IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

Evening Star, Issue 19387, 22 October 1926, Page 5

IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

BRITAIN'S FOREIGN POLICY EXPLAINED TO DOMINIONS IMPOSSIBILITY OF INDEPENDENCE. Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright LONDON, October 20. Over to-day’s proceedings at the imperial Conference there has fallen an official veil of impenetrable secrecy. It was hinted yesterday that Sir Anslon Chamberlain’s three hours’ review of the foreign affairs of the moment would bo so frank that it was hopeless to expect even a remote outline for release to the host of journalists who daily haunt Downing Street. It is understopef that the conference, when confronted with Sir Austen Chamberlain’s complete candor at the morning session, resolved to treat the whole matter as most strictly confidential, so there has not been even the skeleton of a revelation in the dominions’ publicity departments. The midday announcement and the journalists’ evening interview were cancelled, as it was apparent that the unhappy results attending the conference of 1023, when an abridgment of Lord Curzon’s statement, supplemented by accurate parliamentary leakages, which when cabled back from America to P.aris caused some feeling in Franco, where the Ruhr occupation was at the moment a burning question, had decided the conference that its only safety lay in complete silence. Therefore all the delegates were pledged not to divulge a syllable. The only communication given out was the announcement already cabled of tbe delivery of a speech by Sir Austen Chamberlain.

It is understood that the speech was divided into two parts. The first was an outline of the happenings since 1923, when European politics were still a ma® of perplexities and mistrust, more or loss associated with the Ruhr occupation. From this point Sir Anston Chamberlain went on to recite the attempts at conciliation, mentioning that Mr Ramsay MacDonald and M. Harriot were in accord; then the failure of the Geneva protocol to win approval over general obligations: and finally the conversations which led up to the LocarnoPact, with Germany’s entrance into the League of Nations. Sir Anston Chamberlain on these lines defended the Locarno Pact as sound European diplomacy. He mentioned that already there were hotter Franco-German relations, with a strong hope lor a further improvement if the Thnry conversations were followed up in the spirit of Locarno. The second part of Sir Anston Chamberlain's speech was more general in character, including the Chinese situation and the difficulties confronting the restoration of Russia to the realm of normal diplomatic relations and recognition. As to Locarno, there is reason to believe that the speech dealt only with the results and effects of the Locarno Pact. The more difficult question of omitting the dominions from that compact was left to bo thrashed out at a later sitting, but it is understood that Sir Austen Chamberlain’s complete uncovering of every channel of diplomatic intercourse was so unreserved and arresting as to throw into vivid relief the virtual impossibility of safely accommodating the cold facts to the ideal of dominion independence in the field of foreign affairs. It is acknowledged that those dominions aspiring to complete autonomy and independence were unable to suggest how to overcome the dictum “ When the King is at war the Empire is at war,” or to answer the question whether their declared neutrality would be observed by the King’s enemies. This is regarded as the kernal of the whole problem of international interimperial relations, and Sir Austen Chamberlain’s exhaustive analytical survey of foreign affairs is generally understood to have emphasised that new paths must be ;hosen cautiously.

It is significant that to-morrow’s programme consists of addresses by Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister and Mr L. S. Amery in order that the Prime Ministers may have time to reflect on Sir Austen Chamberlain’s exposition of world affairs.

