County Observer and Monmouthshire Central Advertiser Abergavenny and Raglan Herald Usk and Pontypool Messenger and Chepstow Argus

Conservative Demonstration at Chepstow. SIR JOSEPH LAWRENCE ON OUR FISCAL SYSTEM. AN IMPORTANT SPEECH. I Under the auspices of the Newport and Monmouth Boroughs' Conservative Association, a demonstration and picnic at Chepstow Castle was organized for Saturday last. Unfortunately, the weather was against the event, and the attendance and arrangements suffered in consequence. About 20O (including several ladies) travelled to Chepstow from Newport by special train leaving at 2.15 and ,getting to Chepstow about 3 o'clock. There the Tain was descending steadily, and the athletic sports, which it was intended to hold in the Castle, -were abandoned, the party dispersing to amuse themselves in various ways until five o'clock, when ,they assembled in the Church Boys' House for tea, during which the Newport Town Band played selections of music. Sir Joseph Lawrence, the Borough Member, who was announced to speak on the occasion, came down from London specially to attend the gather- ing, and arrived about an hour after the .excursionists. Mr T. Parry, as Chairman of the Association, presided over the meeting held after the tea, and on the platform with him were Sir Joseph Lawrence, M.P., Messrs. Fred Phillips, Clifford Phillips, W. M. Blackburn, H. Pugsley, and 3. T. Hughes (Conservative Agent). The Chairman expressed his great regret that -the weather had turned out so unfavourably for the outing, and complimented those preftent- especially the ladies—upon their pluck in coming • to Chepstow under the circumstances. But for the -weather he was enre that room would have been -crowded, for they were always delighted to have Sir Joseph Lawrence with them. (Hear, hear, and zapplause.) SIR JOSEPH LAWRENCE, M.P., who was enthusiastically received, after a few întroductory remarks, expressed his sorrow at meeting them uuder slightly depressing circumstances as regarded the weather. However, "amongst all the ladies and gentlemen he had Spoken to that afternoon, he had not seen any -feelings of inward depression nor any indications of political despondency, caused either by the 'weather or reports they may have heard or read of in the papers as to the condition of the political tparty to which they were all proud to belong. fHear, hear.) He thought that he ought to touch, .at the outset, on a local circumstance, namely a resolution which was passed quite recently by a tVery narrow majority of the Newport Town ■^Council, wherein he was asked, as the member for the Boroughs, to introduce a Bill in Parliament .having for its object the CLOSING OF PUBLIC HOUSES ON SUNDAYS. (Cries of "Shame," "Kuock it out.") Well, he <was obliged i,o reply to the courteous communica- ntiou of the Town Clerk and say that obviously, the gentlemen who proposed, seconded, and voted for "that resolution did not carry in their memories the pledges he gave to the constituency when it did .him the honour of electing him as its representative in Parliament two years ago. He thought he had left no room, on any of the occasions on which he spoke, for any doubt as to the scope and nature of his views on the licensing and Sunday-closing questions. Possibly, his views did not commend themselves either then or now to the minority of -the constituency, but judging by the result of the election, the majority of that great constituency endorsed the sentiments he then expressed. (Applause.) Consequently, he should be guilty of the greatest act of political apostacy if he were now, even in deference to the wish of so august a tbody as the Town Council, to promise to do that from which his own conscience aud feelings would for the time being revolt. (Hear, hear.) There were two or three THINGS OF PASSING IMPORTANCE -in connection with political affairs. He knew it -was not very savoury on an occasion like that to talk about the dry features of political life, and it was almost difficult, in the conditions of the -weather existing, to impart any brightness or attractiveness to one's views on a subject which, ian itself, was somewhat dry. He thought that any discussion upon a political question, which was bound up in wbat was once described as the most -dull and dismal" of all sciences-political economy—upon an occasion like that, was .calculated to make them feel the effects of the weather more than they otherwise would. ;(Laughter). But he did think that the subject that had been broached publicly by Mr Ohamberlain of late- (appla u t3e) -had an interest •^even for the least active politician, whether lady or gentleman, in these realms. It was absolutely bound up with our well-being and our happiness, domestically, as well as politically and nationally. They heard the question of THE CHEAP LOAF AND THE DEAR LOAF, "but he was very sorry to have to think that that tissue, which bad a great significance 50 or 60 