If he would assure us that, instead of asking for a loaded revolver with which to enter upon a fiscal war with the whole universe, the Foreign Secretary will devote his earnest attention to remedying the defects I have pointed out, he would secure much more practical benefit to British trade than by any illusory schemes of fiscal retaliation. The question of British trade and commerce is not a Party question, for surely Members on both sides and their constituents are equally interested in upholding and extending the prosperity of the trade and commerce of the country. I beg to move. MR. RIGG (Westmoreland, Appleby) formally seconded the Amendment. Amendment proposed at the end of the Question to add the words “And we humbly represent to Your Majesty that it is essential for the safeguarding and promotion of the commercial and political interests of the British Empire that adequate steps should be taken to maintain and extend our commercial treaty rights, and that the Consular Service should be reorganised and strengthened on lines calculated to make it more effective for the promotion of the trade of the British Empire.'"-(Mr. Joseph Walton.) liberately adhered to our old system of drawing a clear line of demarcation between the province of the State and the province of the individual trader. We have deliberately adopted an attitude of laissez faire, or at least, of benevolent neutrality towards the efforts of British commercial enterprise. We altogether decline to use State credit for the purpose of financing or aiding industrial or commercial undertakings abroad; and we do not use our tariff for the purpose of imparting an artificial stimulus to our export trade. Foreign countries adopt the very opposite policy. They not only act as the foster-mothers of their own trade, but they might almost be said to be traders on their own account. By a great variety of expedients-the protection of the home market, bounties on exports, drawbacks, preferential railway rates, subsidies to shipping, and guaranteed loans for railway enterprise abroadthey do everything in their power to maintain their hold on existing markets, and to capture new ones; and they test the success of that policy, not by the burden of taxation which it throws upon their own subjects, but by the resultant increase of their export trade. It is well that we should Question proposed, "That those words understand one another. The right hon. be there added." *EARL PERCY: The hon. Member has dwelt with great insistence-and with a pessimism which is not frequently reflected in the speeches of his Party when dealing with our fiscal policy-on the importance of British trade, especially in China. We all recognise the great importance of our trade interests in China. It is almost a common-place. The loss of the Chinese market would be a severe blow to our present trade; the loss of the prospective markets of China would be a still more serious blow to our trade of the future. We all admit the premises of the hon. Gentleman, but when upon those premises he proceeds to build an argument implying that it is the duty of the British Government to maintain, and increase British trade, I must demur from his proposition. So long as we adhere to cur present fiscal policy, that is not only not the duty of the British Government, but it is beyond our power. Hitherto we have de Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham recently impressed upon an audience the necessity of learning to think Imperially. I think it is equally important that we should learn to think clearly. I should very much like to know what is the policy of the hon. Gentleman opposite. Does he desire that we should change our policy, and adopt that of foreign countries in these matters? If the Party opposite desire that, let them say so, and we shall be prepared to discuss it. *MR. JOSEPH WALTON: Change your policy of "“drift.” *EARL PERCY: If, however, they are perfectly satisfied with improved technical education, with more Charlottenburg schools, with a remodelled and extended Consular Service, then all I say is—that measures of this kind, however desirable, form but an insignificant part of the Then the hon. Member passed from Madagascar to Persia, and criticised our commercial treaty. To begin with I should like to make two corrections. The hon. Member seemed to think that the mode in which the signatures were appended to the treaty constituted a departure from precedent. It did nothing of the kind. The document was signed in the French text by the English plenipotentiaries, and in the Persian text by the Persian plenipotentiaries. Then he said we had gratuitously prevented our Colonies from giving to the mother country preferential treatment. We did nothing of the kind. On the contrary, we took care to obtain a special assurance from the Persian Government that nothing in the treaty would prevent the Colonies from giving preferential treatment to the mother country. machinery on which our foreign competitors rely to take away our trade, and as complete remedies they would not be effective. Unless we are prepared to go very much further, what is the use of indulging in all this hollow rhetoric about the British Government not affording the same amount of support to their nationals that is afforded by foreign Governments to theirs? I entirely deny that the decline of British trade, such as it is, is to be traced to the causes to which the hon. Member refers. As I have said, so long as our present fiscal policy is adhered to, it is not the duty of the British Government to maintain and increase our commerce; that is the duty of British traders. The duty of the Government is to keep clear the avenues and to increase, if possible, the opportunities for commerce, and to see that the open door is really open, and not merely ajar. *MR. JOSEPH WALTON: But you do not do it. *EARL PERCY: It is by that test, and that test alone, that our policy must be judged. The hon. Member will forgive *MR. JOSEPH WALTON: That assurance is not in the treaty. *EARL PERCY: No, and there is nothing in the treaty which binds the Persian Government regarding the preferences given by the colonies to the mother country. *MR. JOSEPH WALTON: Oh yes, there is. of me if I do not follow him into such ancient history as that of our commercial treaty with Madagascar. That has been often discussed in this House, and I think everybody is perfectly aware of the circumstances of the case. When the *EARL PERCY: At all events, the French first went to Madagascar and Persian Government