Evening Post. MONDAY, JUNE 29, 1931. "PASSING IT ON?"

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 151, 29 June 1931, Page 8

Evening Post. MONDAY, JUNE 29, 1931. "PASSING IT ON?"

Ten years ago, when on tho eve of tho Washington Conference General Smuts was suggesting thai the Dominions should boycott it on the- ground that they had not received independent invitations, Mr. Massey on behalf of a Dominion which was proud to be included in an Empire delegation and had no desire to pose as an-independent Naval Power at a Disarmament Conference strongly took tho opposite view. Tf Mr. Massey had then been told that before very long South Africa would be giving the other , Dominions an inspiring lead and that New Zealand would decline to follow it he would pi'obably have replied, "Not in my time," and he would havebeen right. Such a J reversal was impossible while Mr. Massey lived, but some of those who were then his colleagues were fated to see it. The first great Imperial event after his death found the position unaltered. South Africa looked askance at , the Locarno Treaty, and General Smuts, who was then in ppposition, deplored the danger to the Empire of , the increased responsibilities which Britain | had undertaken on behalf of the; peace of Europe. The declaration, of Mr. Coates was, on the other \ hand, in full accord with the Massey | tradition, and also, we may add, with ' the Seddon and the Ward tradition. | New Zealand's place was, he said, by! the side of Britain, and she would j therefore accept the obligations from . which the Treaty purported to ex-, elude the Dominions except in so far' as: any of them expressly ratified it.1 We may safely assume that it was in i consequence of what Mr. Coates heard at the Imperial Conference of 1926 that those stirring words were j not made good, but it was neverlhe-; less deplorable that New Zealand [ should, on the face of it, have made i default without a single public word j of apology, regret, or explanation. • | The news from Cape Town which | we published on' Saturday alongside j of the«report of a debate in the New j Zealand Parliament shows that tliej wheel has now"' swung full circle, i Speaking on Friday General Smuts i welcomed President Hoover's offer of; a war debts moratorium as "the | most outstanding event in recent years." All the world looked to America for' help, ho said, and she has not failed. I He might have added that all th.e| Dominions looked to Britain for i help, and she has not failed. But, though Mr. Baldwin as Leader of the, Opposition had supported the British \ Government's generous offer as j "fully consistent with the dignity and' the reputation of our country," the I Leader of the.Opposition in South, Africa did not consider that it] would be consistent with the dignity i and the reputation of his country to \ accept. ' I General Smuts "said it woald go to ' help Australia to' ro-oatabliah hoi'solf, | but ao far aa South Africa was eon- j cerned she was in a position to pay nor debts, and must do so. "We have never , had to aeoept a moratorium, ami it : would bo a climb-down if we did ao | now. The Government should thank tho i British Government for its generoua : offer, but should refuse it." , It ia, of course, always easier for an Opposition to preach economical self-sacrifice than foT a Government1 to accept it, but on this occasion there was no conflict of opinion. The I reply of the South African Government as stated by Mr. Bodinstein, the Secretary for External Affairs, is that while the TTnion had intimated its cordial agreement with President Hoover's proposal, and the Government had a high appreciation of Britain's offer to share tho moratorium, it does not consider the circumstances of the Union such as to justify acceptance, j and. accordingly, will continuo to meet the payments as they are duo. It is not gratifying to our British pride that a gentleman named Bodin- J stein, as the spokesman of a Boer Government, should be setting the j other Dominions an example in this matter which they are not prepared to follow, and to say that he spoke not as an Imperialist but as a Nationalist is but cold comfort. Self-re- i spect and the determination to pay twenty shillings in the pound are estimable virtues which those who profess a higher patriotism would be wiser to imitate than to belittle by uncomplimentary labels. It is, indeed, probable that, had South Africa's decision been known earlier, it might have altered the trend of the debate in our own Parliament, though it could not have affected the result. At the least, South Africa must have shared in the admiration expressed for Great Britain and the United States. But if the synchronism of the two decisions was unfortunate in this respect, Jt was happy in the coincidence which it revealed between the arguments independently employed by_ General Smuts and Mr. Downie Stewart. Alone of our speakers Mr. Stewart appeared .to have a full appreciation of the immense sacrifice that Britain is making for her daughter^ States, to which the process is bo familiar that they accept it as a part of the natural order of things, and never think of reciprocating.

When one considered the tremendous burden under which Britain was lab' owing at present, said Mr. Stewart, and her untiring efforts to restore peace and prosperity to a troubled world,'

tho offer must arouso the admiration of everyone. Whilo our difficulties were great, those of ■ Great' Britain were so overwhelming that it was almost surprising how sho -had found it possible to mnko tho offier. ..Mr. Forties, on -the other hand, missed the mark very seriously, His reference to President Hoover's offer as "a splendid one" was, of course, as it should have been, but of, Britain's contribution he spoke in , a lower key, as though she were merely the handmaiden or conduitpipe of -American generosity. Yet every penny of what Britain is conceding to the Dominions is entirely outside of the letter of the Hoover ofler, and New Zealand's share during the. current year, after deducting the £270,000 she will lose from the suspension of German reparations, will be £540,000. We are indemnified against loss with a bonus added of just 200 per cent, at the cost of the British taxpayer, and Mr. Forbes disguises it, unintentionally, no doubt, under the term "passing it on"! ; ■ Mr. DoAvnie Stewart's suggestion was that we should forego this bonus and that it would he in our own in-1 tercst to do so. v ThQ reason I put that to tho Prime Minister is, ho said, that it is obvious from the state of affairs in Groat Britain that "our Credit suffered a very .severe shock from our association, with Australia, and if wo said to Great Britain that we were prepared to pay her what we owe, except thq amount we did not get from--Germany, J think it is. , worth ; considering ,-whether it would not be worth while, with a view to improving our credit in London in the.near future. But even from his own side of the House Mr. Stewart's excellent proposal received no support at all. nor can we blame the Prime Minister for not accepting it If he had been in close touch with the Reform Party, as he ought to be, and Mr. Pownie Stewart's proposal had had the two parties behind it, it would have been practical politics. But under existing conditions Mr. Forbes would have courted disaster if he had brought it forward. Thanks to the three-party system' New Zealand lakes her place not beside South Africa, which is proud to pay her way, but beside Australia,, which is badly .in need of help, and is not afraid to say so.