years ago-really had a pressing significance-had not 'to-day the same significance in relation to the great subject that Mr Chamberlain had broached ,i(Hear, hear.) If he felt that any reform of the iariff system in this country would ultimately result in impoverishing any man, woman, or child in these realms to the extent of one farthing, he would not support that policy. (Hear, hear). If 3je believed it would really occasion the loss of one 5 penny or twopence per week in the food bill of the 'people, he would not support it. (Hear, hear). '•But if, by any re-arrangement of the tariffs, whereby some consideration could be given to our Colonial brethren, whereby we might be enabled to cultivate a closer commercial intercourse with our Colonies, aud advance the common well-being aiot only of this country, but of those Colonies—if ¡¡by any such re-arrangement we could eo adjust 4he tariff that in the nett result NO MORE MONEY SHOULD GO "iSut of the pockets of the ratepayers at the end of 'the year than now, for the same objects, he should 'welcome any such change. (Hear, hear.) He was perfectly certain we were not a people 'entirely bereft of sentiment. It was perfectly "Tight that these great economic questions should be looked at from the monetary and pocket point of view. as well as from other points of view but -after all we were still Englishmen and English women, and we were not wholly dead to con- siderations of sentimetit-(I)car, hear) and one of the strongest sentiments that could appeal to aim, and did appeal to him, and he had no doubt ^appealed to them, was the sentiment that blood as thicker than water"-(hear, hear)—and that much could be done by combinatiou with our -(killred across the seas, of benefit to them and to us, in a re-arrangement of the fiscal tariffs between the several countries. This question is a very large one, and in the few cursory remarks he was' going "to make he did not hope to touch upon more than ,the merest fnnge of it. In the consideration of this great question people had been apt to run vaway with their own pre-conceived notions. He himself used to entertain, in his early days, some ■ Conceits about this question. He thought it was vimpossible ever to touch the ark of the covenant" of .I FREE TRADB; I -lie thought it was perfectly impious for anyone to attempt to touch the question but as he got on in life, and got into actual daily contact wish the -Conditions of business aud commercial life, he ioand that this question had more than one aspect, -and he was rather sorry to find that it was being discussed by our political opponents in a way that -somewhat prejudged a subject that demands the closest investigation and the closest inquiry. (Applause.) A writer in the Daily Telegraph that day used a very pretty little homely simile. He quoted it from an old copy of Punch, in which a lady is described as telling her nurse to go into the nursery and see what baby is doing, and to "tell at it mustn't." (Laughter.) That, was pretty much what the leaders on the other side were ^oing, aud it was a wav of looking at the subject that was unworthy of a great political party or of statesmen. lie had considerable sympathy-more than a passing sympathy-with the aims and aspirations Mr Chamberlain had expressed to draw the people of the Colonies closer to us. (Hear, hen): He thought that when the subject was ca-elu ly and temperately looked at, it would be ioaud that there was I MUCH THAT COULD BE DONB both for the Colonies and for ourselves. Now. what was the first cause of this pronouncement by Mr Chamberlain ? It was not as if he woke up in the dead of the night and said-" Oh, this Free Trade system in this country is all wrong, and we ought to go in for Protection, or something of that kind." Nothing of the sort. What had happened was this: Since the Colonial Premiers met in England in 1897, and again in 19U2, there had been a strong manifestation on the part of the Colonies that the Mother Country and themselves should be drawn closer together—hardly in a political union. because that was not quite possible at the present time, but lather that they might be drawn together on the footing of closer commercial inter- course. (Hear, hear.) Canada commenced by giving us a reduction in her tariff. She formerly charged certain duties upon goods coming from all countries; she treated all countries alike, including her own Mother Country. But in 1897 she made a reduction (which had gone on until now) of something like 33 per cent. in favour of English manufactures entering Canada. How had that been treated ? Germany regards Canada, and all our Colonies, praotically as fiscal entities in themselves-as independent countries, entitled to make treaties with other countries. Con- sequently GERMANY SAID TO CANADA "If you make that concession of 33 per cont. to England, we will make you suffer for it. We will penalise you by putting our maximum tariff against you for