The contradiction of the ridiculous statistics in regard to jewellery,
and the explanation of the increased imports from Morocoo, are not the only damaging criticisms to which Mr. Chamberlain's hebdomadal budget of inaccuracies has been
subjected. Speaking at Thornton Heath on Wednesday, Mr. Ritchie showed that Mr. Chamberlain's aAsconnt of the repeal of the Corn-tax by no means corresponded with the facts. Mr. Chamberlain's words were : "We could not afford to lose our Chancellor the day before the Budget was introduced ; we had to accept the view which was forced upon us." This, said Mr. Ritchie, had been interpreted as signifying that he sprang his decision at the last moment, and that, as the Times said, " he took advantage of circumstances to put his colleagues in a hole." Mr. Ritchie's answer was to give the dates. The Budget was introduced on April 23rd of this year. Mr. Chamberlain's proposal to the Cabinet was in November, 1902, befcre he left for South Africa, and "I not only expressed my firm deter- mination at the time not to assent to the proposal, but I distributed to my colleagues a reasoned argument against that proposal, dated November 14th. From that time onwards I spoke on more than one occasion to the Prime Minister in the same sense as I spoke to the Cabinet in November." Mr. Ritchie went on to describe how, when Mr. Chamberlain returned to England in March, there was a discussion on the subject with him, but that, though not converted to Mr. Ritchie's view, he ultimately withdrew his opposition, and on March 31st the Budget was settled by the Cabinet, though not introduced till April 23rd. Can any one after considering these facts deny that Mr. Ritchie has good ground for protesting against the assertion that he sprang his opposi- tion to the Corn-tax on his colleagues at a moment when they were powerless to resist him ?
Previous page
