CIHM ICIMH Microfiche Collection de Series microfiches (l\/lonographs) (monographies) Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian da microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes / Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming are checked below. Q Coloured covers / Couverture de couleur □ Covers damaged / Couverture endommag^e □ Covers restored and/or laminated / Couverture restaur^ et/ou pellicul^e I I Cover title missing / Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps / Cartes g6ographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black) / Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations / Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur □ Bound with other material / Reli6 avec d'autres documents Only edition available / Seule Edition disponible Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin / La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge interieure. Blank leaves added during restorations may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming / Use peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film6es. Additional comments / Commentaires suppl6mentaires: D D D L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6te possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exem- plaire qui sont peut-§tre uniques du point de vue bibli- ographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m6tho- de normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages / Pages de couleur I I Pages damaged / Pages endommag6es □ Pages restored and/or laminated / Pages restaur^es et/ou pellicul^es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed / Pages d6color6es, tachet6es ou piqu^es I I Pages detached / Pages d6tach6es I • I Showthrough / Transparence □ Quality of print varies / Quality inegale de I'impression Includes supplementary material / Comprend du materiel suppl6mentaire Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image / Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont et§ film6es k nouveau de fa^on ^ obtenir la meilleure image possible. Opposing pages with varying colouration or discolourations are filmed twice to ensure the best possible image / Les pages s'opposant ayant des colorations variables ou des decolorations sont film6es deux fois afin d'obtenir la meilleure image possible. n D D This item it filmed at the reduction ratio checlced below / Ce document eat film^ au taux de rMuction indiqui ci-deaaoua. lOx 14x 18x 22x 26x 30x y 12x 16x 20x 24x 2Rx 39« Th« copy filmed h«r« has b««n raproducad t/tanks to tha ganaroaity of: National Library of Canada L'axamplaira filmi fut raproduit graca i la gin4rosit* da: Bibliotheque nationale du Canada Tha imagaa appaaring hara art tha bast quality possibia considaring tha condition and lagibility of tha original copy and in koaping with tha filming contract rpacificationa. Las imagas suivantas ont *t* raproduitas avac la plus grand soin. compta tanu da la condttion at da la nottatA da l'axamplaira filmi. at an conformity avac las conditions du contrat da filmaga. Original copias in printad papar covars ara fllmad beginning with tha front covor and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illustratod impros- sion, or tha back covar whan appropriata. All othar original copias ara filmad beginning on tha first paga with a printad or illustratad impras- sion. and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illuatratad impression. Tha laat racordad frama on aach microfiche shall contain tha symbol — ^ (moaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"). whichever applies. Les exemplaires origineux dont la couvartura an papiar ast imprimea sont filmes an commancant par la premier plat at an terminant soit par la darniire paga qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second plat, salon le cas. Tous las autres axemplairas originaux sont flimAs an commandant par la premiere page qui comporie une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration at an terminant par la darniire paga qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants spparattra sur la darniere image de cheque microfiche, salon le cas: le symbols — ^ signif ie "A SUIVRE", le symbole ▼ signifie "FIN". Mapa, plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartas, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent atra filmis i des taux da reduction differents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour etra raproduit en un seul cliche, il est filme ^ partir de Tangle supirieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bas. en prenant la nombre d'imegea necessaire. Las diagrammes suivants iilustrent la methode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART (ANSI and ISO TEST CHART No. 2) 1^ 130 2.8 -'•25 i u 1.8 1.6 b< ^>^^^^ ■'*«»» (S? Unity of the British Empire^ ••«e^«r:^- ^ t- ^^^f-d^idf* If * 4 ^/v of /Ir/s PtmpbJet wtUbe seat imit paM to any »4dtm^ mm rmtlfit of 12c A4inmM, J LeverO: Co,, PobHnben, 49 Sparha Chmmktn, ■ Wa SparU St. , Ottawa. and PrcfcrciJ Dtitiesei* 1.-:',' ( '\-K.. ',Tt^ \'v •*■ ^-^^ 1*1 •j,,!', .f:,i; ; t t c, Bibi!'