The Dominion MONDAY, JANUARY 27, 1930. THE DOMINIONS AND DISARMAMENT

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 104, 27 January 1930, Page 10

The Dominion MONDAY, JANUARY 27, 1930. THE DOMINIONS AND DISARMAMENT

The naval correspondent of the London Daily Telegraph stresses the point that in the matter of the limitation of armaments it is not a question as to how far the British Government is prepared to go, but how far the British Empire is prepared to-go. He finds in Dominion circles, he says, “a feeling of almost apprehension lest the individuality of the Empire’s forces should be overlooked. , This observation is a reminder that the Dominions through their representatives at the London Disarmament Conference are not mere spectators. Whatever may be suggested by way of reduction ot armaments must necessarily be examined by each in the light of its possible reaction upon local defence policy. At the last Imperial Conference there was recorded by resolution the common desire oi the Governments represented to do their utmost in pursuit of the international reduction and limitation of armaments, “so far as this is consistent with the safety and integrity of all parts of the Empire and its communications.” Herein the Dominions’ right to criticise disarmament proposals from their own point of view is clearly reserved to them. Again, in reference to the Committee of Imperial Defence, it was explicitly stated that its functions were purely advisory and consultative, and that the Dominions could “accept, modify, or reject its advice. Further, “the primary responsibility of each portion of the Elliptic represented at the Conference for its own local defence,” and the deciding authority of its particular Parliament—affirmations of the previous Conference — re-affirmed. The Daily Telegraph’s correspondent declares that when Mr. MacDonald says that Britain is satisfied with fifty cruisers he really is hypothecating the future strength of the whole Empire, although he has admitted, or at least implied, that his preliminary survey was confined to the British Isles, and took no cognisance of Dominion requirements. The point raised is of considerable political significance, in view of the independent status enjoyed by the Dominions. As the .result of the Conference of 1926, they are defined as “autonomous communities within the-British Empire. . . - united by a common allegiance to the Crown.” In point of fact, the King is the pivotal centre of the Imperial system, not the British Government. This explicit constitutional ruling appears in the new definition of the status of the Dominions’ Governors-General as the direct personal‘'representatives of the Crown, “holding in all essential respects the same positions in relation to the administration of .public affa'irs as is held by His Majesty the King in Great Britain.” The political implications of this new relationship are important. Since our allegiance is to the King, and not the British Government, it follows that the policy of the latter may be questioned, even rejected, without any suggestion of disloyalty. At the last Imperial Conference, the then Prime Ministers of Australia and New Zealand were very insistent upon the point that the defence measures should be adequate. Mr. Bruce emphasised that any reduction in armaments should have “due regard to our circumstances,” while Mr. Coates reminded the Imperial delegates that: “While the reduction or limitation of armaments contemplated by the League of Nations, or elsewhere, and the economies that have been effected, - tend to lessen the degree of protection to our commerce, we are daily developing our trade and seaborne commerce. To ensure this protection it seems we need two things, more cruisers, and a base to ensure sea supremacy in the East” It may be that Mr. MacDonald’s intense earnestness for large-scale disarmament has led him to overlook the comparatively recent history of Imperial politics. The reminder that the Dominions are more than sleeping partners is therefore timely. Mr. MacDonald cannot hypothecate their defence policy on his own initiative although there is no reason why all should not work together for disarmament, an objective affirmed at the same Conference at. which Dominions autonomy was asserted.