EMPIRE UNITY.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18871, 10 December 1926, Page 11

EMPIRE UNITY.

CONFERENCE REPORT CRITICISED.

HOUSE OF LORDS DISCUSSION

(I'T CABLE— rSESS ASSOCIATION—COPYTUOIIT.) \austeai.:as and b.z. cable ASSOCIATION.)

LONDON. December 9

In the House of Lords, Lord Parmoor drew attention to the Imperial Conference and criticised the report upon the relations between the- units of the British Empire. He questioned whether it was wise to lay down the general principles of equality before essential differences had been "disposed of by an enquiry. He asked whether freedom of association also meant freedom of separation. Lord Balfour, replying, said Lord Parmoor seemed to have approached a difficult and complicated question from the wrong viewpoint. Ho could not imagine a policy from which ho differed more profoundly than the suggestion that before laying down the general principles on which the Empire was now constituted all difficulties must be removed and all technicalities settled. Could anything be moro lawyer-like and less statesmanlike? Lord Balfour asked: What would happen if the Dominions wished to separateP What sort of notice should be given? They might as well consider all tho causes of divorce before deciding the problems of matrimony. Lord Balfour continued that 'that was the wrong way to work. The way to get rid of difficulties was for the Prime Ministers of all the Dominions to discuss the question in all its aspects and agree on the broad principle that no control was exercisable by any one self-governing part of the Empire over another. Foreign critics were disposed to say that standing upon equality, the units of the Empire were bound to separate. His view was that the British Empire was a moro united organism now than ever before. There could not be equality in function, however, for this must depend upon the circumstances of the moment, "but this does not conflict with the fundamental equality of status, which is the only permanent bond between the self-governing portions."

Lord Pannoor, in withdrawing the motion, said ho was quite in agreement with Lord Balfour..

SOUTH AFRICA FINISHED WITH SECESSION.

(BY CABLE—FHEB3 ASSOCIATION—COPYRIGHT.) (AUSTRALIAN AND H.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION.)

CAPE TOWN, December 8,

Addressing tho South African Party Provincial Congress at Pretoria, General Smuts made his first reference to the Imperial status question since Dr. Tielman Roos's repudiation of secession, The work of the South African Party, said General Smuts, was now crowned with success. The decisions of the Imperial Conference and General Hertzog's whole-hearted acceptance of them completely justified the South African Party's action. He maintained, however, that there was no material change in principlo from the position defined at the Imperial Conference three years ago, when the right of treaty-making was freely conceded to the Dominions. What change's were made were of minor importance. ' He hoped that now South Africans were finished with secession for ever.