IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 136, 25 May 1911, Page 1

IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

MR. ASQUITH’S SPEECH. UNITS OF A GREATER UNIT. [PRESS ASSOCIATION. —COPYRIGHT ]. London. May 24. Mr. Asquith said that by a happy coincidence the time chosen for the* conference would enable the statesmen of the self-governing dominions to take a personal part in the Coronation. The Empire was made up of countries not geographically conterminous or even contiguous. It did not even draw its unifying cohesive force solely from > identity of race or language. They: had here a political organisation' which by its mere existence ruled out of all possibility war between populations numbering something like one-third of the human race. There were two things in the selfgoverning British Empire unique in the history of great political aggregations. The first was the reign of law; the second was the combination of local autonomy ababsolutely unfettered with loyalty to a common head. In the early Victorian era there were two rough and ready solutions of the colonial problem. One was centralisation. or government from Downing street. The other was disintregation, by which each community as it grew to manhood would, without embitterment, start an independent existence. After seventy years of Imperial evolution neither of these theories commanded the faintest support in any part of the Empire. Now each intended to remain master of its own household, but units in a greater unit. ' AUSTR A LI A’S WHOLE-HEART-ED DESIRE. Mr. Fisher said he had come to the conference as a whole-hearted advocate of the conference, and. gain would accrue if it could meet,; not only in the centre of the Em-' pire, but in the centres of the other dominions. He earnestly appealed to Mr. Asquith to take some strong steps to remedy the grave abuse affecting the commerce of the Empire and other countries in the shape of the exorbitant Suez Canal charges. He hoped the Government would afford the dominions more, expeditious access to the trade reports from every part, of the world. Referring to the defence scheme, he said that Australia desired to help in the preservation of the honour and greatness of the Mother Country, and would cheerfully co-operate with the Mother Country while protecting its. own shores. The Commonwealth desired to assist anything in the shaps of international arbitration to preserve the peace of the world. PRIVACY TO BE PRESERVED. Sir Joseph Ward, in moving the admission of the press, referred to the difficulty of obtaining information at the last conference, a difficulty which the press was unable to control. Sir Wilfrid Laurier said the last conference arrangements were satisfactory. The people of New Zealand were as well informed as the people of London and Canada. If, the press were admitted their deliberations would assume the form of a public discussion. It was necessary to preserve their privacy and publish the results, not the differences of opinion. Mr. Fisher sympathised with the resolution, but said that if the press withdrew when a particular subject was discussed public attention would be markedly dravrn to it. He suggested that confidential subjects should be separated from the list. General Botha opposed the. motion. Mr. Asquith suggested that Sir Joseph Ward should not press the motion. He appreciated his reasons, but it must be remembered that the conference did not partake of the character of a public meeting. Its usefulness would be impaired if questions were not discussed freely. The occasional exclusion of the press would excite curiosity, and a picture would be drawn of conflicts within the con-: fcrence. Sir Joseph Ward said that, in view of the opinions expressed, he saw no chance of carrying his mo-: tion, and would withdraw it.

THE QUESTION OF DEFENCE. Mr. Asquith explained that naval and military matters would be discussed in the Committee of Imperial Defence, where they would have the opinion of experts’ advice. It would also probably be desirable not to bring some other technical subjects before the conference until they were discussed by the overseas representativs and the Imperial Departments concerned. There were proposals on the agenda paper aiming at some closer political union in the shape of an advisory council. Without offering an opinion, he ventured to observe that they must not lose ‘ sight of the value of elasticity and i flexibility in the Imperial organisation. He trusted that the Imperial Government would be able to offer acceptable suggestions with regard to the constitution of the Colonial Office in connection with the segregation and concentration of work appropriate to the dominions from the other work of the department. He referred to the far teaching results of the last Defence Conference and the inauguration of the Canadian and Australian fleets giving a further impetus to the spirit of self-reliance. It was highly desirable to take stock together of the possible risks and dangers to which they were exposed in common, and to weigh carefully and adequately the reciprocal adaptiveness of the contributions being made to provide against them. He believed there , was throughout the Conference one spirit and one purpose —to make the Empire in all its parts a more complete and effective instrument for the furtherance of liberty. Sir Wilfrid Laurier said that he might claim that the work of the last conference was productive of material, even of important results. He represented a country which had no grievances and very few suggestions to make. They were satisfied with their lot and approached their colleagues’ suggestions with an open mind. He recognised that with the principle of the British Empire they could and ought to live in Imperial unity based on local autonomy. THE SOCIAL SIDE. PILGRIMS’ BANQUET TO THE PREMIERS. (Received 25, 8.5 a.m.) London, May 24. Lord Roberts presided at the Pilgrims’ banquet given to the Premiers at the Savoy. Sir Edward Grey dwelt in enthusiastic tones on the projected Anglo-American Arbitration treaty. He said the success of such a treaty must be dependent on the absence of any possibility of conflict concerning the national policies of the two parties thereto. This condition must be assured. Secondly, it must be between the. two Governments’ confidence in each other’s reasonableness and goodwill. History for the last few years shows reasonableness and goodwill to be characteristic of all negotiations between us. If it be true that the proposed treaty merely seals the satisfactory state of things already existing then let us seal it. If we do not, it will be like an unprofitable talent wrapped in a napkin. There will be people in other countries asking whether they too could not do likewise, and this will elad to the sifting and weighing of the causes of differences between nations and with progressively favourable results. Continuing, Sir Edward Grey added : (! We shall rejoice if President Taft’s initiative should lead director or indirectly to beneficial consequences to others. Sir Wilfrid Laurier and Sir J. Ward responded for the Premiers. IMPERIAL COUNCIL OF EMPIRE. SIR J. G. WARD’S MOTION. At the Conference Sir J. Ward moved: "That an Imperial Council, on grounds of Imperial unity, be organised for governing Imperial defence, providing for an equal distribution of burdens for defence ; also the representation of the self-governing dominions in the Imperial Parliament for determining peace, war, foreign policy, and . international treaties affecting the i Empire.”

In moving this Sir Joseph Ward ■ ■ said the remarkable growth of the ’ ■ overseas Dominions required the ' gravest consideration of statesmen • to prevent difficulties for which it ■ ; might in the future be almost im- •' possible to find settlement but >' which might be dealt with while 1 the populations were limited. He ; believed that in 25 years the com--1 bined population of overseas do- ■ minions ■would exceed that of the United Kingdom. Those control- ’ .ling the Empire’s destinies have to - consider the expansion of the f units. All were deeply concerned I Ehat the maintainance of some loose form of federation should not ■ be kept together alone by senti- • ment. The experience of the United States showed what tre- ! mendous changes might take place in regard to nationality. He be- ! lieved they would have to face such a problem owing to the attractiveness of overseas dominions for setl tlement to people of a different } language to our own. Unless the i question of emigration ana immi--1 gration were treated imperially, 1 and anxious care were taKen to - keep our people within the Emf: pire, our future strength might be 3 dissipated and the best of our - : population be spread amongst 1: alien countries. ? j The debate was adjourned until 1 Thursday.