain sugars, and their Opposition may
be more formidable than at first sight ap.
pears. Already, Sir Wilfrid Lawson and
other kind, unselfsh statesmen, who most
readily would sacrifice EhglandS colonies
OF the altar of their political prejudices,
have begun the crusade i'll the House.
We have often given reasons in these CO.
lumns for the belief that Protection is ma
king rapid Roadway in England. 1t may
be remembered not a couple of years ago,
when there seemed but little likelihood OF
bouptiss being abolished, we expressed
the, bBlief 'tbht9yC ppdbIfc6 Pinion was rapidly
veefiIg r8aAd toethefS side of those, until
then 8 benpa naiYaAt small body who
were dets1HpJingeq to set rid OF this bounty
system, 1; necessary by the threat of coun-
tervailing du9feSs, aid the recent action of
great Trade Associations shows that we
correctly grasped the situation. But the
Free Traders have still a majority in the
country and the Liberal Unionists are as