Hide Articles List

11 articles on this Page




[No title]





YERBURGH FOR CHESTER. I FORMAL ADOPTION. I ROUSING SPEECH. j E!5CAL QUESTION AND HOME RULE. Mr. Robert. Yerburgh, MP., was formally a>depted as the Unionist candidate for Chester at' a meeting of the Unionist .Registration Associa- tion held at Newgate-street Assembly Rooms on, Thursday evening. The hoc. member had a most j enthusiastic reception, and he delivered an Un-: portant speech, in which he plainly stated his; views on the great Fiscal question and drew atten- j tion to the Home Rule peril. Mr. W. H. Churton presided, and a representative attendance included Dr. Butt, Messrs. F. E. Roberts, C. Cooper, R. T. B. Atcherley, W. C. Heeley, J. Bains tow, T. L. Edwards, F. B. Mason, W. E. Phillips, J. Knight, J. Clarke, G. S. Martyn, George Bennett, C.; Wiseman, J. W. Richmond, Warren Trevor, J. .Minns, G. H. Brown, Wm. Conway, R. W. Jones, W. Johnson, George Jones, R. Thomas, James Thomas, Edwin Hignett, G. F. Ward, W. Mulligan, F. Chesworth, A..Knox, James Erans, ,F. -Moody, W. Wray, J. W. Hincks, J. Barber, H. Johnson, J. F. L. Dickson, George Barnes, J. Undrwood, A. Jackson, J. Tasker, A. Worrali, T. W. Hodgson, H. W. Lovs-tt, etc. The Chairman pointed out the close proximity of the General Election, and said they had veay little .time, but they must carxy their candidate at the head of the poll as usixeL (Cheers.) He moved that the Chester Unionist Registration Association be dissolved. Mr. Atcherley seconded, and it was carried. The Chairman next proposed the adoption ce Mr. Yerburgh as candidate -at the forthcoming election. He said Mr. Yerburgh had repreeenteN, the-city for the last twenty years, and had given the greatest possible satlsifaction to every member of the constituency. (Cheens«S Apart from politics, he did not believe that their -strongest opponents would say tiaev had .anything in the way of personal feeling against Mr. Yerburgh. (Hear, hear.) It was a wry good thing to hase a popular candidate and one whom they knew, a man witum they could trust, and who was an Englishman. (Cheers.) Their opponents some- what relied on divisions m the Unionist party; there might be divisions itt some constituencies, j but he did not think there would life any division in Chester. (Cheers.) He did not like to eay much in. Mr. Yerburgh's presence that would make him blush, although Mr. Yerburgh had perhaps arrived at an age when blushes were scarce, but he did not think that anybody would say that Mr. Yerburgh ht<d not represented every party in the city. Anybody who had a grievance and had brought it before Vlr. Yerburgh had always found him gentlemanly cnzk courteous. (Cheers. ) Mr. E. W. itowe seconded, and the proposition was enthusiastically carried. MT. Yer buret, whose rising Wtil the signal for an outburst of cheers, said :—I appreciate meet deeply the osmplirnentyou have just paid me in-expressing your renewed confidence in me as your candidate for the coreing election. It is now some twenty years since I first bad too honour of appearing before the constituency of Chester as political candidate. During that time, as Mr. Churton says, nearer of us has gtown much younger, but perhaps & little older. I am reminded of the words I once beard, that a waman is &s old as she looks, but a man is as old ac he feels. (Laughtert, I can assure you I ieel as young to-day as I did when I first came before you in 1885. and I can promiae you I will give the Radical party as good a run far their money this time as they ever had during the nsany times I have been j before this constituency. t(Loud cheers.) I have j been told in different parts of the city that we are going to have a stifi fight. I heard it to-day from a gentleman in a very high position indeed in the Radical party. Well. it does not do co be over- confident, but I am bound to say that so far as I can observe the political situation here I can see no reason for this forecast. (Hear, hear.) Why are we to have on this occasion such a particularly stiff fight ? I can see only one reason, and it has been put before us by Mr. Churton. It is that the idea prevails in the Radical party that we are divided, that there is some question upon which our ranks are not united, and that therefore j they will be able to pierce our ranks, and effect our I overthrow. I know this, and I speak on high authority, that if there had not been the idea in j the Radical mind that there was this division among us there would have been no contest in this con- stituency. (Hear, hear.) I have been told-I am again quoting Radical authority, for I am a careful I man and always got good au thority- (laughter)- I that there would not have been a contest, so certain I were the Radicals that victory was within the grasp ¡ of the Unionist party, unless they thought the Unionist party was hopelessly divided. Hopelessly divided The great Unionist party, which has j done so much for the country and held office for twenty years, with a small break during that