Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:50:45.071Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Imperial Reaction to the Fielding Tariff of 1897

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

R. A. Shields
R. A. Shields*
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Calgary
Get access

Extract

During the closing decades of the nineteenth century the self-governing colonies of the British Empire and particularly Canada attempted to obtain a broader degree of freedom in developing their commercial policies. The campaign, which may be said to have commenced in 1878, had as its goals the right for the dependencies to conclude preferential tariff agreements with each other, the establishment of tariff preference throughout the Empire, including the United Kingdom, and the denunciation of the mother country's treaties with Belgium and the German Zollverein. Abrogation of the latter two agreements was regarded as vital since they provided that any duty concessions made to the United Kingdom by the colonies had to be accorded to Belgium and Germany. These concessions also had to be extended to all other foreign countries with which London had treaties containing the most-favoured-nation clause that included the colonies.

The movement suffered a considerable set-back in 1895 when the Colonial Secretary, the Marquis of Ripon, issued his famous circular letter to the colonies in which he stoutly defended Britain's free-trade policy and emphasized the value of her commerce with the foreign world. His policy statement rejecting the establishment of tariff preference within the Empire and the abolition of the two treaties was aimed at a series of resolutions emanating from the Colonial Conference of 1894 held in Ottawa. This imperial pronunciamento was not the last word. The entire issue was raised again in 1897 when a new tariff bill was introduced in the Canadian House of Commons by the Finance Minister, W. S. Fielding. The purport of the bill was to grant preference to British goods.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , November 1965 , pp. 524 - 537
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See editorial in the Mail and Empire, Feb. 8, 1896.

2 Minutes of March 30, 1897, Foreign Office Records, Public Record Office, London. Series F.O. 83/1513, Original correspondence with the Board of Trade, the Colonial Office and other departments on general topics. Hereafter cited as F.O.83.

3 See his biography, Dictionary of National Biography, Supplement, Jan. 1901-12 1911, Vol. II, ed. Lee, Sydney, 104.Google Scholar

4 Wingfield to Bergne, Private, April 1, 1897, F.O. 83/1513.

5 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 04 22, 1897, I, 1107–11, 1124–6, 1128–31Google Scholar; April 26, 1897,1, 1266–99.

6 Minutes by John Anderson of April 24, 1897, Colonial Office Records, Public Record Office, London. Series CO. 42/846, Canada, Original correspondence. Hereafter cited as C.0.42.

7 Anderson's minutes of April 29, 1897, ibid.

8 Aberdeen to Chamberlain, copy, Secret, Ottawa, May 4, 1897, F.O. 83/1514.

9 Tupper to Vincent, Ottawa, May 13, 1897, Tupper Papers, X, Public Archives of Canada, Ottawa.

10 Colonial Office to Foreign Office, draft, Immediate, May 15, 1897, C.O.42/847.

11 Minutes of May 19, 1897, F.O.83/1514.

12 Colonial Office to Foreign Office, May 22, ibid.

13 Board of Trade to the Colonial Office, copy, May 19, 1897, ibid. Italics the author's.

14 Report of a sub-committee of the Canadian Privy Council, May 12, 1897, contained in Aberdeen to Chamberlain, Secret, May 13, 1897, C.O.42/847. Italics the author's.

15 Aberdeen to Chamberlain, telegram, received London, 8:05 a.m., May 27, 1897, ibid.

16 Minutes of May 27, 1897, ibid.

17 Ibid.

18 Bergne to Curzon, inter-office memorandum, May 29, 1897, F.O.83/1514. As early as 1888 the Foreign Office had cited a lengthy list of foreign countries enjoying mostfavoured-nation treatment in the British colonies. Included were Austria, Montenegro, Paraguay, Roumania, Servia, Uruguay, Belgium, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Greece, Hamburg, Italy, Mecklenburgh-Schwerin, Russia, Salvador, Sandwich Islands, France, Portugal, Sweden and Norway. See Parliamentary Paper, Great Britain, House of Commons, 1888 [C.5369], XCVIII. Memorandum by Sir Edward Hertslet, May 14, 1888, “Treaties of Commerce in Force Between the United Kingdom and Foreign Powers Which Preclude Preferential Fiscal Treatment of British Goods In the Colonies and Dependencies of the British Crown.”

