The Dominion. FRIDAY, MAY 26, 1911. EMPIRE POLICY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1137, 26 May 1911, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, MAY 26, 1911. EMPIRE POLICY.

The first thing that will strike the careful reader of the opening speech at the Imperial Conference on Sir Josemi AVabd's motion for the establishment of an "Imperial Council of State" is the fact that the mover seems to have advocated far more in his speech than is contained in the motion. The resolution asks for a Council advisory to the British Government "on all questions affecting the interests of His Majesty's Dominions oversea"; Sir Joseph AVard urged in his speech the representation of the Dominions in an Imperial Parliament for determining questions of peace and war, questions of foreign policy and international treaties. If this is evidence of a confused mind in a state of transition to a better knowledge of the great and complex problems that wait upon any material disturbance of existing arrangements, Sir Joseph AVakd can claim that he has not been alone in his confusion. It is pretty clear from his speech, in which he rested the case for change on the necessity for doing now "while the Dominions' populations are limited" what may be very difficult in the future, that he has been studying the most recent phases of British discussion upon the_ subject. There is not very much in his speech, otherwise; that calls for comment, but, in addition to a word of thankfulness that ho at last realises the importance of immigration as an Imperial concern, we may add a word upon his statement that "the component parts of the Empire are now hold together by sentiment." The context shows that his following argument involved the opinion, or perhaps a fear, that sentiment would not always be as good a cement as it is now. There is no warrant for any such supposition; on the contrary, the history of the Empire and the heart of the ordinary "Britisher" combine to establish a strong case for the permanence ■ of this sentiment. As long ago as 1597 Mr. Chamberlain pleaded for "closer union," but he could say nothing that could disturb the position of anyone who chose to affirm the all-sufficiency of the spiritual basis of the Empire. It so happens that the mail which arrived yesterday brought some highly important contributions to the problems involved in Sir Joseph Ward's proposal. The main problem, of course, is the part that the Dominions should play in determining the foreign policy of Britain. That, it might almost be said, is the whole problem,, for defence policy and foreign policy arc as inseparable from one another, to quote a good phrase, as the two sides of the same penny. In the House of Commons last month (on April 19), a debate took place upon a motion that "the international situation" should be discussed by the Conference, and tho debate was largely influenced by some weighty articles in the limes. That journal pointed out that the international situation directly or indirectly affected all the larger questions of Imperial policy, and pleaded strongly for a full and free, but necessarily secret, discussion at the Conference upon the principles of British foreign policy and the conditions in which it has to do its daily work. A contributor to the Times, after referring to the naval developments in tho colonies, and the commercial treaties between colonies and foreign Powers, argued ; that "if the Dominions are to possess navies of their own they must presumably also have some kind of foreign policy."- At present, he pointed out, they knew nothing, and had no means of knowing anything, of the hidden realities of foreign affairs or, therefore, of the wisest policy in. critical times. Some machinery should therefore be devised by which they could learn about such matters and keep in close and constant communication with the British Government. The motion in the House of Commons to which we have referred was withdrawn, after it had brought from the Colonial Secretary an announcement that it had always been the intention of the Government to take the colonial Prime Ministers into consultation on matters of international concern, and that the Government would give them any information which they desired. That the Dominions should fit in with the foreign policy of Britain is a doctrine about which there can be no dispute, and the only question, therefore, should be, AVhat machinery will secure harmony and continuity in foreign policy 1 It is quite plain that the British Government is opposed to any large change that implies a change in our present conception of the Empire. Mr. Asquith has made that clear. For our own part- we feel certain that anything that tends to a premature Federation—and the advocates of an Imperial Council of State all admit that it is to be the seed of a formal Federation—will be a dangerous experiment. The time to sow even the seed for Federation, if Federation is to come, is when by heir weight and power the Dominions can federate with dignity and effect. Otherwise the seed, instead of quickly ripening to sound grain, will go bad. In addition to the report of the discussion at the Conference, we print to-day a long report of a remarkable banquet in London. Simple men can and will join with cautious students of Imperial affairs in wondering why, in the face of the feeling revealed at that gathering, there should be so much anxiety to rush a strait-jacket on to the Empire. The speeches of the Prime Ministers there are the best reply to the advocates of fundamental change and to the gropers after change. This view may not be shared by some. Mr. J. G. AVilson, for instance, rather takes us to task, in a letter we print in another column, for our attitude on this matter. With much of Mr. Wilson's letter we heartily agree, but we are afraid he has misunderstood us, perhaps through our own fault. He puts a hypothetical case: Supposing the Conference were to resolve that the cost of naval defence should bn evenly borne by the Empire, and

that an Imperial Parliament with certain powers should hs constituted in which Hie contributing nations Would be represented. "Could we," in such an event, he then asks, "refuse to agree, would Parliament refuse to ratify the request! Are you therefore justified in saying that those who think that these changes may bo foreshadowed have 'uninstmeted minds' , !" We think we arc. For most of those in New. Zealand who think an Imperial Parliament a fine tiling to set going think so because they have not really considered what it would mean. It would be absurd to say that to advocate Imperial Federation necessarily to display one's want of knowledge. Many profound thinkers long for such Federation. Our charge against them is only that they have not enough faith in the spirit of the Empire; and there is no room for argument on a point of faith. Great as may be the need for the closest co-operation between the parts of the Empire in Empire policy—a need we fully recognise—vc are firmly convinced that that need can be met without disturbing the foundations.