un- happy time for the country from 1892 to 1895--tilis ¡ Unionist party, which held office all those years was hopelessly divided. It was divided in Chester I as elsewhere because they had found some question upon they could not agree Are we divided ? (Cries of "No, no,") We !lr divided, §q we år told, upon the I_. FISCAL QUESTION. ) I have had friends coming to me and shaking their heads and saying We like you. You have been a good candidate and not a bad Member, but you know you do not go quite as far as we should like you to go upon the Fiscal question. Your views are not advanced enough for us, and. we are not quite sure you will get all the support you should get at the coming election." I have always had one answer. I have said these old Unionists may grumble a little, and may sulk in their tents, but when the trumpet sounds for battle they will all come out again as they have done before. (Loud cheers). They will say to themselves-as my old friend told me he had said to the Radical candidate the other day- I may not quite see eye to eye with the Member upon this particular question, but the whole of the Unionist policy is not summed up in one question. (Cheers). There are numberless other points which divide us from the Radical party. (Cheers). We and our Member see eye to eye on these, and why on one point out of ten points sever ourselves from him ?" (Cheers). A dear old friend of mine was asked by a member of the Radical party how could he, as a Protectionist. support Mr. Yerburgh. He replied "Yes, I am a Protectionist, and I can agree with Mr Yerburgh on nine points out of ten, and disagree with you on everything." (Laughter and cheers.) What supreme folly for any I man to sacrifice nine points for one! I believe no member of the Unionist party would do such a supremely ridiculous act. (Cheers.) Let us get a little further. I have been told I have net defined my position upon what is known as the Fiscal question. 1 thought I had defined it verv Dlainlv indeed quite two years ago at the large meeting at the Music Hall. I then said, as I say now, I was a follower of Mr. Balfour. (Loud cheers.) As far as my memory carries me, I said that I followed his policy as laid down at Sheffield, and that I was not a Protectionist. I still adhere to my position. What is Mr. Balfour's policy? Mr. Balfour, the leader of our party, the man in whom assembly l after assembly of representative Conservative Associations have declared their unabated confidence, has told us in no uncertain tone that he has a distinctive policy. There are those who say his policy is not distinctive. I say it is a clear and distinct policy. Mr. Balfour's policy is that you are not to regard Cobdenism as something so sacred that you are never to in any way attempt to question it. He t-ays Free Trade is the thing for this country, and that he himself is a Free Trader. But, he says perfectly plainly that there are occasions when it is necessary for the responsible rulers of this country to consider whether they ought not to take steps to protect some particular industry which may be threatened, not by fair means but by foul means, by foreign competitors. Do you follow me? (Cries of Yes," "yes.") There is this difference between Mr. Balfour's position and the Protec- tionist position. Mr. Balfour declares against any policy the object of which is to put up home prices at the expense of the consumers. He wants fairplay all round, and says you may find your industries attached by foreign competitors working under great advantages in such a way that your industries may be destroyed. I can conceive of such a thing. I canconceive it is perfectly possible that a country with the means and the requisite capacity and that supported by the opinion of its own subjects, might take steps in assisting its trade which might result in the crippling of your own trade by practical methods of warfare. You can conduct war oom-I mercially quite as much as with soldiers and sailors. You cAn destroy a country far more effectively by crippling its industries than by destroying its army a-nd navy. (Hear. hear.) You all know that France irecovered in a most marvellous way from her war with Germany. France had her soil occupied, Jher army destroyed, her capital taken, and had to pay a huge indemnity extracted by Germany. But in a very short time she recovered. Why ? Because abe still had her industries, which were not attacked. If you wish to destroy a country, do not content yourselves with destroying her army and: navy or seeking a portion of her territory, kill her industries and you will kill the country. If you thought your industries were being attacked in this way you would be perfectly right, and it is your duty to consider whether you could, paying due regard to other industries, take any steps to secure yourselves against foreign competition. The real genesis of the whole question is your own interests. This is a policy of oommonsense. You have not to go into the subject blindfold and say, Our industries