>thpilje n,itirin;ilf- ERRATA Page 24, line 6» ' anti -British' policy ' should read, "anti-British feeling. OK THi: riiish &mpm ANI> Pmpmnlml ^ufm BY A copy of this Pamphlet will be sent post paid to any address on receipt of 12 cents. Address — J. Lever & Co.» Publishers, 40 Sparks Chambers, 193 Sparks Street, Ottawa. a£s COPYRIGHTED Entered according' to Act of the Parliaim-nt of Canada in the year 1902 by H. Washington, at the Department of Ai?nculliire. «a PREPACK. ain «a It will not be unsafe to assume that practically all the people owin^ allej^iance to the British Crown, or who have once experienced and realized the personal liberty {guaranteed under its protection, have a sincere desire f' - the unity and perpetua- tion of the Empire, and may be relied on to oppose any internal change that might endanger its con- tinuity or check its material advance, Recent events in South Africa manifested the degree of real and practical unity now existing. The most astute observers of Imperial affairs could not disguise their surprise at the evidences of its existence, or, unfriendly nations their chagrin. There was a time within the memory t nany people living, when such unity did net exi: , but, when indeed, the signs of disintegr'tinn within the I mpire were fast accumul^'tmg. Before disturbing the con''**'.ons uader which British Imperial unity has gathered such strength, we should at least be certain that the proposed change will not put out of action, any of the unify- ing influences which experience teaches ha\e had such happy results. The proposal now made to re-impose prefer- ential duties within the Empire as against the rest of the World, is attracting wide attrition, for it involves a change far reaching in its consequences. ■ " J As tersely as possible I have endeavored to point out the effect such duties would necessarily have on inter-imperial trade, and their probable effect on the Union. A few pages devoted to a feasible line by which closer union might be reached, and the probable condition on which its perpetuation depends concludes the pamphlet. ^ m m Probable Effect of Preferential Duties on Inter- Imperial Trade. The industrial life of a modern community or body politic IS inextricably complex. Internal and external influences are constantly vibrating through Its nerves, and disturbing every fibre of its systern daily. These influences are hourly changing the conditions under which profitable production can be carried on, whether on the farm, sea, or road, in the forest, mine, factory, warehouse, or shop. With the exception of the known effect of crop failures, war, plague, pests, storms and earthquakes, the cause of these disturbing influences, are as a rule unknown, at the time their effect becomes manifest. These changing conditions are constantly increas- ing the profits in some lines of industry, and decreasing the profits in others. It is impossible to predict what changes will manifest themselves m the immediate future. This uncertainty mu«t always make it a dangerous experiment for govern- ments to interfere with the people in their pursuit of profitable production ; or in other words, in their effort to feed, clothe and house themselves : for this effort of the governed to obtain these results is the main if not the only cause of profitable production. When we consider the obvious truth, that it is from the current proceeds of profitable production out of which capital receives all returns for its use a government expenses are paid, and in a word,' all the disbursements of the community are drawn, the danger of tampering with its cause at once becomes apparent. In this connection it should be kept in mind, that though it is true the conditions are constantly changing at all points throughout the world, under which profitable production can be carried on ; the cause of production is the same at all times and places, namely, the necessity of the individual to provide food, clothes and shelter for himself and those dependent on him. Experience proves that this individual effort, enforced by nature, will cause wealth to increase in any country, in spite of the mistakes of rulers, the aggression of monopoly, and all other adverse conditions, short of such, that causes population to decrease. It is for this reason that all but the very worst govern- ments, can point to the growth of wealth during their administration, as evidence of the wisdom of tlieir acts. The proposal now made by some of the repre- sentatives of the self-governing portions of the Empire, supported by certain politicians of Great Britain, is, that the Mother land should give the products of the outlying portions of the Empire a preference in her market, by putting a duty on similar products when imported from foreign coun- tries, and that the colonies favor the products of the Mother land and each other in a similar way. The imposition of such duties would of neces- sity suddenly change the conditions under which profitable production is carried on amongst the bread winners for the three hundred and ninety-six million inhabitants, who are now fed, clothed, and k T tf^ housed, in peace and increasing comfort, within the broad domain of the Empire. Whether such a change would increase or decrease the per capita productiveness of this vast population, and thus tighten or loosen the bond that holds the Empire together is highly problematical. Experience teaches that deepening poverty tends towards dis- integration, increasing prosperity towards stability and union It is known that the wages of productive labour gravitate naturally towards a point a little below the exchangeable value of the wealth the labourer produces. This natural tendency dehes the effort of employers to keep the wages of productive labour from rising when the productive power of labour is increasing,— or the struggle of workmen even when assisted by governments, to keep wages from falling, when the productive power of labour is decreasing. Although each may defy this natural tendency under exceptional cin um- stances. during short periods, and within limited areas, they invariably pay heavy damages for their temerity. A decrease in the per capita productive- ness of the Empire's population, would therefore deepen poverty by lowering wages, whilst an in- crease in their productiveness would have the opposite tendency. The advocates of preferential duties assert thrt their imposition would give a great impetus to trade between the Motherland and the Colonies. Such an impetus could result only from an increase in the per capita productiveness, which in turn is governed by effec tive demand, that is to say people 8 with money or goods to exchange for what they demand. Now if we examine in the light of experience the