takes a different established a Protectorate, we did obtain view from the hon. Gentleman. Then a definite assurance that they would he says that in that treaty we are continue to respect the treaty rights worse off than we were under the old which we had obtained from the native treaty. Yes, and I am very glad Government. Subsequently, when they converted the protectorate into annexation, they held that by the act of annexation they had dispensed themselves from the necessity of acting any longer upon assurance. We did not hold that view at the time, and we not hold it now; we protested at the time, and we have continued to protest. I do not know that there is anything more to be said about it except that it is an experience by which we should do well to profit when we are engaged in negotiations of the same kind, so that, knowing the view the French Government take of the effect of annexation, we may avoid similar misund erstanding in the future. he has drawn attention to the fact; careful to safeguard the interests of Great happy to say that, at the present moment Britain. No one can say that that was the prospects of British railway enterprise satisfactory to us, but the blame attaches in China are better than they have been to both Governments-Liberal as well as for a long time past. In August last Conservative. I think the hon. Member year an understanding was arrived at might have given the present Govern- with Prince Ching under which the ment the credit of having been the Pekin Syndicate's line north of the first Government who have taken the Yellow River is to have a Chinese trouble to put our commercial rights Government guarantee, and the promise in Persia beyond doubt and secure for us obtained by the British and China not only the same rights as the Russian Corporation to construct a railway Government obtained, but also a definite from Pukon opposite Nanking to join the security that the rate of duties cannot be Luhan line at Sinyang has been conagain raised on British commerce with firmed. We have also obtained a promise out our consent. I am happy to inform from the Chinese Government that whenthe hon. Member that although, on the ever the time arrives when they wish to face of it, that that treaty did seem likely have a railway built from the Yangtze to to have an injurious effect on British Szechuan and they are not able to find trade, it has not had that effect so far as the funds themselves they will apply to we have been able to ascertain. I have British capital. The hon. Member has got out the figures of the imports during alluded to the question of railway the first quarters of 1902-3 and 1903-4. I material and he seems to think that give them in quantities and not in value. there are certain clauses in the contracts The Customs returns show that in the made by foreign companies with the period March to June, 1903-4, the import Chinese Government compelling them to of Russian tea increased by 398 maunds, order all their railway material from a while the import of tea from the British particular source, which would constitute Empire increased by 92,855 maunds. a violation of the most-favoured-nation The increase in cotton tissues from treatment. As far as we are aware, Russia was 140,288 maunds whilst the increase for the British Empire was 268,738 maunds. So far as we are able to ascertain the facts the Treaty has not had any really serious effect in diminish ing British exports to Persia. The hon. Member went on to discuss the position in China. He referred to our trade there, and he seemed to think that it had steadily and even rapidly diminished. I do not want to weary the House by quoting any more statistics, but I assure the House that that is not so, but British trade, on the contrary, is now steadily rising. There was a period just after the Boxer trouble when there was a certain diminution, but since then it has more than recovered its former level. The hon. Member dealt with the question of railway concessions. If we consider merely the mileage obtained by British as compared with foreign concessionaires, our record compares very favourably with theirs. It is quite true that there has been a regrettable delay in materialising those concessions, and so far as that is due to the action of the Chinese Government, we have lost no opportunity of urging them to accelerate the proceedings, and I am there is no clause of such a character one time supposed to be. Therefore no steps have been taken either by the Chinese Government or our own Government to establish a Customs House or Consuls there. As regards ports of call on the West River eight ports have been opened for passenger traffic. Rules for inland navigation have been issued by Sir Robert Hart, and provisional regulations for carrying out the stipulations of the Treaty have been approved by the Chinese Foreign Office. There was no provision in the Treaty for the creation of a conservancy at Canton, but a survey of the harbour has been carried out by a Chinese revenue steamer with a view to the removal of obstructions. At Whangpo a Board was to be formed. It has not, however, been constituted yet owing to the delay of the Chinese Government in appointing their representative. have made frequent representations on the subject; and it will become necessary if the Chinese Government do not appoint their representative to proceed with the constitution of the Board without him. I do not know whether the hon. Member expects me this afternoon to go into a comparison of the advantages between the British treaty and the treaties made with the United to ours. We States and Japan. I dispute entirely that the United States treaty is superior On the contrary, the United States treaty omits provisions of the utmost importance to British trade. As regards their two treaty ports, it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to appoint and send out Consuls to both Mukden and Antung. The hon. Member asked me a general question with reference to the situation in Manchuria as bearing on the treaty rights of this country. I do not want to discuss that subject in detail for very obvious reasons, but I may say that no effective steps have been taken to carry out the evacuation of Manchuria since the House rose. After the notification by Admiral Alexieff in May that the province of Shingking was to be evacuated, as the hon. Gentleman is no doubt aware, Mukden was again reoccupied by Russian troops. As regards Niu-chwang the hon. Gentleman has correctly stated the position. The maritime Customs are