are suffering; we must put on duties against the foreigner in order to get him to lower hia tariffs in our favour." You have to ask yourselves how any- policy you propose to undertake is going to affect yourselves. And if the country does undertake to entrust Mr. Balfour with the power to negotiate in order to secure the lowering of foreign tariffs you have to see that that power is exercised in a proper way. May I illustrate my point? I observed about two years ago in the report of the Cheshire Dairy Fam-ers Association a statement that the CHESHIRE CHEESE INDUSTRY I had been very bad; its great znarket-the Lanca- shire market—was depressed. The Cheshire cheese industry largely depends, so my informant tells me, upon the market given to it by the cotton operatives in Lancashire. I want you to follow this, because it- exactly illustrates my point. When cotton was depressed the cheese industry in Cheshire was depressed. I think I am not wrong when I say that in Chester you to some extent depend upon the prosperity of the | farming industry oJ: Cn.esá.il"c f'Yoo.") From that. fiict results this position—that Chester itself depeiidi, jo some extort for its prosperity upon the- pre cperity the cotton industry in Lam iashire. iGire-'j. of Yes. ") That, must be eo. What -does the ootton industry in Lancashire say?! I know i.a 11 capture welL for I live within four miles of a large town with a population of c OliO 130,009 people which is entirely de pen den t, upon the, cotton industry. They caff that th eir rrarket- for their goods de- pends upon chc ap p.ioduction. Their chidf markets a?e in 1,? idia, wh?r? t?Kif go<x? c? th? cheapest possibh > kinds are bought by the poorest na',Ive8 ird ;?.i?ir depends upon the Fr Ea.st—Chi na, Japan,, and other countries. They say, Incre: ise the prw> oi our prodi»etia<a, and we shall < )ur market. That, is the danger we fear, -and the refcre ivel,utee-t against your taking any steps Df any rt ",hid, will iscrea^ the cost of produ( itkm roo our cotton milk." If you increase th e cost 031 iivitg to ti\o, opera-trvses you increase the cosfc of production to the mill- owncr. You are goini: to ei:danger his icmrket, and in doing thati you are .gomg to c-z;.da.T.,g-,er -.t-be prosperity of the Cbuehirc farmer and the I peritv of Chester*. -hear.) A I ifou see how 00 mplncs^rd tcis quertioa is..awi how careful you must be IJ handling ii^how- wou must i'hring to bear- upon -your the best -busa,-ikcs firif-I m the .ccnntr.y. ?n? is no nn?te".?' hasty decieionit. you must think it all out" and Then you say vo: are going h' negotiate with other coantT?sM) E?et? (certain tariffs loweredancl to have the power ofi you xnuffi.j think how,i £ will affect ^sour,own industries. In-; Chester you will say to i«>urseiv*>s "If any dut.y! ie put on which is going to ic-.cwpse the <,04- dfl prOOuction ,o the Lancashire miUowner we ,¡;.baW be irjuringvi-urselves in Chester" To shew 3aow oomp iicitefci r.ihe. whole question ;1' I may say that tcxtiarv I had the opportunity ef conversing with a -gezstlernac who was engaged in joinery, such as the producing- of window tashes. I understood frombimud there will fee ^e»ikmen here wh o will tell -you whether I drew na; inference cor- r,ectiv-that tne chief eoinfeiitior! with our own joiners and «3-hers does not come from Norway and Sweden," hut from our own; colony of Canadl.. II am sold thæt Conada can new > export to this country window frames, and t-hings of that kirwf tlhettpor than IVorway and Sudden. So cur chief ctompetfeor M; Canada. But iiiax is not- all am also told tiaat the price ef the raw matcrial- fmilber-la.s gwns up to an extraordit ary degree. awd ttm reason ..alleged for I3ss was that ai, the | time -of i' he ScKt,-b Afr-,czn 'kvar were rot. i shscps eot-ugh to bring the timber over. The priot- df -this raw material, tirmber. • remains as higi1 as -ever. (I want to krnsw what you are goiig to .(¡o in a.- like that, Yúur own pro- ducers are being, cut out in their own m.arkets by the colonial producers, and the price Of iho ra-w material is so high that they cannot, produce in this aDuntr7 at :,&, do this «ttnrtrj at ;ia retrofit. What. ase .yeu to do there? Does it not shew you how difficult the whole C[»estion is? It is so invoWed, ro compli- j eated; .!1Øu -eannot decide it by getting 00 a. plat- form aftd saying our industries aie 'Jyiiig'-s.n-d we I must hare protection. It seems to in,- t, only way you can -deal with this question in what. I call a. thoroughly businesslike And practical manner is to take that. question by ii-telf and see how other •questions;bear upon it. TCow. 'J ven- tured with ■great diffidence some- tame ,-ag» to suggest that the proper method of eonsidcKng the whole of this qua-tion was to appoint a ROYAL COMMISSION. I not of politicians, but of the best busiscs? you have got in the country to oensidei- the .qlWf.