effect the imposition of such duties would have on the purchasing power or effective demand of the forty one million people within the United King- dom, not to speak of tliose beyond the seas, we shall find little to support this assertion. To produce any appreciable result the proposed duties would have to be sufficiently high to exalt prices throughout the Empire. To benefit the colonies food stuffs would have to be put on the list of dutiable goods. The effect such duties would have on the price of food may be judged by what followed the imposition of a s]i^ht duty on wheat, flour, and meal, imposed a short time ago by the British Government. Sir Michael Hicks Beach when introducing the measure, was very positive that it would not increase the price of bread, yet the words were scarcely out of his mouth, when the price of bread rose one half cent per pound. Although this half cent advance seems but a trifle, its effect on the purchasing power or effective demand of the people of the United Kingdom will be very great. In order to understand the effect of this artifi- cial exaltation in price on effective demand, we must keep in mind the obvious truth that the people of a modern community spend or invest from day to day all or nearly all the money they possess. Outside of India and our Eastern Empire few people keep their surplus earnings in their own possession. In one sense therefore the purchasing 1^ power of the community is a fixed quantity ; if prices are exalted they are forced to curtail their demand ; if prices fall they can and do demand an increased quantity, ;is we know from every day experience. This rise in the price of bread must therefore decrease the quantity demanded, or the quantity of other commodities and securities demanded to the extent of its increased cost. What the in- creased cost of bread will amount to for one year as a result of the present rise in price may for the sake of illustration be roufi^hly estimated. Let us allow a % lb. per capita as the daily consumption. There are 41,000,000 people in the United King- dom, this number multiplied by 365 would equal 14,96^,000,000, the aggregate consumption in \ lbs. for one year ; each y> lb. represents %c. extra cost ; if we divide the aggregate consumption by 400 the result will giv(^ the extra cost for one year i.e. $37,- 412,500. If the people purchase the usual quantity of bread at the increased price they will be forced to forego the purchase of other commodities and securities to the extent of about ,$37,000,000. To produce and distribute commodities and securities that would sell for this amount, would keep a good many people employed for one year. We see from this that the rise in the price of bread although so small, will in the course of one year reduce the purchasing power or effective demand of the people of the United Kingdom enormously, and conse- quently check the demand for labour. Now the imposition of preferential duties would e:. -t the price of a long list of commodities, lO and the purchasing power or effective demand of the people would be reduced in proportion. Inasmuch as profitable production is governed by effective demand, producers would be forced to curtail the volume of their output in proportion to the decreased demand. This action would necessi- tate a reduction in the number of their workmen, thus causing an abnormal increase in the number of the unemployed. As the number of the un- employed increased, wages would shrink and poverty deepen. Under such conditions the seeds of disintegration would again flourish as they did prior to the abolition of this very system of duties it is now proposed to re-instate. The decreased per capita productiveness would check inter-imperial trade and probably cause it to decline. Experience points to the conclusion that inter- imperial trade would decline were preferential duties re-imposed. Speakers and writers who are advocatmg the imposition of these duties appear to have forgotten the fact, that until the middle ot last century Great Britain, like other European countries, maintained in force preferential duties in favor oi her colonies. Spain, Portugal, France and other countries still maintain such duties. Unfortunately there are no records available which would enable us to judge as to the immediate effect the imposition of these duties had on inter- imperial trade. The earliest records I have been able to obtain cover the period from 1839 in regard to exports to the Colonies, and from 1854 in regard to imports from the Colonies, which were as follows. II ii lE^ Exports of the United Colonies from 1839 to 1900 Colonies between 1855 and Exports. ;^ 1 6, 345, 769 » 7.458.307 i5«oo3.425 13.473.064 15,228,884 16 712,712 17,077,060 16,165,315 i5.»47.679 13.035.543 •5.9*2.549 18,830,700 19.766,435 19,698,918 32,956,816 33,852,198 37,000,000 46,000,000 50,000,000 60, < 00,000 67,000,000 81,000,000 79,000,000 78,000,000 81,000,000 94,400,000 Kingdom to the British and Imports from the 1900. Imports. ' 1839 1840 1841 . 1842. 184 ^ 1K44. 1845. 1846. 1847. 1848. 1849. 1850. 185.. '852. 1853- 1854. .. Average ^ 1855-59.. 1 86o- 64. . 1865-69.. 1870-74,. 1875-79-. 1880-84.. 1885-89.. 1890-94.. .895-99.. 1900. . . . ;^40,ooo,ooo 68,000,000 68,000,000 76,000,000 83,000,000 96,000,000 87,000,000 96,000,000 98,000,000 109,000,000 1 British Trade and Navigation Returns. 2 Financial Reform Almanac 1902. It will be seen from these figures that the ex- ports from Great Britain to the Colonies, fluctuated 12 considerably during the last ten years preferential duties were in force, reaching the highest point in 1840, and the lowest in 1848. The figures indicate that a decrease in exports equal to 25% occurred between 1840 and 1848. During the same period the proportion of exports to the colonies fell from 14-8% to 8-6% of the whole. {See page 13.) In January 1849, the preferential duties in favor of the Colonies were practically abolished. During that year British exports to the Colonies increased $14,000,000 or 21%. With the exception of the year 1852 the next five years show substantial increases. The figures for 1854 indicating an increase of 159% over 1848. From 1855 to 1884 increases were steady and enormous. The average for the five years 1880 to 1884 being 521% over the last year the preference was in force. 