The Dominions and Britain.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16299, 24 August 1918, Page 8

The Dominions and Britain.

On Wednesday last we discussefl the recent decisions of the Imperial authorities, in consultation with the Dominion Prime Ministers, respecting the relations between Great Britain and. the other self-governing units of the Empire. Hie net effect of theso decisions, as we explained, is that henceforth there will be no subordination of the Dominions to the British Government: the Empire will be both in theory and in practice an alliance of free nations meeting on equal terms under the Crown. This very important step forward in the evolution of the Empire is a desirable one, hut it is not without its risks, and <vhat these risks may be has recently been illustrated by the operations of Mr Hughes. While Mr Massey and Sir Joseph. Ward and the representatives of South Africa, Canada, and Newfoundland have addressed themselves to advancing the Dominion point of view in .terms which respected the full autonomv of Great Britain, Mr W. M. Hughes has contrived to start the new order on its way in an atmosphere in which'the re has been more than a trace of ili-feeling. Before his arrival, his coming was heralded by the Tariff Reform Press as an event of the first importance, for he was the one strong man in the Empire, and would use his great power to give Britain the good advice which British statesmen wore unable or unwilling to give. Mr Hughes has amply fulfilled the expectations of his British supporters—so amply that his speeches will take a high place in the records of British party polemics. He allowed himself frequently to forget tha salutary principle, carefully observed by the other Dominion representatives, that the domestic concerns of each part of the Empire are no concern of the other parts.- Impatient of the criticism whioh some of his utterances naturally provoked from those whom ho challenged, ho went so far as to suggest, more than once, that the British Freetraders are agents of Germany. This was inexcusable, and it is not to be wondered at that his activities received some notice in both Houses of Parliament. The opinion of a large section of the British public was voiced by Mr Samuel, formerly Home Secretary, when he said that while any man was entitled to enter the arena of political controversy and violently to attack party leaders, yet Mr Hughes should first have divested himself of the character of Prime Minister cf Australia; In the House of Lords Earl Beauchamp asked whether" Mr Hughes spoke, as a private individual when advocating preferential tariffs, and the Marquis of Crewe, a judicious critic, said Mr Hughes had in some of his speeches overstepped the line. Lord Curzon, in replying, declared that in his opinion Mr Hughes Trad not transgressed the laws < r hospitality, and. ho expressed the view that there would be considerable danger in trying to muzzle Mr Hughes or any other colonial statesman. It is not appar-v ent that the Freetraders have asked for the muzzling of Mr Hughes, or for anything more .than information as to the extent to which the old principle; of mutual non-interference had been varied. The "Spectator" of last Saturday week used some expressions, in an article rebuking the Liberals, which seem to amount to a repudiation of that j principle altogether. It would be the [ height of absurdity, it said, "to ques-j " tion his right to interfere in British "concerns," adding that "Mr Hughes, 1 " as an ' Australian, is minding liis "own business when ho' is minding "ours." This is a startling doctrine, and it is one which no New Zealand^r. would be eager to accept, since the' implied converse is that a British statesman, or a number of them in combination, or a great British political party, may claim tho right to interfere in New Zealand concerns. It will not make for success in the working of the new Imperial system if each Dominion is to be considered free to seek tho antagonism of half the people of Britain of. of some other of the ,

partners in the Empire. Fortunately the tactful and conciliatory speeches of the representatives of the Dominions other than Australia may be expected to offset the unguarded words of Mr Hughes.