- tion in all ;-tf, (Hear, hear.) The Iquestj<m is .?v enDliW(iU, ?o C?mpl1oad, that yc.? j cannot decide it by the option cf any r.e or I two men, however eminent they aw. Politicians are the last people in the world to decide questions. Business and politics must be d.vorced. (Hear, hear.) Haw yeur business questions discussed by business men, and it seems to me that the proper way to dcF) w' 'tl'- question is to appo.nt a Roya? Ccmm ssien ?C4 | business men to examine and mpcri jpor. the roal business condition cf the country. ;Chee:s.l We have a Tariff Commission sitt.rig- at the p-e- sent t me. I dare say the people who ar" Tariff Reformers will accept its conclusions, but. the ordinary public would net; they weald say this is the decision of a body which is aiieady t.&s«ed in its judgment- But the report of thiit Tariff Commission might be very useful jnaeea as affordl ng iii a "Orial for the oon side ration t: a Royal Commission. I had the opportunity some years ago of appointing, in conjunction with the Central Chamber Il of Agriculture, a. com- mittee of experienced people to cc-n^dei the whole question of the storage ef grain in this country in the event of war with foreign coyn- fcries. (Hear, hear.) We had a great deal of very valuable ev'denee before us. Experts in the trade were called, we went- into the whole question with great care, we conducted an inquiry at great length, and came to the conclusion, after hearing all the witnesses, that the preper thing to do was to secure the appointment of a Royal Commission to go into the wl1<e ques- ton. I am delighted to say 8, Royal (i,remission has been appointed, and they have thoroughly thrashed cut the whole question of our position with regard to our food supplies- and ()lr raw materials for our indugtrkcf4 in case of war. Why not follow the same oourse new? (Hear, her.r.) Are we jn such a desparate hu.-ry? Why not have this Royal Commisson cf expert and thoroughly practical business men to {'I(Jm: derthe whole question of our business condition. H-re I may say I tnorousrhlv arree wita. MR. BALFOÚU'Š-PRÓPOSAL I I that you should have, if the Unionist- party is itturiied to power, a Colon:al conference—^cheers) t [•—to ooneider the whojjfe <juesti<jn of "the trade I relat*.o" bet w&n the Hot her Country end the] Colonies. India would, also be represented at this conference. I think it is a thoroughly wise step to take. We have been iold that- the Colonies are prepared1 to do certain things for us in return for certain things we are to. do for them. Now I have said once that I am personally opposed to any suggestion that we should put duties upon any raw material we employ in manufacturing .industries, or anything people us? in that way. In fact, for my own naft, I should prefer to see duties taken off every article of food. (Cheers.) I do not know- whether we shall ever arrive at that happy rt-ate, but locking at the condition of a great mass of peonl e in this country it would be a very good thing indeed if we could adopt a financial policy whicn would relieve food of every kind from contributing to the Exchequer. I have itold you I am against these various proposals which have been put for- ward w:th regard to the taxation of focd. We are told in turn for this we are to receive certain things from the Colonies. They will admit our manufactures on very favourable terms, and we shall make a very good bargain by the proposal the Colonies have made. I have never seen any proposal in black and white. I have seen no- thing definite. I want to know what the Colonies are prepared to offer us. It may be worth our while to acoept their proposal, and it may not be worth our while. WTiat we ought to do, and everyone ought to do, is to weloome the cajjing of this Colonial conference to thresh cut, this vfxed question as to the position between our- selves end the Colonies. (Applause.) Let them put their cards on the table as we have put our cards on the table. Let the best men from the Colonies and the best men from this country meet round a Round Table and qjgeuss the whole position, and let us know what they have to offer, and let it be put to the decision of the people to close the bargain or otherwise. It is I A WISE AND SENSIBLE POLICY. and a policy which wHI settle tj? qu?hc.Q once ancl for al and for aJL and' we shaJl know wh&t the Colonies are prepared to offer us and whether it i worth our whiio to accept, the. offer. I must lay down this proposition that after all it would be a very foolish thing indeed to adopt for the benefit- of the Colonies any policy whic.h would materiaUy injur-e the Mother-country. (Hear, hear.) You must first of all consider the. Mother-country, be- cause s he is the source of life. to the Cblcnies. The Colonies cannot hold an independent position without the Mather-oountry behind their.. We find defenoo for them in war time av- d we are the best market in the world for them in times of peace. We. ought- always to consider—and I ki ow the feeling of the Colonie.s-that they would, be the last people iill, the world to ask the Mother- country to undertake any policy to injure her. They are far too