1885 to 1894 ^^e average was 3% less than that between 1880 and '84. Since then increa- ses have been substantial, the total for 1900 being $67,000,000 in excess of the average for the previous five years, or an increase of 624% over 1848. As imports and exports are in the main the complement one of the other, there can be little doubt but that the imports of th^ Mother land from the Colonies during the last ten years the preferen- tial duties were in force, were affected much in the same unfavorable proportion as were her exports. The decreasing trade between the Mother land and her Colonies during the last ten years prefer- ential duties were in force, and the remarkable increase immediately after these duties were abol- ished, is strong evidence that such duties tend to defeat the object for which they are imposed. The »3 probable reason why they act in this way I have already explained. The imports between 1855 and 1900 show a substantial increase for each five year period, with the exception of that between 1885 and 1889, The imports for 1900 were about $55,000,000 above the iiverage for the previous five years. The gentlemen who are advocating the re- imposition of preferential duties, frequently assert, that the proportion of trade Great Britain does with her Colonies, grows at a much slower ratio than her trade with the rest of the world. This was true in regard to her exports during the last ten years the preferential duties were in force as the following figures show. Proportion of Great Britain's exports to the Colonies compared to the whole between 183Q and 1854. '839—14.8 % of the whole. 1 840- 1 4.9 % 1841-12.83% 1842—12.71% '«43-ii.55% iK44-,,.44% .845-11.31% 1846-10.87% 1847 —10.36° of the whole. 1848- 8.6 % 1849- 8.3 % 1850- 9.5 , 1851- 9.21% 1852- 9.61% •853-15-03% 1854—14.0 % These figures indicate a steady decrease in the proportion of exports down to 1849 the year the preference was abolished. The change for th -: better between 1849 and 1854 is significant. It will be seen from this and the figures on page (11) that a decrease in exports to the Colonies both *Thesc percentages are based on the eslimaled value of the ag- gregate exports as stated in the trade and navigation returns for Great Britain. >4 iveraj^^e be) ween 1880.84 -34 s% of thf whole. •885 89-35.0% •89094-33.5% 1895-99—34.0% in regard to volume and the proportion to the whole occurred under the preferential duties. The following figures give the proportion of the exports as compared to the whole between 1855 and 1899 in five years periods. Average between (0 1855-59-31.5% of the whole. 1860-64-33.4% 1865-69-27.6% 1870-74-25-6% •874-79-33. »% The decrease between 186^ and '74 was con- temporaneous with a vast increase in volume aggregating about $350,000,000 for the ten years. With the slight exception already referred to, increases in proportion and volume have since been steady. The proportion of imports fell off during this period, although the volume increased enormously. The average between 1855 ^^"^ '59 was 23.5% of the who!r between 1895-99 21.6% of the whole. The cause of this falling off in the proportion of imports may with reason be asMgned to the action of some of the Col- onies in placing restrictions «)n their trade, which in the very nature of fbings must have reduced the productive power o leir people, and thus checked the growth of thei urplus for export, lispecially is this true of C ..lada, some '^ the West India Islands, and most of the AustrL n Colonies. It is sigi 'leant to note in this connection that wherever (i) Financial Reform Almanac 1902. These per-centages are based on the declared value of the exports being the products of the United Ki.igdom only. 4- 1!( 1 the Colonies remove these restrictions, their expi^rts to the Mother land go up with a bound. Canada reduced her tariff in 1897, and durinjf the following year her exports to the Mother land increased within a fraction of 34%. The facts and hgures adouced point to the following ::onclusions : That it is very probable the imposition of pre- ferential duties would check the growth of inter- imperial trade. That trade between the United Kingdom and her Colonies did actually decrease, both in regard to volume and in proportion tc the whole, during the last nine years such duties were in force. ^ That the abolition of these duties was followea by an immediate expansion of this trade, which has gone on expanding with wonderful rapidity down to the present. That the slight falling off in the proportion of trade Great Britain does with her Colonies is probably owing to their action in placing restric- tions on their own trade. We may conclude from the foregoing, that the per capita productiveness of the people of the Empire has increased enormously since the abol- ition of the preferential duties : for the import and export trade of its various parts has increased at a much greater ratio than population, and all the information obtainable on the point indicates, that a vast improvement in the quantity and qualit> of the commodities consumed by the industrial mil- lions has taken place. i6 From this we may infer, that productive labourers throuj^hout the Empire have been better able to feed, clothe and house themselves ami those dependent on them since 1849 than they were prior to that year Increased stabiiity and union must have ^rown apace durinjj the interval, as recent events in South Africa prove. We should therefore hesitate before ur^intj the M« ther land to return to a policy so far reach- inj^ in its consequences, and under which t e Empire showed infallible signs of disintcjjfration, nam(;ly, deepening poverty an I successful rebellion. Other Empires of the day under preferential ar- rangements with their colonies show signs of d(!cay similar to that which prevailed in our Empire when we lo«»- one of the most promising portions of our great heritage. The imposition of th^.