IN TIME OF WAR.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 144, 3 June 1911, Page 1

IN TIME OF WAR.

DISCUSSION AT THE CONFER ENCE. THE DECLARATION CRITICISED. > [nm ASSOClATlON.— copybight]. London, June 1. Mr. Fuller moved a resolution t< the effect that it was a matter foi regret that the Dominions were not consulted prior to the acceptance of the terms of the Declaration o: London, and that it was undesir able that Britain should adopt the inchuion of foodstuffs in Article » or adopt Articles 48 to 54. He saic that he did not desire to restrict the power* of Britain, but merelj wished that the shoulc be taken into confidence wherevei possible, and the Declaration ol London afforded a most suitable opportunity of illustrating his argu Mr. Batchelor said they were ap proaching the consideration of the Declaration at too late a stage tc alter its course, or to do anything to effectually modify it. While admitting that there must be bul <me foreign policy, he considered this did not preclude the possibility of some kind of consultation. Sir Edward Grey said the De claration had not altered the exist fakg Internationa] law, but introduced consent to international rules, which did not exist previously. Sir Wilfrid Laurier thought they were going too far to ask that the Overseas Dominions be consulted on all matters. Sir Joseph Ward said, after grave consideration, he had formed the conclusion that the Declaration protected foodstuffs more than formerly, and therefore he supported it. The debate was adjourned. It is expected that Mr. Fisher will not press his resolution. SIR JOSEPH WARD’S VIEWS. (Received 3, 9.35 a.m.) London, June 2. Sir J. Ward supported the Declaration of .London because it reduced the risk to which foodstuffs are now exposed. The establisment of an International Court of Appeal was a great improvement °P the Belligerents’ Court. The crux of the whole position was the maintenance of the British Navy, and to keep it so powerful that the sea routes would be protected and there would not be the slightest chance but that the Declaration would pass the test. It was of material importance to consult the Dominions on these matters and secure their opinions before it was finally reached and remitted. This was not done in the present instance, though all would have liked to have been consulted. They were not provided for and were not prepared to support rejection of the Declaration.

Dr. Findlay, of New Zealand, •aid the more the declaration was examined the more it would be seen how advantageous it was to Britain. It embodied the British practice for the last century with respect to foodstuffs.

THE DECLARATION ESSEX-

TIAL.

Sir E. Grey concluded his speech by saying that the Declaration was a step forward, and if the Conference refused to ratify it. their action would be a great blow to the confidence of other nations in us. as power was prepared to forward arbitration. Is was essential to co through with the declaration. Our withdrawal would be an incentive to others to proceed nn International arrangements withnnt us.

Replying to Mr. Fisher’s question as to whether consultation would be confined to the HaeiTe. Sir E. Grey said consultation would not be limited. There were cases of treaties where it would he difficult to consult, but so far as conld be done, the British Government would do it.

LAURNER’S SnrXD ARGITMENT.

Sir W. Laurier snid it was a fnrreaching proposition that the Dominions should be consulted with regard to treaties. Canada would

Claim liberty of negotiation on her own commercial treaties. If that were conceded in regard to other treaties it might seriously embarrass the Home Government. Britain carried the greater burden of the Empire, and it would be gning too far if Oversea Dominions were consulted in matters which might

result in war. He thought it would be better to leave the matter to the discretion of the Imperial Government. The Declaration was an immense advantage. If Sir Edward Grey concluded arbitration with America, it would be the greatest act of his career. Consummation of the American treaty might perhaps be prevented if the Declaration were not notified. ALL-RED ROUTE. BLACKSOD BAY THE BASE. (Received 3, 9.45 a.m.) ! London, June 2. i Supporters of the All-Red Route' laid documents before the Imperial! Conference, including Admiral Cy-| prian Bridge’s report favouring | Blacksod Bay as the port of arrival' for ships bringing food in time of war, Blacksod Bay being more remote from the probable enemy’s ■ base, and therefore a smaller naval i force would be necessary to defend; it than at any other line of com- 1 munication to the United Kingdom.: Supporters of the All-Red Route suggest Blacksod Bay as the port to which cargoes of neutral vessels should be consigned if the Declare- i tion of London is approved, as it could be utilised without danger of! interference from hostile warships. ’ BRITISHERS OUTFACED BY FOREIGN DIPLOMATS.

(Received 3, 10.20 a.m.)

London, June 2. “ The Standard ” states that Mr. Fisher has* modified some of \ his opinions about the Declaration J under the influence of the British ; Government, but arguments which i ate convincing in Downing Street may not survive transportation, ’ since Australian ships and neutral i ships alike are liable to seizure if privatering is permitted. The ; truth is Sir Edward Grey and Mr. t McKenna were completely outfaced h by foreign diplomats.

FISHER’S MOTION WITH-

DRAWN.

(Received 3, 10.20 a.m.) Mr. Fisher withdrew his resolu- j tion and a motion approving Sir: Edward Grey’s statement was! passed. i

Sir Joseph Ward’s proposal approving the declaration was carried. Australian delegates alone abstaining from voting.