generous, and they hanc. no desire to injure- you in any way. They would- welcome an open conference with this country to discuss the question, from a business- point of view. Have I made the, position quite clear ? C'Yes.) I am- entirely in favour of a system of negotiation with foreign countries to secure tjrt-ter terms for our own manufactures and of giving the Government powers to make. their negotiation successful, and you can only do that by having the power of acting against another country, but in the exercise of such powers you must see you are not using them in any way that. is going to mime yourselves. It would be the mott supreme folly of aU for the benefit of a. particular industry to injure others, which may be. much more im- portant. Principles of this kind, in my view, in no way conflict with the principles of Free Trade. (Cheers.) Let. us examine for one moment what the position of the- Radical party is en this ques- tion. They say that they are Free Traders, and that any proposal in the direction that- Mr. Bal- four has gone—so far as I can gather from what I have read of their views in the- papers—is an attack upon Free. Trade. I say jt. re not an at- tack upon Free Trade. I say, on the contrarv, it is in order to secure Frea Trade. As far as I can gather, and I trust it will be made clear at the coming election, the Radical party are not prepared to come to the assistance of any industry, no matter how it might be attacked, by fair means or foul. (Applause.) Ycu may go to the Radical party and point out. that, inoustry after industry is being killed by unfair corn pet it ion, as the sugar industry in the West In dice was being billed by the bounty system of foreign countries, and they will not lift their little finger. They say "Free Trade- is a thing you have. got to preserve, and we will not interfere in any way, but let things take their natural course." No I matter how things suffer and are attacked by foreign competition and foreign cour/ries decide I TO KILL US COMMERCIALLY. I the Radical' party will not lift. their little finger I to help you. You see how different their posi- tion is from ours. They say our position is not a clear one. I say the two positions are absolutely distinct. One says you may bill industries hy attacking them, and the other says in- dustries may die, but great is Free Trade, and you will injure Free Trade by taking measures to help them by putting on Tariff duties. As regards the Cbkmial conference, they will not agree to ask a Colonial conference to discuss this question of any arrangement with the Colonies and India. Here is a. distinct issue to join with them on the Fiscal question. I do not want to go before my conetituents under false pretences. (Cheers.) I am a little bit previous; I am speaking only as a "Coming events cast their shadows before ibexn," and- Although w.E, a little previous I sii&Il not lake my words back (Laughtor.) J stilireInaiD a,s I said two years ago, a supporter of Mr. -Ba.fo-.ir and jtr supporter -of Mr. Balfour's poky. (Ctieers.) The policy is a policy of negotiation w-ith otrKT countries to soe whe itb,,r you car.not secure better terms for your own industries, and "ie sumniot/.iig of .a Colonial .Conference tc- oansukir .M t;H;ei0n of 011 r relations with regard to business- rna.t.er» 'I wit.b our .Ootonics. (Qbeers.) I appeal to any ble. sober-minded man whether he fan pelt." sibly support, with any view of the welfare of the oouistiy, the, they havo taken up «c £ > this Fiscal questkn..1 titnk it is <J<.o.r. and.Irdo not doubt it, th.t ive, rc-Jv fhe whole.party behind: us o(i\(¡. this point (Cheer J) Tftsre are. various other matters 1 can tocch upon, -some very.big matters indeed. A que«<oon which j suppose to certain catKsit I may touch upon, because it is bound to be in the* forcfupnt at th ccxcing ejection, and. which the-ot extraordinary speech made by the present Prime 32-inirter has brocight .at bound to tho forefront ef politico, is vihe- questJK'.n of Home Rule- I observe it. is ;_vg stated by our oppcocnte tli.Ft, v&, are en- jieaa.-ouring tf drag HOME -RULE AS ARED-HBP.JlNG acBf-ss the. track to divert .the attention of the I court:y fwm tiie groat, battle between .Free Traoe and ProtectioEi I think they ha-vc misnamed the -batiU because the battle is between so-called Free Trace and ..Mr. Balfour** policy of jr-egotiatieu The.charge, that we aic dragging- the tv5-hernng acrofs to divert aiter-tion i-g absolute-iy inocriect. never forced this question to the I front It was not. brought to the front by the Unionist, part^ but by Minister b inwclf in ins speech at Starling. (Eea.r, hear.) Wo til-ought onie Rul"(-, was darmaxt- "Dead' -w,ow- or less buried for the time being. Its resm-flection .is the act of the present Piime Minister. Hlotr, hear.) At Sterling, -he said he -Avaa Ir. favour c-f giving the Insheffective manage- juiciit <tf the:r oym affairs, and- be advised them to take in instalments anything they may grt which will ^etxist then? in obtaining the larger measures- ei -their demands. He declared himself .a Home RraJer, j?