not

but actual

The

1s. 6d. The price of unrefined sugar in | manner of the Government what benefit January, 1901, was 10s. 3d. and in January, has come to any one from this Con1904, 8s. 111d. I think the House will vention. Acts of Parliament are passed admit that these prices cannot be for the purpose of avoiding said to have inflicted much injury. doing mischief to someone, The confectioners are, in fact, crying out for the purpose of doing doing before they are hurt. No injury has benefit to someone. It has been been shown, or can be shown to have abundantly proved by the speeches of been done to them by the Convention. my hon. friends that damage has been The complaints refer not to any injury done by this policy, but no attempt has already inflicted, but to a possible and pro- been made to show that anyone has spective injury arising from the fact that gained anything from it. But I wish the Permanent Commission has decided, particularly to direct attention to the contrary to the opinion of the Govern- position of the House in this matter. ment as to the true interpretation of the My hon. friend the Member for Islington Convention, that Article 3, which limits said we might demand a change in our the surtax on sugar, does not apply in representation on the Commission at the case of sugared goods. I admit that Brussels. I doubt whether that would have it is a great disappointment to find that any effect. The truth is that we are in in this matter the Commission has not this position, that it is out of our power taken the view which I still think the to alter the substance or to modify the correct one, namely, that Article 3 does working of the Convention in any respects. apply, and that the real meaning of the We are tied and bound helplessly. Convention is that there should be no most we could do would be to suggest to greater surtax on sugared goods than upon the Government that they should suggest sugar. We do not consider that the to our representation on the Commission question of the surtax is by any means that he should suggest to his eleven closed. The decision of the Commission colleagues-all of whom represent States leaves Article 1 of the Convention abso- which are our competitors and adverse to lutely untouched, and when the Commis- us in policy-that they should assent to sion meet again, in a week's time, it will some little modification being made in the be the business of our representative to working of the Convention. require a clear statement as to the whole extent of the power of the House and effect of Article 1, having regard to in the matter. It is an excellent illustration the decision on Article 3. The subject of the way in which fiscal reform and is still sub judice and under discussion, Parliamentary control come into collision. and if the interpretation put by the Com- which caused the break up of the Cabinet I have looked up the historical pamphlet and find it asserted there that, as regards our fiscal policy "what is fundamental is that our liberty should be recovered." One feels inclined to say "O liberty, what. political crimes are committed in thy name." By this policy you deprive the House of Commons of its freedom of control and the country of its freedom of trade. I think the Sugar Convention is a most useful object lesson at the present lessness of the rampart which it was juncture of affairs. It shows the worthproposed to erect against foreign dumping. The debate will also show the country that this policy of retaliation, or what the retaliators call the resuming of the liberty of negotiation, means a very different thing after the negotiations are concluded; and I trust that when the effects of the Convention are realised by the country its determination will Le:

scope

mission on Article 1 should render it

possible for the contracting States to give what bounty they please on the sugared product itself, apart from the sugar contained in it, a grave situation will arise, necessitating such steps as may be required in order to provide a suitable and adequate remedy.

SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN (Stirling Burghs): It is quite unnecessary for me to say anything upon the general question after the most masterly exposition of the present state of affairs by my two hon. friends behind me, and the brilliant speech of the hon. Member for Oldham. The first part of that speech was the most sustained piece of irony I have ever heard in the House of Commons. My lon. friends have asked in a very pointed

That is the

strengthened to take no step on the path years ago in the year 1885 upon this which they have been asked to tread. question

MR. WALTER PALMER (Salisbury) said he had listened carefully to the speeches of the hon. Member for Isling ton, the hon. Membe rfor Devonport, and the hon. Member for Oldham, and not one practical instance dealing with the first part of the Motion had been given by them. It was all very well for the hon. Member for Oldham to come down to this

House and make speeches for the amusement of the other side, but this was a very serious question, and it was because he recognised the seriousness of it that he wished to raise his voice against some of the statements made by hon. Gentlemen opposite, and to say that he entirely disagreed with many of their arguments. He stated the grounds of his disagreement last year, and most of the arguments advanced by the hon. Member for Islington were the same as those which were contained in his speech of a year ago at Birmingham. The fact that important trades in this country which

were interested, were not represented on the Brussels Convention was a matter which might be more favourably dealt with by the Government. But he entirely disagreed with the junior Member for Oldham, and thought the time had come when retaliation ought to be resorted to by this country. Hon. Gentlemen opposite had not made out their case, particularly in regard to the consumer in this country, who, he thought, would not suffer. He maintained that the Convention had secured us freedom, so that in future we should not be ruled by cartels on the Continent. He believed that thereby the production of cane sugar would gradually be increased.