The Australians, New Zealanders, and Indians listened with keen interest to Lord Lloyd's statement of the present position in Egypt, especially in relation to the preservation of the most vulnerable link in the Empire’s fine sea communications. QUESTIONNAIRE ON MANDATES. RESENTED BY TRUSTEES. LONDON, October 20. The ‘Daily Telegraph’s’ diplomatic correspondent says that before the conference met, Mr Baldwin, Sir Austen Chamberlain, and Mr L. S. Amery exchanged views with Mr Bruce, Mr Coates, and General Hertzog on the League’s new inquisitorial questionnaire, on mandates. The dominion representative showed themselves no loss resentful of its terms than Sir Austen Chamberlain. The desirability was mentioned of terminating the mandates system if the trustee Powers were to be subjected to the Commission’s vexatious interference, but it was eventually agreed that the present circumstances did not warrant the serious contemplation of such a drastic step. The correspondent foreshadows that the conference before closing will come to a decision concerning the dominions’ candidature at the next League Council elections, and that Canada will bo selected as the Empire’s nominee. The correspondent also expresses surprise at the minute scrutiny to which the Locarno text has boon subjected by the dominions’ jurists, most of whom do not accept the contention of the authors of the pact that it does not increase the obligations of the League States under the Covenant. SOUTH AFRICA’S ATTITUDE. OFFICIAL CIRCLES CONCERNED. LONDON, October 20. The ‘ Daily Herald’s ’ diplomatic correspondent states: “A portion of General Hertzog’s speech has caused a considerable flutter in official circles. General Hertzog’s views have never been concealed, but recently there has been an impression that he had moderated them. Therefore the passage ‘in the practice of consultation with a view to co-operation wherever possible,’ when only ceremonies of politeness arc to be expected, came as a shock. ‘ Co-opera-tion wherever possible ’ is a far weaker obligation than any alliance, and reduces the Empire to a rather shadowy entente.”

The ‘ Star,’ in a leader, says: “ General Hertzog comes to the conference in the trying temper of a candid friend. He challenges the other dominions to recognise that South Africa will only remain in the Commonwealth on her own terras. No doubt Mr Baldwin will apply the soothing syrup of political

commonplace. Ho should add that if General Hortzog's idea of free nationhood includes freedom to impose on the native races the oppressive domination which iis part of General Hertzog ,s policy, it would bo difficult to keep South Africa within an Empire which is based on the theoretical equality or men of every color

VALUE OF PUBLICITY

NEWSPAPER BANQUET.

LONDON, October 20. The overseas delegates to the imperial Conference were given a banquet at the Savov Hotel under the auspices of the Empire Press Union, the Newspaper Proprietors’ Association, the | Newspaper Society, and kindred organisations. The assembly represented the principal figures in the British I rcss, statesmen, and representatives of the Empire’s public men, including Messrs P. Selig and Robert Bell. Viscount Burnham, who presided, said that the Imperial Conferences, were intended to strengthen the Empires bonds, hut the process must bo gradual. There were allegedly constitutional bugbears to frighten us, but they would disappear. Mr Mackenzie King said that tne conferences might do much for the world’s peace by 'interpreting AngloAmerican opinion. Mr Ifnico said that the recent Australian Press Conlerence had enabled Britain to interpret Australian ambition. The Imperial Conference could do nothing without public opinion. The Press could educate public opinion to realise the importance of Imperial problems. ft was only necessary for the British people to realise how groat was our opportunity to go forward with a new spirit in order to secure the accomplishment of those things to which past efforts had been devoted. 11 it comes to a question of the British Empire and the British people against any other nation,” Mr Bruce declared, “ wo arc determined that we will bo as one, and will tight anything which will lead to the breaking up of the great unity that to-day is ono of the stable forces in the world for tho promotion of world peace.” Lord Burnham, replying to the Maharajah of Burdwan, said that any invitation to the Press Conference to meet India would be gladly accepted. Mr Coates said that the conference would explore all the avenues to ensure a mutual fntcrimpcrial understanding. He advocated New Zealand’s advantages for migrants, and pointed out that the Press Congress of the World might hold its next meeting there. He paid a tribute to New Zealand’s Press, and emphasised tho dominion’s loyalty to Britain. SIR AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN’S SPEECH LONDON, October 20. Tiso accounts published in most of tho London morning papers indicate how closely tho compact not to reveal tho intimate details of Sir Austen Chamberlain's speech have been observed. Tho ‘ Morning Post’ says that he did not touch the question whether or not the dominions should adhere to the Locarno Pact, but pointed out that in practice the treaty does not carry any further obligations than are already undertaken by tho signatories to the League Covenant. Tho ‘Daily Telegraph’ says that the absence of publicity should not bo taken to connote, the existence of any new or disturbing features in the international situation.