-seduties would. in a word, put out of action the most effective intluence at present at work in unifying the seeming diverse interests of the various divisions of the Empire, namely, the F'rce Trade policy of Great Brit.iin. Danger to the Food Supply of Great Britain Durnig V/ar as a Plea in favor of Preferential Duties. The free-trade policy of the Mother land gives her people (as it would the people of any country) access to the farmers of all countries^ for trading purposes in spite of hostile tariffs. The result is that her urban class can increase prosperously in proportion to the increase and productiveness of the farmers of the world. Since she adopted this 17 f i^ * 1) p'^Hcy in 1849 her urban class has increased with extraordinary rapidity, and is now out of Jill pro- portion to her rural class. In spite of this they nave enjoyed a greater measure of prosperity than the urban class of any protectionist country. In proportion as her trade spreatl her food supply in- creased, making possible this phenomenal increase which in regard to the working popu- lation of Plngland and Wales, stood about 10 urban to i rural in 1891. This excess of the urban population over the rural is many hundreds per cent, greater than it is in any other country. The census for 1901 will no doubt indicate a still greater disprojortion in this regard The preferential trader now propoj es to tax this food supply, which maintains and is the cause of this continuous expansion of population. The object for doing this is to give an impetus to the production of similar products within the i)()rders of the Empire. It is held bv them thiit if thi^ food supply was drawn entirely 1/ )m within the Empire, there would be less danger of it being intercept(*d in time of war with a maritime power, 'i hey also predict with great confidence, that, if such a tax was imposed, the Colonies wf>ald in the course of years be able to supply all the food stuffs Great Britain now gets from foreign countries. They fail to explain several important points. They do not explain for instance, why in case ot war, a ship, loaded with grain, sailing fr()m Can- ada or Australia for Liverpool, and tlying the British flag, would be safer from seizure, than a ship under a neutral Hag, carrying a similar cargo, i8 and bound f(3r the same port. Many rea ons can be advanced why the neutral ship would be the safer of the two under such circumstances. They do not explain what the urban popula- tion of Great Britain is to do for food, whilst the Colonies are getting ready to supply the shortage their scheme must at once create in Great Britain. Such a shortage would have to be created in order to make the scheme effective in giving an impetus to production in the colonies. Nor do they explain why under a liberal preference (about 50% on the average) the colonies supplied much less food stuff to the Home market, than they did immediately after this preference was abolished. For the sake of argument we will grant that under this scheme the Colonies would in course of time, be in a position to supply all the imported food Great Britain might need ; and examine for a moment the immediate effect the imposition of such duties would necessarily have, on the indus- trial life of the Empire. The first effect of a tax on food stuffs, if high enough to produce the result aimed at by the pre- ferential trader, would be to exalt prices ; not only in Great Britain, but throughout the Empire. Owing to the great disparity between the rural and urban class of England this exaltation in the price of food would be felt more keenly there than in any other part. In proportion to the rise in the price of food, there would necessarily occur a cessation of effective demand, both for food and other com- modities as well as securities. This cessation of effective demand from the great mass of people 19 who would be immediately affected, would re-act unfavorably on countless industries throughout all parts of the Empire, and great numbers, who, under present conditions are earning an honest living would be thrown out of employment. This unusual increase in the number of the unemployed, would force wages down, and further reduce the purchasing power or effective demand of the hun- dreds of millions fortunate enough to be still employed, thus causing unutterable distress through- out the length and breadth of the Empire. War itself could do no more ill. War on a large scale with a maritime power, would immediately increase the cost of food through- out the Empire, and as experience proves, tend to produce the evils described above. In the case of war, however, the evils flowing from the increased cost of food, would in a very large measure be nullified by the demands for the army and navy, in men and supplies. In short this measure which is proposed with the object of assuring Great Britain's food supply during war, would not only have the effect of mak- ing it less secure during such a period, but would prodi :e in times of peace, the very evil we fear most, as the inevitable result of war ; without call- ing into existence the ameliorating conditions which war itself would furnish. 