^d the-zdoclarsatioin wa.R so effective that be drov.c Lord jRosebery to titKé up a r, t ti" L-ti (ie of opposition jit. I happened to read out the speeches made by Mr. Redmond and other necnle bekfte.Sir Hy ..Gi-rnpbeij-Baiirw-nnan delivered his speech sk Stirling. I fincl that Mr. Redmond, speaking-fim the question, of Home. Pu-ie tome time befcx-e. -hwi sajd that the Liberal party W'E)l'e not to be .dilffrved to -shelve Home Rule, and as r. matter of (fact, tihe Irish party would t.g()()(j I were in power .that they I should ^Icisd with- f/iome Rule, or tlwt .c 11.4, 01.1 them iø he&-vy ucoocnt if they did apt deal with it That ,was> a bout a. mosrth before Sir Hecry Ca?r.pbeU'tBanu?'rmM. spo? a.t Stirh?tg. L&-d R<t&pbety i«KKidered jth-at the remar it t,'L?t R,o--cbe R)td€' ?a? to:bp' ? pt of t? &pt;v& policy <?' the present Govmcnt. Expiana??n-; h?ve! been madie, and the-ps^dtion is not supposed to be! the- same it ivasj but we have it on record tha-t was Lord Rosefccrv's view. How did -tire "Freeman'v J ournal" represent Sir Henry C?mp-' beU-Banneraoanis wor<&;•? Writing not very }<M? ? afterwards, !t ?t?ted tt;a?. f?ery vccte given to Sir i Hy. C«unpbc>li-Sannerma;i waiS a vote fo. Home- Rule. That clearly shewed Home Rula in the. view of the Irish party, was a policy that could be obtained by .easting their votes for Sir Hy. t Campbell-Banaemaan. When, we, have that ro- sponsible infortruaion frc1. such a leader as Mr. Redmond, and froju the "Freeman's Journal," the guest organ cd ilit- Nationalists, we may con- ) clude that the policy of Home Rule wiil be, brought to the fore-groundi wader the osgis cf the piescnt Government- It -is a. Jiving, active thing, and a question w? s?o. peJfly ju??ified. ia put ting bcfor.& the ?iecx? durmg th<: p:<?( nt (!?c- i tion. (Cheers.) I do not wagi. to dilate to you what Homo Rule would mean, to- this country i'1d to Ireland. It would uxian run to Ireland You knew the effect it wouid- liave. It wound drive li--vc- It w-auo d di- all the capital out of Ireland, and ,Irivc --v.,av tho wealthy people, and ruir. tbe. banks and1 other in- etitutions of that kind. The- possibilities are—it has becn put bofore—chat ciic, cf the results- of driving the. capital out cl the country will bo to sejad Irishmen in large numbers to England. Thene are other evils wo know to this country. The great evil is the establishment of an INDEPENDENT IRELAND, because we know from the Nationalist kad- ra that what they want is an independent Ireland— an Ireland independent of this country. Every- body knows well who has studied the- question that an independent Ireland- would IrA an the breaking up of the integrity of the United King- dom. (Hear, hear). It would mean a permanent enemy planted within sixty miles of th.9 country, and in came of foreign complications it would mean you would have to keep some portion of your Fleet in Irish waters and- probably some portion of your Army on Irish soil in order to take care that no complications ensued cn that- quar- ter. It would mean increased expenditure to cur country, and in the end great loss in men and in money to Ireland herself. I believe mcvt firmly not only in the interests of the Empire, but of our own country and of Ireland, that He mo Rule, in the sense in which it is interpreted by the Irish leaders would be one of the greatest disasters that could overtake that country. Ul-o can dismiss Home Rule, only remembering it is a question we must bring before the elector* We must take care wherever we go to tell our fellow-citizens what we believe is meant by the I present Liberal leader and by the Irish party I wjth regard to Home Rule, arkfpeint out to them the evils which Home Rule would entail both upon Ireland and ourselves. {Cheers.) There are various other matters which I will not go into at length. What J want to impress upon I you is that we- must not go into this fight with our tails down, we rnupt go into the fight with our ta'ls up. (Cheers.):' Think what a SPLENDID •ECORD Our Government h&s go?. ?Eea?, hear.) I doubt whether any Government has ever had a record like ours. Think of tb? number of years we have be!d o&ce. Think of the way we have discharged our trust. I have ktWis and pamphkts here shewing what we have done, and they would take a very long time to read through. But I want I you to acquaint yourselves with all these facts, I because until you have done that you are not aware what the Government has done for you. There is one leaflet which shews what we have r done for the great wage-earning classe;* of this country. It is a quotation from & speech made by a gentleman whose acquaintance I have the honour of possess?