"Really the sugar question is about as strong as any we can have. I would as soon fight this fair-trade humbug upon sugar as upon any other thing. I know something about the Workmen's Association for the abolition of the Sugar Bounties I have met the gentleman before. It is a sham association, with precious few workmen about it. men about it. It is got up and paid for by a few West Indian planters who want to make a profit out of an increased price of sugar. Ah! I have great sympathy with any real movement on the part of the working classes, but I have no sympathy at all with those who sell themselves to an agitation of this kind. Well, I have no doubt my constituents will know how to deal with them when they come. The only arguconsideration is this: they say that cheap sugar ments they have got which is worth a moment's has thrown out of employment a number of decent, industrious working men who were engaged in the refinery trade, and they ask you, the whole population of the country, to submit to an additional charge for your sugar in order that these poor fellows may be set to work again. The claim upon you to submit to a great sacrifice, to raise the price of every cup of tea you drink, of almost every article of consumption for sugar enters into almost the whole con

sumption of your household-this claim, made by these eighteen-penny working men, is not made on behalf of the working classes, but it is made in order that the few West Indian planters may double their fortunes rather quicker than they otherwise would do.”

It might be said that anyone was at liberty to change his opinions, but facts and principles did not change, and the facts and principles of this question were the same to-day as they were in 1885. It was the right hon. Gentleman the Mem ber for Birmingham and his friends who had changed, including the Member for the Bordesley Division, who, after a life-long devotion to free trade, had suddenly discovered that he had been worshipping a hollow idol all his life and that our system of free imports was as dead as Queen Anne." Well may they say, Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis.

*MR. TOMKINSON (Cheshire, Crewe) said it had been stated without contradiction that the real originator and author of this Convention was the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Birmingham. He should like to read to the House what the ex-Colonial Secretary said nineteen 202.

Question put.

66

The House divided:-Ayes, 162; Noes, (Division List No. 37.)

STATEMENT EXPLANATORY OF NAVY ESTIMATES 1904-5.

The Estimates for 1904-5 amount to £36,889,000 as opposed to £34,457,000 for the current year. More than half of this increase is accounted for by the fact that it is proposed to pay the whole balance still due on the 1st April in respect of the two recently-purchased battleships, formerly belonging to Chile, and to provide che ammunition for them, during the next financial year.

The rest is due to the expansion of the Fleet, affecting the charge for matériel and stores in Votes 8 and 9, and that for the personnel especially in Votes 1 and 2 and 7 ; the increase also to the pay of the Army necessitates a corresponding increase to that of the Royal Marines in Votes 1 and 2; in Vote 10 there is a further large increase for interest and sinking fund in respect of the Naval Works Loan Acts.

The Board of Admiralty are well aware that the charge they are asking Parliament to sanction is a heavy one, but Parliament must remember how heavy is the responsibility cast by it on the Board of providing the country with a Navy strong enough to sustain a struggle with the navies of any two Powers, and also strong enough to ensure reasonable security to its vast sea-borne trade and to the food supply of the people.

The Board ask for nothing which they do not believe to be necessary for this purpose. They have avoided, and will avoid, giving any stimulus to the expansion of armaments by the formulation of large programmes of construction, but when such programmes are adopted by other Powers, they have no choice but to take them into account in framing their own shipbuilding policy.

Administration.

The distribution of work between the members of the Board of Admiralty has been modified with a view to simplification and to the further consolidation under each member of the Board of a definite sphere of work. The Senior Naval Lord

remains as hitherto responsible for advice on naval policy, for the distribution and war organisation of the Fleet, and for its general discipline and efficiency; the Second Naval Lord is responsible for the personnel, the Controller for the matériel, and the Junior Naval Lord for the supply of stores and the organisation of transport; the Civil Lord is responsible for the Works Department; the Financial Secretary is responsible for the finance, and the Secretary for correspondence and the management of the Office.

The staff of the Naval Ordnance Department has been strengthened by the addition of an officer of the Royal Marine Artillery and additional writers.

*

The staff of the Naval Intelligence Department has been increased by an additional Naval Attaché, of whom there are now six, stationed respectively at Paris, Berlin, St. Petersburg, Rome, Washington, and Tokio; by a Commander and three Lieutenants, Royal Navy, by an Engineer Commander, Royal Navy, by a LieutenantColonel and Major, Royal Marines, and by four Civil Servants. This Department, the work of which is distributed between four divisions-mobilisation, war, foreign, and trade-is, as I have stated in previous Memoranda, steadily developing.

It must, however, be borne in mind that, whereas map-making is one of the principal functions of a Military Intelligence Department, the very important and responsible work of making and correcting charts for the Navy is in the system of the Admiralty entrusted to a special Department, that of the Hydrographer, and that the work of that officer in all that relates to the preparation of the Navy for war is coordinated with that of the Director of Naval Intelligence by the real chief of the Naval Intelligence Department, the Senior Naval Lord himself.

The administrative changes reported in previous years are all working smoothly and well.

VOL. CXXX. [FOURTH SERIES.] 3 I