BY RT. HON. J.M. ROBERTSON

P.C.; President of National Liberal Federation since 1920; M.P. (L.),

Tyneside Division, Northumberland, 1906-18; Parliamentary Secretary to

Board of Trade, 1911-15.

Mr. Robertson said:--At an early stage of the war Mr. H.G. Wells

published a newspaper article to the effect that while we remained Free

Traders we were determined in future to accord free entry only to the

goods of those States which allowed it to us. The mere state of war, no

doubt, predisposed many to assent to such theses who a few years before

would have remembered that this was but the nominal position of the

average protectionist of the three preceding generations. War being in

itself the negation of Free Trade, the inevitable restrictions and the

war temper alike prepared many to find reasons for continuing a

restrictive policy when the war was over. When, therefore, the Committee

of Lord Balfour of Burleigh published its report, suggesting a variety

of reasons for setting up compromises in a tariffist direction, there

were not wanting professed Free Traders who agreed that the small

tariffs proposed would not do any harm, while others were even anxious

to think that they might do good.

Yet the policy proposed by Lord Balfour's Committee has not been

adopted by the Coalition Government in anything like its entirety. Apart

from the Dyestuffs Act, and such devices as the freeing of home-made

sugar from excise, we have only had the Safeguarding of Industries Bill,

a meticulously conditional measure, providing for the setting up of

particular tariffs in respect of particular industries which may at a

given moment be adjudged by special committees _ad hoc_ to need special

protection from what is loosely called "dumping." And even the findings

of these committees so far have testified above all things to the lack

of any accepted set of principles of a protectionist character. Six

thousand five hundred articles have been catalogued as theoretically

liable to protective treatment, and some dozen have been actually

protected. They have given protection to certain products and refused it

to others; according it to fabric gloves and glass and aluminium goods

and refusing it to dolls' eyes and gold leaf.

Finally, the decision in favour of a tariff on fabric gloves has evoked

such a storm of protest from the textile manufacturers who export the

yarns with which foreign fabric gloves are made, that even the

Coalitionist press has avowed its nervousness. When a professed

protectionist like Lord Derby, actually committed to this protectionist

Act, declares that it will never do to protect one industry at the cost

of injuring a much greater one, those of his party who have any

foresight must begin to be apprehensive even when a House of Commons

majority backs the Government, which, hard driven by its tariffists,

decided to back its Tariff Committee against Lancashire. Protectionists

are not much given to the searching study of statistics, but many of

them have mastered the comparatively simple statistical process of

counting votes.

Essays in Liberalism Being the Lectures and Papers Which Were Delivered at the Liberal Summer School at Oxford, 1922 · 第 54 / 127 题