20 Effect of Protection on the Unity of the Empire. Since the partial disintegration of the British Empire which cuhninated in a rebellion in Canada in 1837 great strides have been made towards its closer union. This growing unity between the M other land and the various divisions of the Empire may be assigned to two main cnuses. First in importance in bringing about this happy result, is the wisdom the Home government has invariably exercised since 1837 in granting to the people of every part of the Empire, a constantly increasing degree of liberty in the management of their own affairs. Next in importance is the unifying in- fluence of her trade policy adopted in 1849. This policy (free trade) enables her people to purchase the major portion of the ever increasing volume of Colonial exports, with greater advantage to the (Colonies than they can obtain in other markets ; thus giving a constant impetus to their expansion, and supplying a bond of union based on mutual financial interest. As this unity has gathered strength, and events have proved its realitv. schemes, by would be Empire builders, for the supposed purpose of bring- ing it about have multiplied. The only influence of any importance at work within the Empire which retards the action of these unifying influences, is the use made in one respect, by some of the Colonies, of their liberty to manage their own afairs. In some cases they have used this liberty to build a tariff wall around themselves, in the name of so called protection, with the object wmm avowed or unavowed of restricdng their trade with the Mother land. 1 his action not only tends towards disunion, as we shall presendy see; but it seriously retards their own expansion in popu- lation and wealth, by encouraging unprofitable production, at the expense of that which is pro- fitable. Our experience in Canada will serve to illus- trate the anti British feeling the popularization of protection 'nduces. When the Canadian opponents of this arbitrary ' ;tailment of the liberty of the subject called attention to the fact, that it would tend to weaken our British connection, its chief advocates replied "so much the worse for British connection." Polit- ical leaders who encourage such a sentiment in the public mind as a necessary prelude to th;t policy they advocate becoming popular, strike at the very foundation of Imperial unity. In spite of the danger to Britist cc!> section which a protective tariff was acknowledged to in- volve, such a tariff was enforced in Canada in 1879. The usual evils which follow the imposition of protective duties in any country soon developed, namely, decreasing farm land values, decreasing wages, decreasing trade, a drop in the ratio of in- crease in population, increasing poverty and crime, accompanied by corruption in high places. As these evidences of retrogression became manifest, an attempt was made by the advocates of protec- tion to attribute its failure to produce the results they had so confidently promised, to the fact that Great Britain for selfish reasons, and antiquated 22 notions of individual liberty, persisted in adhering to her effete discredited and utterl) stupid policy of free trade. The protectionist press teemed with manufactured evidences of Great Britain's deca- dence : Germany, France, and other protectionist countries, were pointed to as the only countries worthy the imitation of a progressive community like Canada. One Minister of the Crown (who afjerwards stated he was only quoting Hon. Mr. Chamberlain) declared that " Great Britain driven out of the civilized markets of the World, was now forced to use her army and navy, to compel the uncivilized peoples to buy her goods, her wares, and merchandise." Some idea of the anti Brit- .. feeling, which by this time prevailed, may be gathered from the fact, that, this utterly false state- ment, was applauded throughout Canada, during the political campaign then in progress. Another Minister of the Crown stated in Parliament, that protection would have been a greater success in Canada were it not for the free trade policy of Great Britain This statement is true, if the success referred to by the minister meant only the success of the monopolists and manufacturers, who by this time had become a political power in the land and claimed to dictate the tariff policy of the fifovernment. It is significant to note that this modern tirade against Great Britain is confined to protectionist countries, whether within or outside the borders of the Empire. The reason for it is not far to seek. Protective tariffs increase the cost of produc- tion in proportion to the rate of duty charged. 23 Free Trade reduce -i the cost of producticMi to the lowest possible point. The result is that Great Britain can sell her products at a profit in all pro- tectionist countries in spite of high tariffs. 1 1 is her ability to do this that rouses the ire of the monopol- ists and manufactures throughout the protectionist World, for it not only prevents them obiaininor from the consumers of their own countries the monopoly price protection promised, but it forces them to sell their protected and bonused products at a loss in neutral markets. It is no wonder therefore, that the beneficiaries under protection, wherever fostered, propagate dis- like of the country that stands between them and the ultimate gain they anticipated from the im- position of high tariffs. It has been said with good reason, that Great Britain is the most universally hated country in the World. This is no doubt the prevailing sentiment in protectionist countries, as we know it to be in slave holding countries. Public opinion as reflected in the utteri^nces of representative men and the press of the variDus sections of the Empire, will reveal the significant fact, that it is only in those divisions, where the advocates of protection are striving to perpetuate it. that any desire to separate from the Empire is apparent. In Jamaica and other protectionist por- tions of the West Indies, political union with the United States is openly advocated. A few years ago the same was true of Canada. In 1891 the people wer ctty evenly divided on a measure which had L "ried, wo.: i in all human probability, t^A^' 34 have severed Canada from the Empire forever. This measure became popular with a stronjjj min- ority of the people, who fancied they