Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-10-03

Countries of the United Kingdom.
 London, Oct 3.-"Every other nation and all our own self-goVerning col onies have refused to accept the gos- pei of Golden, and yet although they ought, according to its dogmas, to De in the last stage of depression and de cline, they have grown during the last twenty years in wealth. population ana trade and in everything that goes 10 make up the greatness of naton. That is the keynote of Joseph Cham- berlain's manifesto which will be pub lished October in the form of preface to a shilling pamphlet entitled ssMr Chamberlain'g Proposals: What Thew Mean and What We Shall Gain by Them" by c. A. Vance, secretary to MT Chamberlain's tariff organiza- ton. Tn view of the vigor with which the war of pamphleteers has again come in vogue in English politics, the publisher has appropriately given MT Chamberlain's pronouncement deep red covers. in significant contrast Wlth the undecided blue-gray of Premier Balfour's academic treatise on the ns- cal question.
 MT Chamberlain does not mince mat ters. With characteristic aggression he carries tho war into the enemys camp. s"Those who maintain" he writes, 'in spirit of blind obscurant1- ism the absolute inspiration of an an tiduated doctrine win have much to explain His remarks are addressed to "Ien of all political opinions, since the questions now raised are not neces- sarily matters of party politics nor. indeed. is it likely that the issues will l.. 1As ,A~Ix- Iooa 7zA etr lines" He begins by saying:
 "It is difficult to believe that the re- suits of the investigation will not con vince every impartial man of the ne cessity for some reconstruction of the system which has remained stationary and unaltered for more than half century while every other policy has been modified and adapted to meet modern requirements"
 Continuing MT Chamberlain points out that the prosperity of the working classes has increased in greater pro- portion in the protected countries than in the United Kingdom and says:
 ''Free trade. if 1t had ever existed. might have secured for us all that its promoters promised; but free imports without free trade have brought us face to face with problems which never entered irto Cobden's calcula- lions. We know that the idea Of a united empire did not appeal to him, and that he regarded the colonies as an emcumbrance to be got rid of as soon as possible The little England CTS who follow his lead are not likely to be moved by any consideration aris ing out of our new found pride and faith in our distant kinsmen. But xro1I1d Gahdar hora hn had foreseen that the trades unions. whose existences he deprecated, would he successful in protecting labor in srore of ways tending to increase the rate of wages and to raise the standard of living? Would Cohden as the rep resnntatiye of the manufacturing class still have maintained that while ms nfacturer was artifcially preventcI from obtaining labor at the lowest rate he ought to rest content when tho products of foreign labor, untrammeled by any regulations and legislation. to which he has to submit -nndersell him in his own market? Cobden's scheme was at least consistent. It was free labor as well as free imports. but free imports comb bined with protected labor is neither consistent nor profitable to any of the parties concerned"
 MT Chamberlain holds that the con- soIing theory that other countries are running themselves by bounties and import duties hardly coincides with the fact that British exports have been practically stationary for twelve years while those of other countries have in creased so rapidly that "if the relative progress continues for few years longer they will have left us far be- hind"
 Dealing with the colonies desire for better commercial treatment, MT Chamberlain says:
 ''It is no answer to offer them an imperial council, which they have al ready refused. If we reject their pro- posals for reciprocity we shall be in great danger of losing our present trade with them, as well as the pros poets of its future extension. It is entirely owing to the growth of our colonial trade that the actual and heavy decline in our exports to foreign protected countries has been concealed in our general returns. Do the stern advocates Of unrestricted imports con- sider it satisfactory that we should have nothing to bargain with and con- tinue to be grateful for such crumbs as fall from the rich mans table, in the shape, at the best, of the most ia vored nation clause, which only gives us the benefits of arrangements pre- viously made with sole reference to the interests of other persons, and in re- speet whereto we had never been con- suited? Is 1t not childish to ignore the fact that by bargaining on equal terms other nations have been able to promote their special interests, and that If we also had in our hands weapons of retaliation we should probably be able to bring the world much nearer universal free trade sys- tenn than 1t has ever been since Cob den's time? Our free food friends will have to be a little more definite and more accurate They will have 10 explain why the transfer of taxa ton. say from tea to bread, would be