The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1895-02-22
THE GOVERNMENT UPHELD
The House OF Commons Sustains
1t by a Vote of 304 to 1909,
THE MOTION TO ADJOURN.
Sir Henry James Motion to Ad-
Journ to Consider the India Cot
ton Duties Fails OF Passage
Speeches on the the
Indian Currency.
BY Southern AssociatoI pyo,s.

LoNDoN, February 2l.-ln the
House of Commons this afternoon
Sir Henry James introduced his
motion to adjourn the House for the
purpose OF calling attention to the
Indian cotton duties. in support
OF the motion he said there had
always been feeling i'll Lancashire
that an import duty in Indin wns II
load weight to the trade. He then
proceeded to review the history of
Indian tariffs since nn early period
of the present century.
Prior TO tho Introduction of the
motion, Sir Edward Grey, replyi ing
to MIR. Inboucherc, snid the Gov.
ernment had recently sounded the
governments of tho powers md The
United States in regard to the
bring about peace between China
and Japan ana had received replies
which were generally favorable.
The communication could not be
published, however, owing to the
existing situation.
Sir Henry James, continuing. sniI
that since 1852, when the Indian i'm.
port duties were abolished, her mar
kcts had remained open. Under the
Tree markets lndias trade had gone
on lacrensing, driving Lancashire
out and into the markets of japanese
ana China. The new duty which
had been levied upon cotton would
further embnrrass Lancashire. The
Government, lie snid, had been
Influenced by tie agitation of
Angio-lndinn officials, not so
much IN favor of India ns
against Lancashire. 1t was npitated
against II trade which had lost more
through the fall in price of the
rupee than any other interest. These
officials hnd misled tho Secretary of
state for India, who, no doubt, had
tie best Intentions, but hud not
consulted the practical merchants
and manufacturers. The result was
TINT the home trade had been ignor
Ell. The duties imposed III India
hnd dIslocated the Lancashire trade.
Ihe counternctlng excise duty wllich
had been imposed in India had
proved to he really no protection to
British producers, while it had Gre
ated intense dissatisfaction in ludm.
MIR. Henry III. Fowler, Secretary
of State for india, said that before
Sir Henry James charged him with
having sacrificed the interests of
England TO Indin he ought to hive
obtained before proof OF the correct
ness OF anything he had mentioned
III his speech. The ceusuro of
India III regard to tho excise
duty wns equally severe with the
censuTe of Lnncnshire. Both had
accused him of sacrificing their ia
terests, India's to Lnncashire and
the latters 10 India. Both could
not be accurate. He bad done what
he thought was Justice to both. \
serious financial difficulty existed
IN India and n large deficit must
be fuced. Therefore, when the i'm
port duty WIS proposed, III fairness
to both countries. 1t was met with
an oif-settlng excise duty.
MIR. Goschen, Chancellor of the
ENcheduer III the last Salisbury
Cabinet, advised the House to think
twice what effect the decision about
to be made would have in India.
He felt. he aaid, that there had not
been sufficient co operation between
India and the home government.
The debate ought TO be followed by
sn earnest mud persistaut effort to
bring Lancashire and Indian opin
ions closer. In the difference were
only one of tariffs, compromise
certainly sonld be obtained.
Sir VIM, Harcourt, Chancellor oil
the ENchequer, said the Govern
ment would not hesitate for IA M
ment to support the decision re
CURED by the best interests of In.
dln, regardless of the effect upon
the Libera! party. He could only
regret that the House had been
forced in this matter to consider n
motion rendering necessary what
must assume the character of "A party
vote. The Government was ready
to meet the issue fairly and square.
iy and without delay. If defeated
they would feel that there was no
cause for which they could fall more
worthily. 1t would be u pity, how
ever, If the vote should leave on the
minds of the people of india the
lasting impression that they could
not hope!for Justice from England.
The motion was defeated by vote
OF 304 to l0J.
In the Chicago Republican City
L llnnUnttlnn 1ot nf