Canadian goods entering Germany." They had, consequently, put on a tax of 50 per cent. against Canada. This has gone on for about four or five years, and the Liberal Party say Why have you not taken the matter up before ? Surely, people seemed to have short memories. We have been passing through a three years' war, the anxieties and worries of which were enough to tax the energies not only of one Mr Chamberlain, but of fifty Mr Chamberlains. (Hear, hear). Consequently the matter had lain quiet, but now it has come to the front, and in such a way that it looks as if Germany is going to penalise not only Canada, but every English colony, and England as well, by way of teaching us a lesson that our Colonies must be careful before they make any concessions in future to their own Mother Country. That position had to be dealt with, and if they were going to deal with it they had to clear the decks in many ways. They could not deal with that section of the big problem by itself, because it called up a number of other questions. Our Colonies, as they knew, had the right—which they received when we gave them self-government— to fix their own tariffs and duties. We cannot step in and say to them You must admit all our goods I into your Colonies free." We are at the present time very largely dependent upon THE COLONIES' OWN VOLUNTARY INITIATIVE I in holding out the olive branch and in giving indications of their willingness to make reductions in their tariffs as regards British goods. Only a few weeks ago a Customs Conference in South Africa agreed to make a certain reduction on British goods coming into the Cape-a reduction of 25 per cent. They must remember that we have been for a good many years conquering and civilising different parts of the world, and when we have gone to the trouble and expense of conquering those places and civilising them, we are fools enough to let other people come in and take the bone off the plate. (Hear, hear.) Voluntary offers have been made by our Colonies to us, and we are in this position. We have either to decline the offers or accept them. If we accept them then naturally they expect something in return. That is where the trouble begins. That is the trouble of which this country is going to hear a good deal during the next few years. He did not think the problem was going to be solved in a few months and it was not desirable that it should be. It was necessary that everyone should thoroughly study the question, aud understand the difficulties of the position. They were not going to be put off by people saying that Free Trade is a magnificent thing and has done wonders for us; it has been good enough for us in the past, and we are not going to change it now." People who spoke in that way did not really understand Mr Cobden's policy or philosophy. If they read Mr Cobden's writings or speeches in connection with the question they would come to the conclusion that whilst in many respects Mr Cobden was right then HE WAS NOT RIGHT TO-DAY. I There was the presumption that if Mr Cobden were alive to-day he would be in favour of some recon- sideration and review of the fiscal policy of this country. (Hear hear.) In looking back at Mr Cobden's life he noticed that in early years, when he entered Parliament in 1841, he was met by Sir Robert Peel and others with the usual non-possumus argument, with which ministers and others always meet new proposils-that the policy of this country was settled, and would have to remain. Mr Cobden was one of the first to argue that the matters of fiscal arrangements and customs policy of a country, were matters of general policy, and ought to come under review from time to time, the sarae as other questions of policy. There was nothing sacrosanct about Free Trade or Proteationist policy. It would be a very good thing if we could abolish the names and come right down to the substance. There was no reason on earth why, if a fiscal policy was right yesterday and wrong to-day, it should not be revised. That was the point at which we had arrived. He would give them ONE OR TWO FACTS I which would be of service and help in the process of enquiry, in which they were asked to engage by their leaders in Parliament, the Press, and other public people. When we are going to make a treaty with another Power we have nothing to give them in return. We have a clean slate practically, except as far as regards tea, coffee, sagar, tobacco and wine. We have practically a free list, so that when countries like Germany or America put a tax on our manufactures, we cannot say If you take off 10, 20, or 30 per cent., we will take off 10, 20. or 30 per cent." because we have nothing to take off. We are without a bargaining power. We go into the discussion with our hands tied behind our backs. That is a deplorable position for a country like England to be in. The Duke of Devonshire, who would be regarded by both parties as a fair-minded man, and who has not