saw in it an escape from the evils protection had brouj^ht on them. A few years prior to this, the govern- ment in deference to the anti-British policy then prevailing, refused to send a military contingent to help the Mother land in her North African difficulty. Since the accession to power iii 1896 of a government pledged to abolish protection, a marked growth of that sentiment which favors closer union of the Empire has evidendy taken place in Canada. As proof of this I need but mention the fact, that only three members of the present Parliament could be mustered to vote against a proposal to send the Mother land all the help she would accept, during her late trouble in *^outh Africa. Eno jgh has been said to illustrate the disin- tegrating effect of Protection ; the perpetuation of which m any country can only be accounted for on the assumption, that its beneficiaries, although such an infinitesimal portion of the population, gain so enormously by the system, that they are able to control the public actions, and dictate the utterances of a majority of the accredited representatives of the populace. fo ^ 25 Free Trade and Unity. Empires have risen, reached their zenith, waned, and passed away. The verdict of history points to corruption as the cause of the downfall of these extinct civiliza- tions. Slavery under which they reached the zenith of their power was the probable cause of corrup- tion- Such an institution is unjust. Experience teaches that injustice in any form can only be per- petuated by corruption. It is said that " corruption is as fatal to the strongest body politic as cancer to the individual." It is thought by some whose standing compels respect, that the British Empire has reached its zenith, and they predict its wane and downtall. They forget that unlike the civilizations of the past, or those that are waning, the civilization of the British Empire is founded on individual liberty. Further progress is therefore possible as a result of an extension of liberty ; whilst its unity and continuity may depend on the ability of its various governments to safeguard this liberty. N w the rp imposition of an inter-imperial pre- ferential tariff, involves the adoption of protection by the Mother land and each of the Lolonies 1 he result of its adoption would be to compel all the people who inhabit the Empire, and who number one forth the human race, to restrict their consump- tion of the commodities they now deem necessary for their sustenance comfort or pleasure, whilst it would at the same time force them to pay for the smaller quantity, what in the absence ot this tarill a6 they now pay for the larger quantity. This would be unjust. The experience of all countries prove, that such an injustice can only be perpetuated by corruption. Under this system therefore the in- evitable tendency of the l.mpire would be towards disintegration. Protection not only involves injustice to the people who submit to it. and corruption on the part of the government that upholds it but is popularized in each country on the shortsighted and immoral plea, that it will injure the material welfare of the people of all other countries. Such a plea is short- sighted, because the material interests of all coun- tries are inter-dependent. Immoral because such a plea is directly contrary to the leaching of the Golden Rule. The main obstacle to the adoption of Free Trade in Christian countries, is the fear instilled into the minds of the people by their rulers, that su':h action would benefit their neigh- bours. Free Trade on the other hand is not only just to the people adopting it, but is just to all mankind, for in opening our ports to all countries, we are simply doing to other nations as we would have other nations do to us. It is a policy of enlightened self interest, for whilst it benefits the nation adopt- ing it, it benefits all other nations. The material benefit Great Britaia conferred on the woJld by adopting Free Trade, may be gauged by the vast extension of agriculture through- out all countries which her adoption of such a policy made possible, and which immediately followed her T ay action in this regard ;* and the protection her low priced goods give the people of the world, against the aggression of their own monopolists. The gooa her trade policy does in this latter respect, may be gauged by the hatred engendered. The material benefit that has accrued to Great Britain baffles computation. The growth of the world's debt to her people will suffice to illustrate this. In 1840 about 10 per cent, o*" the worlds stock of gold and silver, coin and bullion, would have paid the sum the governments and people of other countries at that time owed to the people of Great Britain. To-day in spite of the fact that many thousands of millions have been added to this stock it would only suffice to pay about 87 per cent, of the amount the people of other countries now owe to the people of the United Kingdom. The interest actually received on this debt a few years ago, amounted to $500,000,000 per annum. This sum capitalired at 3 per cent, would equal $16,166,000,000 or $33^3 lent for each $ received in interest. The highest estimate of the world's stock of gold and silver coin and bullion in 1900 places it at $14,000,000,000. It will be seen from this that her people now ♦Average annual increase in the area under crops throughout the world was as follows : — Acres. Between 1820 and 40 4,500,000 per annu .1. 