THE " SPECTATOR " AND TARIFF REFORM.

[TO TIM EDITOR Or THIS "SPECTATOR:1

Sin,—Week by week you champion the cause of Free Trade with a persistency which those -who do not agree with you must commend and confess that the masterly way in which

you always deal with the question commands respect. I am a Tariff Reformer, but, at the same time, I would like to see the Referendum established and Mr. Balfour's pledge renewed by the leaders of the Unionist Party, not, however, to " catch " the vote of the Unionist Free Trader, but because I believe that the will of the people should prevail in any change of such vast import as Tariff Reform. Personally I think that the strength of the Unionist Free Trader is overrated. He is supposed to abound in Lancashire, which is recognized and admitted to be the "Home of Free Trade," and perhaps my own experience of election work, being a Lancashire man and having until last year lived all my life in Blackburn, the

largest weaving centre in the world, will serve either to dispel a delusion under which you and many of your correspondents suffer, or, on the other hand, clear up for me a mystery so deep that I have never been able to probe it. Mind you, I am open to conviction that a system of free imports

is better for the country than Tariff Reform, but the arguments for it will have to be much stronger than I have

ever heard or read (and, by the way, you scarcely ever deal -with the pros and cons of the subject!), and will have to out- weigh, naturally, the very strong arguments for Tariff Reform, particularly with reference to perferential treatment

for the Colonies. But to the election experiences I have mentioned: Blackburn, up to the year 1906, had been repre- sented by two Conservatives since it was constituted a county borough with the exception, I believe, of a very short period, when one Conservative and one Liberal were returned (the Liberal member subsequently stood as a " Radical " and was defeated). In the 1900 election the figures were as follows :—

Hornby (C.) ... 11,247

Coddington (C.) ... ... 9,415 Snowden (Soc.) ... ... 7,096 In the election of 1906 Sir William Coddington (a Free Trade cotton manufacturer) did not seek re-election, and Sir Harry Hornby (also a large cotton manufacturer of Black- burn) stood as a Free Trader, and with him was Mr. Geoffrey Drage (who beat Sir William Harcourt at Derby), a candidate of no mean mention and a strong Free Trader. Their opponents were Mr. Snowden and the leader of the local Liberals. This was the result of the elections :—

Hornby (C.) .„ 10,291

Snowden (Soc.) ... ... 10,282 Drags (0.) . 8,932 Hamer (L.) 8,892 In this election the Liberals almost to a man "split" with the Socialists, but the latter " plumped " for Mr. Snowden, and it was observed at the time, and I believe with truth, that if the Socialists had split with the Liberal candidate the Conservatives would have lost the second seat, although Sir Harry Hornby was, and is, absolutely the most popular per- son in Blackburn. We did not lose the seat through lack of support frova Conservative Free Traders !

At the General Election of 1910 (January) Sir Harry Hornby did not seek re-eleetion, and it was felt desirable that candidates should be obtained who should appeal to all Tariff Reformers and Free Traders (the local leaders of the party were sufferisg from the same delusion as the Spectator), and accordingly the best candidate

available, probably the best candidate in the country, Lord Robert Cecil—who, I rejoice to think, has at last found a seat in Parliament—was adopted along with Mr. Stewart Bowles, who is perhaps a stronger Free Trader than Lord Robert, although the latter, if I mistake not, is a gentleman after your own heart—and mine, too, for that matter. We were glad to have such candidates, and it was a pleasure to work for them. But what was our (the workers') position ? We had no constructive policy to advocate, nothing with which to go to the factory hands to ask for their votes; nothing to set up against, say, Old-Age Pensions. Some of us in sheer desperation canvassed on Tariff Reform. The result of the election—and this time the Socialists "split" their votes with the liberals—was :— Barclay (L.)

Snowden (Soc.)11,916 ... Cecil (U.) ... ... 9,327

Bowles (U.)

The Conservative Free Traders would be able to support the two Unionist candidates, yet we lost the second seat, and for the first time in its history Blackburn had not a Conservative member. What is more we were nearly three thousand behind !

The Conservatives then felt that perhaps a change of policy was desirable, and although the adoption of "out-and-out" Tariff Reform candidates meant the possible alienation of some of the leading Conservatives of the town, the stronger element had its way, with the result that at the election of December 1910 two Tariff Reform candidates were adopted, viz., Mr. W. B. Boyd-Carpenter, a splendid exponent of Tariff Reform, and Mr. Lindon Riley, barrister-at-law. We who were privileged to work in this election felt that now we had a policy, and the town was canvassed from end to end on practi- cally one issue; the Young Unionists' League, a very strong body, wanted no other battle-cry ! This was the result, the Liberals and Socialists " splitting " more faithfully than in the previous elections :—

Snowden (Lab.)

10,762 Norman (L.) 10.754 Boyd-Carpenter (11) . . ... 9,814 Riley (U.) ... 9,500 The majority against us was thus reduced from 2,589 to 940. Now, Mr. Snowden is undoubtedly popular, and Sir Henry was a very strong candidate for the Liberals ; still the result of that election gives rise to great hopes that next time—let us hope very soon !—the tables will be turned.

What I want to ask is this—and I have been a long time coming to it, necessarily—if the Conservative Free Traders are strong numerically, why were we in a typical Lancashire constituency so hopelessly beaten in January 1910, whilst within eleven months, with Tariff Reform candidates, we wiped out two-thirds of the Coalition majority ? If the Con- servative Free Traders withheld their support, or voted against us in the December election, then we must have lost to an enormous extent the Tariff Reform vote in the January election !—I am, Sir, lee., T.

[We admit that the Unionist Free Traders are not numeri-

cally a strong body, and that most of them will now, like our- selves, support Tariff Reform candidates, Referendum or no: We advocated the Referendum pledge, not in order to catch the Unionist Free Trader, but on the following grounds : we believe that the Unionists cannot return to power unless they detach a considerable number of moderate Liberal or neutral voters from their allegiance; but this they cannot accomplish while the Tariff Reformers insist that every vote for a Unionist must also be a vote for Food Taxes.—ED. Spectator.]