still paid into the Russo-Chinese bank to the credit VOL. CXXIX. [FOURTH SERIES.] of the Russian Government. As regards the native Customs which also form part of the security for the Indemnity and were to be administered by the staff of the Inspector-General, we are informed that they have lately been placed under a Russian nominee and the representative of the Imperial maritime Customs has been removed. A Blue-book will shortly be published, which will deal with Manchuria alone, and which will contain a very full account of all the historical events and of our action in regard to them from the date of the Boxer rising. The hon. Member has referred to the assurances given by Russia. On the 8th January the latest of these assurancos was made to Lord Lansdowne in the following declaration by the Russian Government— 66 In order to prevent all misunderstanding and misconstruction Russia considers it indispensable, independently of the conditions which will in the future definitely determine the character of her relations with Manchuria, to declare from this day forth that she has no intention whatever of placing any obstacle in the way of the continued enjoyment by foreign Powers of the rights acquired by them in virtue of treaties now in force." Count Benckendorff subsequently explained on 19th January, in answer to an inquiry by Lord Lansdowne, that this assurance meant that whatever changes might hereafter be introduced in the relations of Russia and Manchuria the Powers would preserve the rights which they enjoyed under existing treaties. I will only say one word in conclusion in answer to the hon. Gentleman's enquiries The recommendations of the Committee with regard to the Consular Service. that sat last session to consider the new regulations to be drawn up for the Consular Service have been under the con sideration of the Secretary of State, and the general principles of these recommendations have received his approval. We hope very shortly to be able to make a more distinct statement on the subject. If these recommendations are carried out we hope that the Consular Service in the future will contain a larger element drawn from the commercial class. A certain number of vacancies will probably be set aside for candidates who have had a commercial training, and they will spend Ꮓ some time subsequent to their examina- genius of friendship-sincere, kind, and tion in the Intelligence Department staunch friendship. Mr. Powell Williams, of the Board of Trade. In regard to the Consular Trade Reports which the hon. Gentleman finds so unsatisfactory, a circular was issued to Consuls in the course of 1902 drawing attention to the point the hon. Gentleman has mentioned, that these Reports are too often overloaded with matter which is not properly commercial to the exclusion of matter which is of special interest to the mercantile community, and also defining the points on which information is required. *MR. JOSEPH WALTON asked leave to withdraw the Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. FISCAL POLICY. MR. JOHN MORLEY (Montrose Burghs) moved the Amendment of which he had given notice in regard to the fiscal policy of the country. He said: I am sorry to know, though this Amendment has been postponed for some days, that even now we shall not be able to have the advantage of the presence of the Prime Minister. I do not know whether he will be able to attend before the debate is concluded, but in any case, however that may be, I am sure I need not tell the House how much, both personally and on public grounds, I regret his absence. There is one other right hon. Gentleman, only less important, if indeed less important, than the Prime Minister, whose presence I understand we are not to look for during the course of this debate. I refer, of course, to my right hon. friend the Member for West Birmingham. Ihope I shall not be trespassing beyond the proprieties of the occasion if I mention that I have known the right hon. Gentleman for half a life-time. During all those years I was in close and intimate relations with him, and I do not think I will allow any differences of opinion upon public questions-and between him and me they are, and have been, profound, and never more profound than they are to-day-to prevent me from saying, if the House will permit me, that he possesses in a most marked and peculiar degree the who, a few hours ago passed away from our great world-theatre, found friends amongst us all. But to the Member for West Birmingham he was more than an ordinary friend. He was one who, in sunshine and in storm, was his close, faithful, and trusted adherent; and I for one, and I believe in all parts of the House hon. Gentlemen will agree with me, fully comprehend and entirely respect the feeling which has mastered the Member for West Birmingham. It has been suggested to me that, as these two great protagonists of-I do not know whether I should call them rival policies or of identical policies are unable to take part in this debate, we should postpone it. I cannot myself, for one moment, think that a well-founded view. I think we are bound in this House to take the very first opportunity of bringing to the test of a discussion at close quarters the question that has agitated the mind of the country for the last four or five months, and we ought to know -it is our duty to know-where the House stands, where Ministers stand, and where the question stands. I think quite long enough, and too long, has it beer the case that this House, of all places in the island, is the only place where this question has not been, and apparently is not to be, discussed. We think the House of Commons would be wanting in one of its first duties, perhaps its most fundamental duty, if it were not to take this opportunity of raising the question which arises on my Amendment. After all, its highest constitutional function is to examine the national charges, to survey national ways and means, to adjust the national burden. We are going this session to do so in remarkable-I think in unprecedented-circumstances. have not only the well-known announcement of the Prime Minister, which I will not trouble at this stage to introduce, that he is for a deep and genuine change in our fiscal policy-that we are to annul and delete the traditions of two generations. We have also from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Minister who is specially responsible for the financial administration of the country, a strong declaration that "the time has come when we should make a breach with the We |