New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-12-27

ann. onIy when overburdened taxpayers are
crying aloud for relief from direct taxation. Is
probably the basis Of the true union "hicn Is
TO restore harmony and to effect complete
reconciliation after Mr.. Chamberiain's proposals
have been modified
The text Of the Limehouse speech VIII Do
searched IN vain for any intimations respecting
these changes. It plain. direct appeal to
workingmen. who were suffering from unre-
stricted imports Of cheaper goods and the unre-
stricted importation Of the people who made
them The competition OF those cheaper goods
had forced down prices, and workers were COM
PEELED either to take lower wages or to lose their
employment. Less labor for the British work.
rnan-that was the final result OF Free Trade;
and of what advantage could cheapness be when
earnings were reduced or cut on aItogetherF
There was no hint Of any intention on the part
of Mr.. Chamberlain to relinquish the 10 per
cent tariff on imported manufactures whlch ne
had proposed as remedy for foreign dumping
Nor there any suggestion that ne hao
ceased to regard preference as the foundation OF
imperial policy for he laid great stress on the
guu1moning of a new conference and prompt
consideration of Canadian and other offers; nor
was there any sign that he had abandoned MS
idea of Ievying duty Of Is. on foodstuIIs' 1or
he asked which was better for the workingInan
to have a loaf which was a farthlng oearer
with plenty of money In his pocket, or to have
loaf at Cd. or Sd. and money to buy 1t with
Mr.. Chamberlain's proposals apparently are not
to be taken in for repairs, but are TO De re-
labelled and presented from new point OF
view. He has been discussing the fiscal question
as an imperial issue and as policy of home de-
fence for manufacturers and worhngmen. He
cannot offer any reasonable objection If the
Chancellor of the Exchequer proves that more
money is needed for imperial defence and ma
tional education. and that a tariff for revenue
is Indispensable for that is what is needed II
there is to be new fiscal policy. with prefer
ences for colonies willing TO bid for them, reel
procity conventions for countries prepared to
negotiate for them. and retaliation for nations
which dump surplus products into the United
Kingdom
Naturally Free Traders make merry over the
idea that Protection can be anything essentially
different, If yelled under the disguise of a rev.
enue tariff, and are doubtful whether Mr.. Bal
four, with all his subtIety and fexibility. can
explain such "a monstrosity" an all-around
tariff for the relief of direct taxpayers as COM
patible with Free Trade. Yet, the Prime Min
lister will not need to split hairs over the obvious
proposition that the area Of indirect taxation
ought to be widened for revenue purposes when
direct taxation has been increased so enormously
as to exhaust the largest and best class OF tax
payers-those with moderate incomes. He may
easily succeed In proving that the bulk or the
new duties will fall upon foreigners. for the ex-
perience of British manufacturers and mer-
chants is available to the effect that export
prices for America and Germany are much
lower than market prices and have to be so IN
order to carry the goods over the tariffs OF
those countries. He viii have help from old
fashioned Tories, who have been estranged by
Mr. Chamberlain's proposals, for Sir Michael
Hicks Beach is already defending retaliation as
contrary to Protection and tending to replace
artificial conditions of trade by natural condi-
lions. precisely as the sugar convention must
ultimately tend to increase crops and lower
places Possibly controversarsts like Mr..
Richie Sir John Gorst and Lord George Hami-
ton can be reconcied, If they can avoid con-
Tossing that they are Protectionists as Ameri-
cans and Germans are, and disguise themselves
as reforners for revenue only. Certainly Mr..
Chamberlain ought not TO find It difficult to con-
vince the Prime Minister that the registration
duty on foodstufs may properly be considered
a tax for revenue only, since Sir Robert Peel
and Golden left it standing when Free Trade
was proclaimed. and since Sir Michael Hicks
Beach restored it and protested against its sub
sequent removal. The proposed basis for union
NAV be broader than even the most sangulne
supporters Of the government now venture to
hope for With low revenue tariff Of this
kind the United Kingdom would be placed in a
better position all around for home defence and
Imperial federation, and equitable and greatly
needed REIMBURSEMENT of direct and indirect tax
alton would be brought about I. n. F.