STATUS OF SOUTH AFRICA

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21116, 17 March 1934, Page 12

STATUS OF SOUTH AFRICA

♦— ! RELATIONSHIP WITH j EMPIRE ! PURPOSE OF LEGISLATION The purpose of the new South , African Status Bill, referred to in J recent cable messages, was ex- ; plained yesterday by authorities of international law as being to make a concession to South African national pride by making it appear that the power of the Crown in South Africa depended on a South African statute instead of on a constitutional law common to the whole ! Empire. South Africa, it was stated, • had always been more advanced in , constitutional theory than the rest ; of the Empire. Mr A. C. Brassington, lecturer on j international law at Canterbury Col- : lege, said that the 192G Imperial I Conference produced the "Balfour i declaration," which went a long way j toward defining Dominion status. The difficulties created by the new definition ot Imperial relauonsnip were handed over to a technical committee to be worked out in the practical application. Matters decided by the 1930 conference were \ by consent of the Dominions dealt with by an Imperial statute —the Statute of Westminster. This has been the subject of considerable discussion, and different views have been taken of its nature and effects. Differing; Views "Professor J. H. Morgan, whose comments were cabled, has the approach of the legalist, and in saying that the present South African proposal 'will be a revolutionary departure and unquestionably a step in the direction of the dissolution ot the Empire,' he. is merely emphasising the view he has already taken of the matters decided at the Imperial Conferences of 1926 and 1930," said Mr Brassington. "Though his opinion carries great weight in these discussions his views should be checked with those of Professor A. B. Keith, an even greater authority. It appears from the cable message, however, that Professor Morgan has considerably qualified his statement, and does not appear to have had the text of the proposed bill before him. "My own reading of the cable message is that the South African Parliament is merely placing in statutory form the position as it is generally understood to exist because of the conferences. What might appear to Professor Morgan to be an alarming step toward the dissolution of the Empire could quite possibly be regarded by other authorities as merely recording the changes which have already taken place. "Many hundreds of books have been written about this subject since the Imperial Conference of 192G, including several very sound j ones by South Africans upholding j the contention that the Dominions ! are already independent states in ' international law. The claim that the present power of the King is lo- j gaily similar to the position of ; George I. as King of Britain and at the same time Elector of Hanover, ! has already been made by South i African and other authoritative writers." Nationalist Desires South Africa, at the Imperial Conference in 192G, put up a .strong claim for the recognition of independent status, and it was mainly to satisfy the claims of General Hertzog that the conference went so far as it did. I The Balfour declaration was re- j garded as a masterly formula, in i that while preserving the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament it yet ( appeared to grant autonomy to South Africa. General Hertzog had accordingly been able to satisfy the nationalist party in South Africa that he had secured from the con- : fcrence South Africa's nationhood, i The agitation about the flag in South Africa had been promoted by the i nationalists, but now appeared to j have died down. j It was important to remember, Mr j Brassington added, that the bill re- , fcrred to in the cable message had ! not vet been discussed by the South ' African Parliament. It would have ; to come under severe criticism from | General J. Smuts, and from other j strong interests opposed to any sug- i gestion of secession from the Empire. '