The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-10-03

80 per cent; of France, 30 per cent; of
Italy. 81 per cent; OF Germany, rs per
cent; Of Canada, 10 per cent; Of Bel
GUM, 10 per cent; Of New Zealand, 0
per cent; of Australia, per cent; and
Of the South African Customs Union,
per cent.
We have little doubt that Mr.. BALFoUR
could have secured the approval OF his
views, not only by a majority of the pres
ent House of Commons, but also by a ma
jority at the ballot box, had he declared
distinctly in this pamphlet that under
no circumstances would he favor levy
ing duties on the raw materials of British
manufactures, or on food products i'm
ported for the sustenance of the British
people, but that he did propose, by the
imposition of duties, to prevent foreign
manufactures from competing with SINH
lar commodities of British origin in the
British market itself.
Had the Prime Minister gone on to
argue that such defensive measures
were particularly expedient in the case
of countries like Germany and France,
from which British manufactures we're
virtually barred, his opinions would
probably have commended themselves to
reasonable economists, like the Duke Of
DEvoNsHIRE, who regard free trade as a
means of national prosperity rather than
as an end in itself; and we can scarcely
believe that even so inflexible a free
trader az Mr.. RITCHIE would have deemed
it needful to emphasize his dissent by
resignation from the Cabinet.
Unfortunately for the maintenance Of
the unity Of the Cabinet, the full scope Of
the Premier's actual predictions and
ultimate aims was not disclosed in Eco
nomic Notes. but, for the understand
ing Of his programme, the pamphlet
bearing that title had to be supplemented
with the letter in which Mr. CHAMBER
LAIN's resignation was accepted, and
which has been given to the world. In
that letter Mr. BALFoUR avowed that he
considered Mr. CHAMBERLAIN's plan Of
a tariff framed for the purpose of giving
a preference to the Colonies to be right
in principle, though, for the moment,
premature; from which avowal the in
ference is unavoidable that Mr.. BALFoUR
would deem it his duty to apply the prin-
ciple so soon as, in his opinion, the time
should be ripe for application.
1t is obvious that just and consistent
adoption of the principle would involve,
not only tax on food products coming
from foreign countries, but also tax
on at least one of the most important
raw materials that enter into British
manufactures. Manifestly, the Austria
Ian Commonwealth would have as good
a right to demand preference for her
wool as would the Dominion Of Canada
for her grain. 1t is most improbable
that the British manufacturer of woollen
goods would consent to pay duty upon
raw wool, for such payment would render
it still more difficult for him to compete
with his German competitor in neutral
markets. 1t is, moreover as certain as
any prospective event eau be that the
non-agriculturists, about two-thirds of
the British population, will refuse to pay
an extra penny, or even halfpenny, for a
loaf Of bread in order to benefit the Cana
dian grain growers.
Mr.. BALFoUR having publicly admitted
that he personally is a convert to Mr..
CHAMBERLAIN plan of preferential
tariff, it was to be expected that his own
scheme of retaliatory tariff, ostensibly
designed for the sole purpose of securing
reciprocity, would be looked upon with
distr,lst as step in the'wrong direction.