FOREIGN POLICY.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17809, 7 July 1923, Page 14

FOREIGN POLICY.

RIGHTS OF DOMINIONS. CONFLICTING DOCTRINES. (srecm. to'thb nx&e.'l WELLINGTON, July U. The Minister of Customs (the Hon. W Downio Stewart 1 uoiivered au interesting speech in the House to-night on the rights of the Dominions in their relation to foreign and Imperial affairs. He reaffirmed the doctrine that had hitherto been enunciated by New Zealand's representative at the Imperial Conference, that the welfare of the 'Empire and the Dominion was one and the same. He joined issue with the reference of the Leader of tho Opposition to tho example of the Irish Free State, which claimed the right to keep out of war even though Great Britain were involved. To follow that theory 'to its logical conclusion would bo to assume, ho said, that tho Irish Free State was not part of British Empire.

'Tho reason I attach enormous importance to the Prime Minister going to the Conference is," he said, "that it is in my view necessary to get au expression of opinion at the Conference of the doctrines we have always subscribed to. In Canada and South Africa at tlie present time there are tendencies whicn, if developed in their full meaning, can result in nothing else than the disintegration of the Empire. The Australian iVime Ministers nave usually adhered to the doctrine, but Mr Id ughts spoke witii a very uncertain voice, anu sometimes expressed the opinion that the Dominions weret reaching a new status and wore not bound by tho Imperial ideal." Mr Stewart) quoted an opinion of tbe Canadian Attorney-General that the Dominion had her own Constitution, aaid had the right to make her own treaties. There were numerous expressions from front rank Canadian men that they did not agree with the doctrine that if the Empire fell its integral parts must fall too. General Hmuts had been emphatic that South Africa, should not be involved in war or pe«ce except by her own act, The matter should bo the first discussed at tlie Imperial Conference. It was tru© that Great Britain had allowed tho Dominions, a fidl share in the formation of tho foreign policy of the Empire, but the real constitutional position was that the sovereignty of the JUmpire was still vested in the Crown and the Parliament of! Great Britain, and if the claims of those Dominions were considered, it would disturb that sovereignly. After referring to the difficulties in representation that were experienced at the Washington Oimferonoo; MrSuetvart aaid/that General Smuts's proposal was tantamount to having a Sovereign with Jive sets of Ministers to be consulted aa advisers. The old theory that tho King oould do no wrong fell to the ground, and no general Empire policy could b» evolved at «li. A man would have allegiance to two sovereigns, one of lua own immediate nation and the Empire, and they oould no mora expect success from it than that two sides of & triangle should be less than a third. The Imperial Conference was but a et«f> to the Imperial Excoutir*, but there was no move for an Imperial Lqgiahvture. Rather it the other way. The doctrines of the hour seemed to be Dominion autonomy. How the Imperial Executive was to be developed had not yet been established. It had been thought that it would hav© functioned through there being a Dominion Minister* resident iu London. (Mr Wilford: Hear, hear.) But no Dominion had wen fit to appoint such a representative.