The sun., 1904-08-28

| being favored guests In British ports, VIII
| Increase their trade with Britain. The
preference will furnish definite motive
| to the colonies for remaining within the
| British Empire or, at least, deterrent
! from leaving it, Is there any sign that
they wish to leave 1t? Touching this ques-
tion Prof. Smart opines that all the SELF
governing colonies except Canada may
| be left out OF the account as having shown'
thus far, no thought OF seeding from the
empire. What Canada may do Is pro-
nounced impossible to tell, for the reason
that although the Government OF to-day
| Is thoroughly loyal, that OF tomorrow may
| favor independence, or reciprocity treaty
| with the United States. Doubtless, now
ever, 1t may be taken for granted that the
| mother country's concession OF prefer
ence to her own children and the corre-
| spondent handicapping OF the foreigner
by her, would, OF themselves. be acts which
| by Canada, as well as by the other colonles'
would be welcomed as at least signs that
| Britain was willing to make sacrifices to
hold the empire together.
The fundamental inquiry still remains
| Would such a concession Of preference
actually make in the end for union4 Be-
| fore considering this question, the author
| Cdlls W IIlluu Wudl lTtt llddo To-
1T is the extension to the international
| sphere OF the freedom we have at home
| the free buying of what others as freely
| sell at natural prices'-the prices deter
! mined by free rivalry in service. Sixty
years ago a free people exercised their
f! freedom OF choice and adopted 1t. The
same freedom of choice this mother country
| extended to her self-governing colonies. "
Tho onpoaIal fraaI0rp nsoH hy the
colonies to adopt protection. not only against
outsiders, but against the mother country
| herself. Now, under preferential tariffs,
| both parties. the mother country and the
colonies, are invited to relinquish their
liberty of choice. 1t is proposed that each
| of them shall submit to restriction of its
| freedom, and consent to be tied by the others
| hands In other words, the members OF the
empire are TO be joined in mechanical unity.
to renounce their natural relations with the
rest of the world and to seek compensation
within their own family circle. Will this
proceeding, as a matter of fact, secure unity
among the members Of the household?
| 1t is unquestionably true as Prof. Smart
reminds U.S. that family may enjoy the
shelter Of one roof and yet be very far from
being a united family. Some sources OF
possible if not probable, discord are noted.
In the first place. it may be taken for granted
that Britain would not step down from the
position which has belonged to her as the
mother country to become only one Of
league Of equal States. The imperial family
would still have to have head, and that
head would have to be Great Britain The
children, however. have long maintained
| houses of their own; under the circum-
stances, are they likely to take kindly and
submit patiently to the resumption Of
parental government by Britain? Then
again, Britain, as the head of the family,
would have continually pressed on her the
question: Are the individual children Of the
| empire getting even-handed treatment?
! Is not one treated better than another?
| Prof Smart suggests that in Chamberlains
| proposal the mother country is requested
| to favor her children in way that seems
at the first glance unfair One colony
| (Canada) has its chief interest in wheat,
| and the wheat is to come in free, as against
| the imposition OF a two shilling duty on
| foreign wheat. Another colony (Austraia)
| has it's chief interest in wool, but there is to
| be no duty on foreign wool. Then again,
| although the duty on meat would benefit
| New Zealand in more than quarter OF
| her exports, it would not benefit Australia
| in anything like the same proportion. A
more fundamental objection to preferen-
tial tariff is propounded. reduction OF
duties in favor of certain Canadian products
| is not. as 1t is loosely styled a preference to
| Canada" it is a preference to a certain
group of industries in Canada and whatever
advantage may be gained goes to the in
dividuals in that group. Thus preference
on grain would benefit the Northwest,
including Manitoba and the Terrtories-one-
eighth only of the whole population-but
would 10 nothing for the other provinces.
A prefe renee on meat would be welcomed
by Onta TO- but would be useless to British
Columbit and the Maritime Provinces.
1t might prove difficult to convince the
nom -iovored provinces and the individuals
of non-favored groups that their loyalty
ought to be intensified by preferences Of the
| kinds named.
Thus far we have left out OF the account
| the relation OF the colonies to each other.
! To each colony, however. every other is
| az a matter OF fact a competitor, as much
as foreign countries are; and experience
| has shown that in drawing up its tariff
| each colony will attempt to get the greatest
| advantage from and give the least advan-
| tage to every other part of the federated
empire Yet. If truly united empire is
| to be created and maintained, all such
diverging interests must be reconciled
| with the interests of the mother country
| and with those of the free trade members
which she has in her keeping. In Prof.
Smarts judgment the task is beyond
| human power.
Still another question is often overlooked,
to wit, that OF permanence. II the bond
| Of preferential tariffs be once established,
It cannot be broken but by the consent
| OF at least the majority Of the States COM
| posing the empire. This means that
Britain's fiscal liberties would be gone,
and that the fiscal liberties OF the colonies
would also be gone. What, then" asks
our author. IF a strong protectionist party
in the colonies should begin preaching
that their industries are being sacrificed
| to English manufacturers, and should de-
mand drastic revision of the preference
clauses? What, again, il, after a tenn
porary victory Of protection, and the estab-
| lishment OF preferential tariffs, an out
and-out free trade Government should