—Mr. Richajd Bell the member for Derby, a man cf great a?ihty, great c--mmoneenw. and r--t moderaticH. Speaking of the trades unions he aays that they must press on to fulfil the vajion? very worthy objects they eet before tbemielvcs" They have "to protect fhe I lives of the workers, to secure better conditions of work, and to look after their educat:on. We]. the Unionist Government have taken in hand all toooo things. (Cheers.) They have looked after the lives of the workers. They have secured com- pensation in ease of accident, they have, secured them better education and berter housing; in fact, in all departments of life the workers of this country have received consideration at t' e hands of the Unionist Government When people tell you that we want a Gotermr-ent to h-ok after the wage-earning elass-s, Tell the in wo have had a Government that has done it, and shew them how the Government has discharged its obligations. (Cheers.) Now, with to Questions of expenditure, they say the lr.te Government has been an extravagant Govern- ] ment, and that we want a Government that will spend less. Ask them how they are going to spend 1-ss. Your expemlture has ipc,-Ox-ed nncn your Navy and your Army and your Civil S-cl- vice. Upon your Army it has increased because, among othr things, you are giving your pr ldiers larg- pay. Nobody wants to decrpa? the pay of tb,? wlàier-(hear, h?ar?—if a.n?.h?ns', you would rather inc're-a his pay. Bcca?M year Empire has increased you also have a rather larger Army. If you have. an En:p'f»e and a territory to protect ycu must hive an Army that: is canable of discharging the duty of prctecti'i'r it Take. again, your Navy, upon whioh depends the maintenance of the Empire find vour NATIONAL SAFETY. (Cneers.) You must hai- a larger Na.vy, and every competent authority has sa-d we must have a Navy large enough to meet any po-slble or probable combination of Foreign Powers again t us. That is accepted by everybody. Ycu cannot, decrease to any extent the expenditure upon your Navy. The Government, shewing, I t'nk, very great wisdom in taking advantage of the present situaton of our understanding with France and our alliance with Japan, ha* the opportunity was at hand to d'si-cntinue so large a building programme as they have carricd out in tho past. As a result we shall have a saving on our Navy Estimates during the ocming year under th, pro posals of the Government. The present Gcv-.m- ment will have to carry them out You may take it as an established fact that you will never be able to reduce the expenditure upcn your Navy to any great extent, because ;t i" upon your Navy that the safety of the country depends. (Hear, hear.) As to the Civil Service you will find the expenditure has gone up in all Branches, the largest increase having been upon education. Nobody proposes to decrease expenditure upon education. In these times cf severe industrial | competition, when you have so many young and active competitors in foreign cour.t1'ies strug¡;tng keenly for the supremacy of the markets of the world, and when you know that yen" suco?pa de- pends upon the educated intelligence of ycur people, is it to be supposed for a moment that this country would adopt tho SUICIDAL POLICY I of decreasing its expenditure upon education, which is really the means of furnishing its people with the weapons to enable them to mairtairt the supremacy of the country in its commercial posi- tion. (Hear, hear.) Your expenditure upon edu- cation is irather likely to increase than decrease. I do not say upcn the rates, because that would be a horrible prospect for the ratepayer. How are you going to decrea.se your expenditure? I am bound to say I cannot see In what direction this Radical Government is going to decrease the expenditure of the country btyend, it may be, effecting some slight reduction upon tho Navy Estimates as outlined by the late Govern- ment. You will say that we are all looking anxiously forward to a reduction of tax at on. The income tax is very high indeed, and, so far as I can observe, it is a tax which presses more hardly than any other tax upcn one of the- mo t deserving classes of the community. The people who feel it most aTe thow in the mce. «tHkult position of aJI-peopfu. who, with small inocmei, j have to keep up appearances and educate families. So far as I oan see there does not ap- pear to be any hope of relief from this burden to any appreciable extent. Then we shall have to face the problem of how to faee the necessary revenue to carry on the business of the country. I will not pronounce any opinion upcn that, but it is quite clear that in the future it is a question the country will have to odnsid-r and decide. For my part I never have seen any objection to raising revenue upon manufactured articles fer the purposes of the business of the country. It is one thing to put on a duty for protective pur- poses; it is entirely another" thing to put on a duty for purposes cf revenue (Hear, hear.) If you put xu> daty f" jpyrposes 01 protect on you are inducing people to mwjt money -n tne par- ticular branches oi j«dustry which you are pro- te&lw. and 'they have a right to 6ay to you, "You cannot t,"e, o-c off because 1* vested -our j c-ney on the understanding I that tfto.se .iut.Crc put <:1\ in order to pro- sect us in our 9, But if you put an a duty for the purpoaefc of re venue- you can always take ii off because it is merely a revenue duty, I and nobody invents men -y on the strength of a revenue duty. J do not know what decision Parliament may oon-e to; but I never saw axy ob- I! jection to raising money ia soae way such as that =.jf the money 13 requir-d. j In conclusion, 1 want to emphasise that WE HAVE A SPLENDID CASE. I say there is no necessity for us to go into this fightialf-heartediy. We can go as a united party. We can go with a splendid record behind u- dud we have to face a tioverniaent, which individually strong, collecti vely represents so mariy various opinions that it cannot positively be a Government that can endure for a great space of time. (Cheer^. It may go back in great force and ic n-av not. I thought it would at one tuue, but 1 am hyund to say that since the Prune Minister declared for Home Rule I have changed my opinion. I think bw declaration in favour of Home Rule will make a large difference in the majoUty the Liberal party will hope to get, and I doubt whether they will had themselves indepen- dent-of the support of the Irish party. (Cheers.) If they go back with such numbera that the Irish party by voting against them on any occasion can overthrow them, then the term of office will not be a very long one. I hope we shall go into this fight resolved to conquer. What you do in this borough will have a large effect all through the country. It will help Eddtsbury and it will help ottier boroughs and counties, s,4 gentlemen, make up your minds to go into this light determined to win, and return your member by at least one thousand. (Cheers.) Remember that meetings will not do it speaking will not do it; talking in the market place, laying new bats upon tLe member will not do it; what has got to do it ie sheer hard work. Do not be over confident; fight fur every vote:1.8 if you depended on that vote for victory; and I am confident you will give your candidate the best majority he has ever had. (Loud cheers.) AWKWARD FOR MR MOD. Tb ChaIrman mcved a. hearty vote o ih&nka to iA<n' nwm be? and prosp<?oti\c c&nthds?s for the excellent, observations ho had madte to *hem. As lie understood t, Mr. Yerburgh's poLey upon the Fj9al question was power to retaliate and agreement to a Colonial conference, the one in order to protect, riir industries and the other ta confer with the Colonies to see whother a work- ing arrangernent could -be arrived at, to see whether this great country c-f ours and the Colonies might bo united and form one grand Empire. In eonnection with that Fiscal quee- feon there Wall a rather curious matter. It hap- pened that Mr. Mend was 00no of the directors of Brunner, Mend and Company, and he (the .chaw-man) Lad the borK?ur of jig a shareholder ia the ocmpany- (laughter} awl a very s-aceps- jut company it was. He want., J to let them into a bttle secret. The company hod done a very large bu*.ui«K» some time ago with America, a very satisfactory business indt^'d It had brought them very considerable profits, but America by the MdELinley tariff bad set up euoh a wall of of B run iter, c. r, c*- Co., ■ far as America was concerned. They had in -to establish wcrfcs in America to *-wry Oil bus ness there- "Hero," said Mr. Ohurteii, "is this gen- tleman, who passes as a very and Free- Trader, who ooes not seem to acknowledge that try dam- age hú been to cur majiufac- turee, £ nd he is a of the very fino Who have been compelled to establish works in A nv r 1,1 tb-'n-ite.ves in order cwn great w-crk-s had been prope- '> protected in this ocuntry they would r-ot have been established in America; and the men employed ill manufac- turing in Amerka would have been our own workmen m thtI octr:i1,ry. (Ciieers T He was rather «urieus to hear when Mr. M-or.d' got to knew abenfc that what, -his explanation would be, beo&ui«p it is a, little, mate-r which ought to go home. The Goveiniijent that had come into power had taken the siirre old >!«-«■ of destruction, robbing th" Church sa.me Government Ol" 3n the p^t. Though he wanted to give them a fair trial he had not the slightest confidence in thenv They t. è t.be Government were going to dV-rl-ablish the Welsh Church, and he appeared to them to think about it. Robbing the churches- and dividing the coun- try was the sort of thing the Government would go on with, and it would end in collapse as it had always done. Finally, M.». t'h urton reminded them thai it was only by haid work that they would return Mr. Yerburgh at the head of tbe poll. (Cheers.") Mr. Frank E. Rote. ii- sfcended- He c-ailed to mind the fact, that tv ei-ty year- ago h^ had had honour of proposing Mr, Yerburgh for the first ;t.i.me. That was a very forlorn hope, and Mr. Yerburgh orne. to fight, a battle no one thought- could won-F-V tl-,e foundations for the future, and or, nest occasion m' vvc- Stw';s1uJ..h The mcfon, which was cal-iil"(t with enthusiasm, terminated the meting.


Family Notices