19 Law officers to Chamberlain, Confidential, May 31, 1897, C.O.42/850.

20 Minutes of June 2,1897, C.O.42/847.

21 Minutes of June 7, 1897, ibid.

22 Minutes of June 2, 1897, ibid.

23 Despatch from Chamberlain to the Governors of the Colonies and the High Commissioner of Cyprus, Nov. 28, 1895, Parliamentary Paper, Great Britain, House of Commons. 1897 [C.8449], LX, 1.Google Scholar

24 Ibid., 3.

25 Ibid., 2.

26 See précis of his speech in F.O.83/1514.

27 Minutes, undated, ibid.

28 Minutes of June 3, 1897, ibid.

29 Minutes of June 7, 1897, C.O.42/847. Sir Henry Bergne, perhaps aware of Edward Blake's expertise, warned that a “reference to the judicial committee might prove to be extremely embarrassing.” See his minutes, undated, F.O.83/1514.

30 “Minutes of June 18, 1897, ibid.

31 Law officers to the Colonial Office, June 21, 1897, C.O.42/850.

32 Aberdeen to Chamberlain, paraphrase telegram, received 11 a.m., June 23, 1897, C.O.42/847. The Canadian claim to have full power to refund excess duties was based on Section 78, Chapter 29 of the Revised Statutes of Canada.

33 Minutes of June 29, 1897, F.O.83/1514.

34 Minutes by J. Davidson of June 30, 1897, ibid.

35 Minutes, undated, ibid.

36 Davidson to the Attorney General, Confidential, July 1, 1897, ibid. Italics the author's.

37 Attorney General to the Foreign Office, July 1, 1897, ibid.

38 Law officers to the Colonial Office, July 12, 1897, C.O.42/850.

39 See minutes by Edward Wingfleld reporting on a meeting between Chamberlain, Laurier, and Davies of July 15, 1897, ibid.

40 See minutes by John Bramston of July 17, 1897, ibid.

41 Minutes of July 18, 1897, ibid.

42 Law officers to the Colonial Office, Aug. 3, 1897, ibid.

43 Colonial Office to Aberdeen, Aug. 5, 1897, ibid.

44 Tupper to Bell, Moberly [manager of The Times], Ottawa, 06 7, 1897, Tupper Papers, XVIII.Google Scholar

45 Tupper to his son, Ottawa, August 15, 1897, ibid., X.

46 See Salisbury to Sir F. Plunkett (Brussels), Commercial No. 43, July 28, 1897 and Salisbury to Sir F. Lascelles (Berlin), Commercial No. 68, July 28, 1897, Foreign Office Confidential Print, Foreign Office Records, Public Record Office, London.Google Scholar Series F.O.425/231, Correspondence respecting Commercial Negotiations with Germany and Belgium.

47 Salisbury to Sir F. Plunkett, Commercial No. 44, July 28, 1897, and Salisbury to Sir F. Lascelles, Commercial No. 69, July 28, 1897, ibid.

48 In a lead editorial of August 18, 1897, the Montreal Gazette supported Tupper with the statement that Laurier had thwarted commercial union of the Empire having “first killed and then nailed it in its coffin” by means of the differential tariff.

49 See Brainstem's report of his meeting with McNeill on Aug. 19, 1897 and Chamberlain's marginalia, C.O.42/855.

50 Laurier to Lt-Col. G. T. Denison, Private, Ottawa, Dec. 24, 1897, Denison Papers, VII, Public Archives of Canada.

51 Amyot to Laurier, Aug. 5, 1887, Laurier Papers, II, Public Archives of Canada.

52 Parkin to Denison, Tunbridge Wells, Aug. 6, 1897, Denison Papers, VII.