41 •' 60 4,550,000 " 61 '• 80 8,300,000 " 81 " 88 7,200,000 '• —MullhalVs Dictionarv of Statistics. a8 control the finances of the world, a fact which will make it difficult for any nation or combination ot nations to make successful war on her. It would appear that whilst other countries have been passing cute little laws with the object of draining Great Britain of money, she has accom- plished the task of draining them by simply abolish- ing all such laws. Her financial position in this regard, as against the rest of tlv2 world, will continue to grow rapidly stronger, as long as she remains free trade, and the governments of protectionist countries continue to tax their own people, to enable their manufac- turers and other producers, to sell their products to the people of the United Kingdom, below what they cost in the country where they are produced. For not only do these chc^ap bonused gof^ds, give a great impetus to industry in the United Kingdom, ^as they would to any country) by cheapening pro'- duction there, but this munificent generosity of protectionist governments, is so extraordinarily costly to their own people, that it constantly creates a shortage ot capital amongst them, and a corres- ponding glut in the English money market. This shortage of capital which is chronic in all protectionist or bonus paying countries keep th - hnanciers of London busy furnishing loans to make It good. The people of the United King- dom therefore not only get the benefit of the goods oelow what it costs to produce them, but they still own and draw interest on the money theit was wasted in the protectionist countries on the pro- duction of these goods. These loans e in the »9 tP main well secured, antl have j.Trown in magnitude in proportion to the extension of the bonusinjf system. Hon. Mr. Chamberlains success in forcing contmental countries to agree to abolish bounties on exported sugar, is j)roof that he was honest when he declared himself ignorant of economics. I hese bounties are equal to a clear gift of about $6o,ooo,o.no per annum to ihe people of the Ur.ited Kingdom, freeing that amount to be spent on other things than sugar. It is estimated that the retail pric(! of sugar is two cents lower than it would be if these bonuses were not paid As the per capita consumpti(jn is about 75 lbs., the saving would be $i.sn per an- num each, or roughly speaking $60,000,000. there being 41,0 jO,0"0 piople. Inquiry proved that for every person in the United Kingdom wh(3 lost employment on account of cheap sugar, three were employed because of cheap sugar. A true patriot and statesman if stooping to interfere in such a matter, would have used his influence to have these bounties continued. Although interference on the latter line would be more conducive to Imperial interests, for it would encourage rival countries through their own enactments to strengthen us financially, whilst weakening themselves ; such acion would not be sufficiently dramatic to suit a politician playing for the applause of the unthink- ing, who are erroneously assumed by the dramatic politicians to be always in the majority. These bounties, like protection, are popularized on the assun^ : tion that they will ruin the trade of 30 Great Eiritaiii. but as a cold in ittcr of fact they are havinjf quite the cc^ntrary effect. Were the pn)tectionist Colonies to fall into line with the Mother land in regard to iheir trade policy, and thus p'ace themselves in a position to share with Her the matenal benefit that the economic blunders of other nations are forcinjr upon Her; progress in population ;md wealth would b^ so rapid, and the union of the Empire become so real, that we should soon be able to guarantee the peace of the World single handed. Until the Colonies do this, and other nations cease to tax their people for the purpose of paying part of the Englishman's sugar, butter, milk, bread, fruit, sieel, and a thousand other bills. Statesmen need not worry over the supposed inability of the people of the Mother country standing the financial strain of defending the Empire ; for whether foreign countries and the Colonies pay pare of the English- man's board and other bills, as they now do, or his army and navy bill, makes no difference to the Englishman's pocket. The wealth forced into the lap of the people of the United Kingdom every year, by this unique method adopted by foreign countries to ruin her, in all probability more than equals the vast expense of defending the Empire ; the normal cost of which is about equal to 50% of the income of her people from foreign and col- onial loans. Danger to the union and continuity of the British Empire, need not even now be feared from the attacks of other nations, but lies in the fact, 3« X that iintler our fre(^ institutions, mtjn ignorant of (economics, nny obtain control of the Home and Colonial ^ove^rnments. who. unable to forse". the consequences of their acts, nii^ht use th«'ir power at the dictation of inK^rested millionaires and manu- facturers, to place its industrial millions under direct tribute to capital. This has aireaJy been done in some of the most import.uit divisions (.f the F^mi)ire under the ^uise of so called protection. Inter-Imperial preferential duti(-s would place the people t)f the whole Empire under such tribute. The adoption of such a measure wonld mark the be^ining of the end of British Imperial Unity. To conclude : his probable that Empire to be permanent must be just, not only to its own peoplebut to all mankind. Protection in the ^I'ise now proposed by the preferential trader would involve an injustice to the vast majority of the people of the Empire. It would be an arbitrary curtailment of their liberty : and It is popularized on the small minded notion that it will injure the material interest of our neigh- bours. Free trade is just to the people adopting it, and is just to all mankind; it is therefore a policy most likely to strengthen the Union and assure the perpetuation of the British Empire; which has attained its present unity, strength, wealth, and grandeur, whilst safeguarding to a greater degree than its contemporaries, the rights and liberties of all, irrespective of race, creed, or color, who dwell under the protection of its flag. J masi^Km riissh Coiomml f'Tm (^mde J^aagm 'eadiqmrUiri- anaa^p.. Object : The po petuation of the Union of the British Empire. SECRETARY : 'on. OTTAWA. I'J^ v" t*-'"*-"