committed himself one way or another on this great question, said in the House of Lords "It is not a question of Free Trade, but a question of free imports and exports hampered by every barrier that the fiscal ingenuity of other countries cm devise." (Hear, heir.) Some of their friends on the other sidu said it is contrary to the soundest teachings of political economy to put. on tfixes as agaiust other countries. Adatn Smith, in his Wealth of Nations," said There may be good policy in retaliation when there is a probability that it will procure the repeal of ttie higher duties." Another DISTINGUISHED POLITICAL ECONOMIST — John Stuart Mill—said "the only mode in which a country can save itself from being a loser by the revenue duties imposed by other countries on its commodities is to impose corresponding revenue duties on theirs." They had there, probably, the opinions of two of the highest authorities -in the kingdom. When they heard, too, of what Mr Winston Churchill, among others, said of Mr Chamberlain's proposals, he (the speaker) would like to remind them of what his father (Lord Randolph Churchill) said at Blackpool in 1881. because it would be applicable if uttered to-day. He said You find foreign iron come pouring into the country, bleeding you. drowning you, swamping you; but what produced this state of tiling ? Free imports? I am not sure. I should like to i; quire. Hut I suspect free imports of the murder of our industries much in the same way as if I saw a man standing over a corpse, and plunging his knife into it, I should Huspect him as being guilty of homicide; and I should recommend a coronpr's inquest and a trial by jury." (Cheers.) He (Sir Joseph) had a horror of qti )tiiig statistics, but ternaries on a question of this kind were like empty sounds unless accompanied by one or i wo concrete facts which should carry conviction to their minds. The trade of this country, they said, was going to the bad, and we were shipping away leas manufactured goods than formerly to other countries. We are a producing country, a manufacturing country. The money we made by the manufactures —which gave the wages to our people—enabled the people to live. Our population has increased, and is increasing. Our manufactures are declining, and it was obvious that we were travelling dangerously near the bear the I I PERILOUS POINT OF NATIONAL DISASTER. In 1872 we exported (excluding coal) to various countries of Europe to the value of 100 millions sterling. In 1892 the amount was only 79 millions, showing a falling off of 21 millions in our exports- 21 per cent. decline. Now, on the other hand. in 1872 we exported to our Colonies manufactures to the value of 60 millions sterling, and in 1902 the amount was 106 millionø-an increase of 46 millions, or 78 per cent. (Hear, hear.) The mean. ing of that was that the countries we should cater for'in the future were the coming conutrips-our own kith and kin, who pay us better, and with whom we do a larger trade, and are destined to do » larger trade than with any other country. (Hear, hear, and applause.) the three greatest countries of the world next to our own-America, Germany, and Russia—with their 274 millions of white people, only took from us 50 millions' worth of exports whereas our own three Colonies, -Cinada Australia, and the Cape—with their 14 millions of white people, took 52 millions. Our own three colonies took 20 times as much of our manufactures as those foreign countries. (Cheers ) They heard of our own trade goinir back or standing still, while that of Germany and America was going ahead, and he would give them some statistics on the point. In ten years—1890-1900—our trade increased to the extent of 7 per cent., whereas Germany's increased by 33^ per cent., and that of the United States by 62^ per cent. That was to say that one of those countries had increased five times as much as our own, and the other nearly nine times. If they were content to let that go on that was their lookout. If they, as ratepayers and electors, were content to see OTHER COUNTRIES FORGING AHEAD, keeping our goods out of their markets, while we accepted theirs, there must come a day of reckoning. 0 (Hear, hear.) In 1901 we imported 15 millions worth of manufactured finished goods—many of which could be made in our own country by our own people—whereas we sent to Germany only 10 millions' worth; yet in 1397 the trade of the two countries was level, we sending to Germany about 12 millions' worth of goods, and they sending us about the same amount. Oil the other hand, in the course of two years -1900-1902-our trade with Canada and South Africa increased from 20 millions to 34: millions. (Applause.) He could go on giving similar illustrations. The tinplate industry had given employment to large numbers of hands iu South Wales, and immense quantities of tinplates used to be seot to the United States, but in the course of ten years the trade had dwindled from 7 