The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1903-06-17
CHAMBERLAIN IN HOT WATER.
MAY BE FORCED OUT OF CAB
met.
People of England Do Not Take Kindly
to Duty On Grain.

People of England Do Not Take Kindly
to Duty On Grain.
london, June a.--The approach of
the first serious Parliamentary brush
IN the free-trade protection fight I'LL
cd every seat in the House of Commons
this afternoon. Before facing the
sitnation which must largely place
them at the mercy Of the Liberal and
irish votes, the members of the Gov
ernmens attended an important
Cabinet meeting.
Eenry Chaplin, Conservative, form
er president Of the board OF agrlcul-
ture, and the malcontent Unionists
were actively engaged In raLy1ng 6ne
supporters Of Mr.. Chaplin's amend
msnt iao the budget BILL which de-
clares that the removal OF the tax on
ora;n g involves needless and inlurl-
ons disturbance of srade and a serious
loss OF revenue, without subssan Salai
relief for the consumer
Before the debate opened Premier
Ralfour ascertained from John bed
mond. the Irish leader, that the
Ns+ionai;st Mo members Of Parliament
would support the Governments as
aoa;nst MI. Chaplin. This. with the
Liberals support pracslcaily lnsalea sl
the Government from possipie oeieae
at the hands of It's own supporters.
The curious situation ereateo Lhe
keenest interest. The debate, py
ruling of the Speaker, was connneo
to the grain tax.
Mr.. Chaplin warmly attacked the
chancellor of the exchequer, TO whose
inaptitude, he said, they owed their
nrasant remarkable position. La re-
healing the grain duty. Mr.. Chaplin
saiid. Richie had made an ire
tr;evaI1ie mistake. For moment ne
anneared to have prevailed over Mr.
Cha arherlain. but his triumph would
be siort-lived. Mr.. Chaplin said the
ministers had thrown away a weapon
which would have helped them to carry
ont the new fiscal policy to which Mr.
RaIfour and Mr.. Chamberlain were
committed.
Sir Michael Hicks-Beach said ne was
opposed to Mr.. Chaplin's amendment,
although he sympathized with the
tlatter,s objection to the repeal OF the
grain dirty: but he believed the alter
native policy to be a greater evil.
Having to choose between two evils ne
would choose the lesser and would
support the budget bill.
Referring to the suggested prefer.
entiaI tssriff, the former chancellor OF
1he excheaure wished to know whether
Mr.. Chamberlain's opinion was that
Of the united Cabinet. The repeat OF
the grain duty appeared to the speaker
t, be a direct bar to the adoption OF
reference principles. He therefore
concluded that the opinion OF Sne
Cabinet, as a whole, was the same
with regard to these principles as
when he was member OF 1t.
Mr.. Ritchie, who made general re-
NV. read carefully prepared state
ment The Government, he said,
thought there should be an inquiry
into the matter Of preferential tariffs,
f,ut he would be surprised If the IN.
ouiry showed any practical means OF
carving ont q policy of preferential
duties. He avowed himself 30 be an
ont and ont free trader and added that
with his present knowledge he could
not be party 10 q policy Wnlcn ne
believed would be detrlmeasai 20 sne
interests Of both Great Britain ana ner
colonies, and he believed that Gne In.
uuiry, from which he wousd not
shrink. would confirm his present
views. Although he was precluded oy
The Speakers ruling from discussing
nreferentiaI tariffs. he might say IN
behaif Of himself and his colleagues
what he and they thought. The mem
hers of Tie Government who had spoken
on the subject had spoken for them
selves and not for the Government.
I sAn that hse Thus far been suggested
was thal; the matter should De dis
cussed and inquired into.
MT. Jsitchie said he thought, In
eonnno, with all his colleagues, that
snch an inquiry was eminently oeslr,
ahse frem every point of view, and
concluded with saving that the gram
duty was properly imposed at q Slme
of great national emergency, ano mas
been properly removed when the pros
pects were brighser. He denied thaS
there had been any Inconsistency, and
while he regretted that the Govern.
ment had wounded she feelings OF
some Of its supporters, he believed It's
action would be endorsed by the
country.
Mr. Ritchies' outspoken repudiation
of Mr.. Chamberiains proposals caused
an immense sensation in the lobbles OF
the House. No such situation had
arisen in the Parliamentary world
since the memorable split on the home
rule bill, and the keenest interest was
manifested in regard to the possible
Developments.