Greymouth Evening Star. WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 1744. EMPIRE OR U.S.A. ?

Greymouth Evening Star, 17 May 1944, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 1744. EMPIRE OR U.S.A. ?

piE London conference of Empire Prime Ministers lias conclnded. and soon there will be issued an official summary of the decisions. This is unlikely to lie very informative, and will be roseate in. hue. There is little reason to doubt that the Prime Ministers’ discussions strengthened Empire unity and understandings, and that a post-war policy was outlined on general principles. Mr. Curtin was unable to secure sufficient support for liis desire for a permanent Empire. Secretariat to be appointed, and the Canberra Pact was relegated to the background. Mr. Fraser appears to have agreed with more or less everybody, General Smuts has had no publicity in these parts, and Mr. Mackenzie King little more, although his speech to the united. Lords and Commons was worth while.

Em pin* migration was not much advanced. Britain was candid that she had few men to spare, and each Dominion will be left to make its own arrangements. It is doubtful if the present Labour Governments in Australia and New Zealand will favour really comprehensive proposals to attract Continental Europeans. l\lr. Eraser’s invitation to Britain’s capitalists and industrialists to establish works in New Zealand, will be endorsed by all in this country, but in view of the special labour legislation, heavy taxation, and other obstacles to successful commerce, it is doubtful if the invitation will be widely accepted. Britain to the worker is becoming yearly more attractive with, promise that post-war plans will bring further benefits. On the other hand, New Zealand has lost much of its one-time glamour to Britain's prospective emigrants, and in the competition with other Dominions for new population, she will be somewhat handicapped, despite this country’s great climatic and other advantages.

One grave omission by the Prime Ministers lias been revealed by the “Chicago Tribune,” a newspaper consistently antiBritish, which declares that “the Conference has not given sufficient attention to the fact that the United Stall's went into the war as one man the, moment the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour.” Just what the Conference had to do with this, and just what else the United States could have done is not clear, except to this isolationist journal. The ‘“Tribune”, apparently, believes that Australia and New Zealand are so dismayed at the Premiers’ omission and so impressed by the American patriotism, as to desire to quit the Empire and join the U.S.A. They are assured by the “Tribune” that although Washington cannot send a formal invitation, it would favourably consider a merger application from the two countries. A guarantee of protection in the next war would thus be secured by the two Dominions, hut what the 1 .S.A. would obtain in return is not mentioned. The “Tribune” has made similar suggestions before, but has most ol: the enthusiasm to itself. Australia and New Zealand are grateful for the help against Japan given by the U.S.A, in the present struggle, but The Americans, whoso main aim was self-preservation, also, have cause to be thankful, not only to the Dominions, but to Britain, whose lone struggle iagainst the Axis, before Pearl Harbour, saved U.S.A, as well as the rest ol the world from Axis domination. Nothing has developed to induce a belie! that Australia and New Zealand would benefit by joining the U.S.A. On the contrary. 'lhere is, of course, little desire in either country to exchange Empire membership for a merger into the U.5.A.,-nor is there any acceptance of the estimate by some American journals that the Empire has had its day, and that only U.S.A, will count ; in future. The “Tribune’s” comments, would not be worth serious notice but | for the fact that this newspaper has a] huge circulation and is influential among] those in U.S.A, who are anti-British most of-the time. It is well to read occasionally | what the American isolationist commentators are saying.