Evening Post. THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 1918. MINISTERS IN LONDON

Evening Post, Volume XCV, Issue 140, 13 June 1918, Page 6

Evening Post. THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 1918. MINISTERS IN LONDON

All the overseas delegates to the Imperial War Conference have arrived in London, and have received a warm welcome from the British people. The newspapers take occasion to refer to the unity of the Empire which the war has demonstrated. The fact that representatives of all the self-governing Dominions and India should in the fourth year of the war be assembled at the heart of tho Empire to take counsel together is indeed a striking proof of the efficacy of Germany's sledge-hammer blows in welding the structure which they were intended to shatter. The arrival of these representatives from all parts of the world, and the answer of every one of them to the roll-call in London on the time-table date, also tend to show that the command of the sea, with which Germany made so brilliant a beginning ,at the battle of Jutland two years ago, and which her submarine "heroes" were to. have completed a year later, still awaits the finishing touches. The Imperial War Cabinet and War Conference which are now in session in London are indeed in themselves a splendid demonstration of Imperial unity and Imperial strength, and are calculated therefore to exercise a profound moral effect at a time when the influence of the moral element upon the fortunes of the war is appreciated more keenly than ever. But the Empire is expecting something more from the second series of these meetings than a mere moral demonstration. It expects from a body which represents the whole Empire and is clothed with both advisory and executive functions some definite help, bith in the more vigorous prosecu^. tion of the war through the stimulation and co-ordination of the efforts which are being made on more or less individual lines by all the Imperial units, and also in the way of guidance with regard to the problems which the peace negotiations and the era of reparation and reconstruction will present.

The first class of questions—those which concern the better organisation cf all the resources of tho Empire for the winning of the war—will primarily concern the War Cabinet; and we must not I expect to 9 hear much about them, except such of the general conclusions arrived at as it may not be inexpedient forrfoes as well as friends to know when the deliberations have been concluded. The broader and remoter issues which will be the concern of the War Conference are not for the most part of the same confidential character, and their discussion has been opened by the newspapers in anticipation of the sittings of the Conference. The two issues which liavo bulked most largely in this discussion are apparently Ireland and the Pacific. As to the first of these, the principal point in controversy is whether it should come before the Conference at all. The Conference of 1917 was invited to tackle the Irish question, and tho suggestion was freely made that overseas statesmen, approaching the problem with unprejudiced minds, and with a due appreciation of the blessings both of the Imperial connection and of the fullest possible measure of local autonomy compatible therewith, would make short work of a question which for generations _ had baffled j the biased, cramped, and effete intelligence of British statesmanship. But last year's Conference prudently declined, the flattering invitation, and its successor will probably' do well to follow its example. It is perfectly true that the representatives of the Dominions would not take long to settle the general principles to be applied to the Irish question. They would show no more hesitation than American'opinion has shown in the matter, and a general declaration from the Dominions 'might have carried some weight a year ago, just as the general opinions collected by The Times from the United States about that time undoubtedly did. But the issue has changed since then, and with the change the time when any declaration on general lines could be of any great value has passed. That Ireland should be as free to frame its own domestic policy as Massachusetts c* Virginia, but that it should ba no more free than they to touch foreign policy except through its representatives in a Parliament representing the whole. Union—these truths have always appeared vital and fundamental to American eyes, and the same may be said of colonial opinion. But British opinion also has now arrived at the same conclusion. A year ago this could not be isaid .with certainty, but Mr. Llojf^

George's declaration in March in favour of conscription and Home Rule for Ireland meant that a Government which is in the main Unionist is definitely committed to a Home Rule policy, that the Unionist Party can. no longer oppose tho policy on the old "die-hard" lines, and that even the House of Lords must confine its future opposition to details. With the disappearance of any opposition to the principle of Home Rule the power of the Imperial Conference to help in the matter has been, to say the least, very muc'i attenuated. It is interesting to find that a strong plea for the help of the Conference now comes from a Radical source. The Westminster Gazette urges that the Irish question has enormous importance for the Dominion, and that tho British people should be induced to regard it as an Imperial, not a domestic, matter. This is good logic and good sense, but even so it would be undesirable for the Dominions to interfere except in a general way with an issue which, though of great Imperial importance, is primarily a domestic matter, and therefore to be decided by a domestic tribunal.

• With regard to the future of the Pacific, it is highly gratifying to find that, though Australasian sentiment received a. rude shock at the beginning of the year- from the apparent weakening of the British attitude to the matter, the opinions expressed on the eve of the Imperial Conference are highly favourable. It may be that the protests evoked from this side of the" world by the iear of Britain's backsliding have helped to produce this result. It would of course be a mistake to take too literally the statement of the Standard that "the British people are heart and soul with the Australasians in demanding that the Germans shall no longer have a foothold in the Pacific." The British Labour Party has never shown any enthusiasm in support of this demand, but it must be remembered that its protest, which made so unpleasant an impression in Australia, and New Zealand, was only ' against annexations of any kind to the British Empire. Its attitude was certainly not inspired by pro-German sentiment, nor even by any prejudice in favour of the status quo of July, 1914. This was conclusively proved by the scorn which the British delegates to the Allied Socialists' Conference poured upon the proposal that the German colonies in the Pacific should be restored to their former owners. Australasian opinion has certainly been clarified and denned by the anti-Imperial declarations of British Labour. The apprehensions excited by those declarations have enabled us to realise that the essential and indispensable point is to keep Germany out of the Pacific. Australia and New Zealand are not anxious to enlarge either their own boundaries or those of the Empire, but they regard the exclusion of Germany as a life-and-death matter, and they are thankful to see the strong support that' this attitude receives from British opinion.