t millions to about tenth of that amount. In the meantime tinplate works had been erected in the United States, and they were now ceasing to import, and beginning to ship goods into this and other countries. A writer in the Spectator had tried to console himself for this loss in the tinplate trade with America by pointing to the growth of exports to Russia. But let them not fill themselves with false hopes. Russia would do with the tinplate crade as she had done with the iron trade. What were Russia and other countries of a similar character doing? Russia got hold of a man named Hughes, from Monmouthshire, and the Czar allowed him to exploit a lage tract of land north of the Black Sea where he found iron in abundance. He founded large works. When RUSSIA WAS ABLE TO MAKE IRON of an exportable character in abundance she put up a barrier against us and other countries as regards iron and steel. She had a tax against England of about X6 per ton which made it impossible for us to ship iron and steel into Russia to the same extent we were at one time able to do. He could point out another case-that of china and earthen ware in the potteries. A few years aero we used to send nearly all the crockery into America. Up to ten years ago we used to send 100,000 crates of crockery ware into America annually, but that has fallen to 48,000 crates-less than one-half. More than this, America was now actually importing the clay from this country which meant that they were taking away our irreplaceable capital, and the people in the potteries were consequently losing their employment. That sort of thing was going on all the time. What was possible in one industry was possible in nearly all. At the present time the textile trades did not feel it, but it was inevitable that, sooner or later, America, growing cotton on the spot, and having the entire command of her market-and at the same time able to exclude the productions of Great Britain-would be able to ship her overplus manufacture here at a less cost than we can produce it. He did not want to draw a lurid picture of what might happen when our trade declined. They in Monmouthshire had had experience of what had happened at the works at Rhymney, Blaenavon, Tredegar, Nantyglo, and Blaina, and the same thing would happen in the North upon industries dying out. All the time our population is increasing, and the imports of the country are exceeding the exports by a greater margin of difference every year. What was going to become of us? IT WAS INEVITABLB that we must do something to foster our own industries, and to draw the people of our own Colonies into closer relationship in trade. If they gave us a preference, a reduced tariff, and we gave them the same, we and our Colonies would be pretty well able to defy the rest of the world. At the present time, we are the dumping ground of the rest of the world, and the surplus of whatever is made in Germnny aud America, can be sent here at a price which ruins English manufactures and deprives our people of imploymeut. He merely threw out these cursory remarks by way of material for thinking over. He had no doubt that their minds were filled with only one aspect of the question, and that was whether in favour of putting our tariffs upon a proper footing or not, that they must not increase the cost of food. Mr Chamberlain's idea, and that of other thinkers of the same school, was that if they paid Id or 2d or Is 6d per year on their corn -other than that received from the Coloniee--they could recoup themselves by taking the same or more taxes off other dutiable articles, such as coffee, sugar, tea, or tobacco. We need not be scared about the red- heTiug drawn across our path in the cry of the big and little loaf. That could be adjusted. If he paid 21 or 3d for a thing more than at present he c,tild save that amount by reductions on other things, and HIS POCKET WOULD BE BALANCED. I On the other hand, it would give impetus and stimulus to the products of our Colonies while they il return would take the products of this country. (Applause.) If they gave a small differential bonus to Canada, Canada would grow double a'ld treble the quantity of c )rti she did now, so that when the aggregate quantity of the products of the world was increased, obviously the price must come down. That was a law as certaiu as that the sun travelled its orbit every twenty-four hours. Now Mr Cobden, when he propounded and carried some 50 years ago his very beneficent scheme of Free Trade, was under the belief, which he expressed emphatically in language which is on record, that in five years from that time (1846) every nation in the world would become freo- traders too. But since that time what had happened? Every nation had become protectionist, and was increasing the tariffs. Five per cent. then had grown to 20, 50, and even 10;) per cent. now. The consequence was fiscal barriers had been raised up against this little country of ours which were gettiug higher and stronger every day, and WE HAD NO WEAPON I with which to combat them, because they could not bargain with a man unless they had something in their pockets to bargain with. Mr Cob-ien painted a beautiful picture of America on the one hand producing corn and beef, and other food products, and then, on the other hand, England, the home of manufacturers and skilled artisans, exchanging her manufactures for America's food products, pound for pound. Thereby both would be balanced. But what had really happened? Instead of America sending pound for pound, she sent to this country 141 millions sterling of exports, and only tojk back 18 millions, and that 18 millions was a steadily dwindling figure. At one time America used to import nearly every- thing from this country, every screw, bolt, and manufactured article. What was she doing to- day ? She was taking less and less from us, and j sending us more aud more manufactured goods, and he could assure them-and he said it with some degree of sorrow-that in their own works in Lancashire, where they had a quarter of a million's worth of plant-about f,180600 worth was of American manufacture, nimply because it was shipped here at cheaper prices than it could be bought in England. The more they competed against us the more they deprived the work people of this country of employment, and scarcity of employment meant a reduction of wage-. With a view to frightening people. Sir Henry Cambpell Bannerman, the other day, said that there were twelve millions of people in this country ON THE VERGE OF STARVATION. If that were so, surely, instead of its being an argument in favour of Free Trado, it was the strongest condemnation of the policy of Free Trade, or he (the speaker) did not know what WitS. He did not believe there were quite twelve millions on the verge of starvation in this country, but if there were, it would be the most terrible indictment they could possibly have. Even if there were only n couple of millions in such a plight it would be the bounden duty of all concerned in the well-being of y 11 the country to do all that lay in their power to provide means of employment for that number, and to allow them to get out of the Slough of Despond." (Hear, hear.) He believe i himself that the policy which had been foreshadowed—aud only fore- P-hadowed-by Mr Chamberlain, contained within it the germs of a great and beneficent policy for this country. (Applause.) He did not think there was a picture upon which a man could grow more eloquent than imagining the future of the great nationalities which had sprung from our loins and had been founded till over the globe-in Australia, in Canada, in the Cape, and not forgetting the great dependency of India, which they had brought to a state of civilization and of comparative comfort and happiness. (Applause.) When they considered all these units contributing to the formation of a great self-contained Empire, each member of which sustained the rest, constituting in the whole ONE OF THE GRANDEST AND MOST SUBLIME I spectacles of human solidarity the world had ever I ween-when he considered these things it made him inclined to say that he was prepared to have an opeu mind on this question, an i to give it all the consideration it deserved. If Mr Chamberlain could satisfy him, if he could by investigation satisfy him- self, that the policy foreshadowed was good for this country he would not only support it himself but he would invoke the support of his constituents at the proper time. (Cheers.) Mr W. M. Blackburn proposed a resolution thanking Sir Joseph Lawrence for his addres, and expressing unabated confidence in him as the representative of the Monmouth Boroughs, in the House of Commons. He said he hoped they would have the pleasure of retaining Sir Joseph as their Member for many years to come. (Applause.) Mr W. E. Baker, who seconded, said he thought the speech delivered by Sir Joseph Lawreuce would prove most edifying to the working classes. The proposition was carried by acclamation. Sir Joseph, in reply, commended the points which he had raised to the attention of the electors, expressing the hope that they would awaken in their minds some little consideration of the great problem before them, and show them that there was something in this reform of the tarriffs worth seriously thinking over and working for. conducive, as it would be, to their own benefit and the benefit of the country. In concluding, he proposed a vote of thanks to Mr Parry for presiding, and paid him a tribute of praise for the work he did in the constituency on behalf of the cause. Mr P. R. Gibbs seconded the vote of thanks, which was also cordially carried. The Chairman, in reply, observed that Sir Joseph had been busy in the House assisting to pass a measure which was calculated to bring about peace and contentment in Ireland. Cheers were heartily given for Sir Joseph 61 the hon. member left the hall.