THE EMPIRE'S PROBLEM

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 16310, 17 August 1916, Page 8

THE EMPIRE'S PROBLEM

A NEW IMPERIALISM.

FUTURE OF FOREIGN POLICY.

VOICE OF THE DOMINIONS.

An interesting address was given at the 1 Auckland Chamber of Commerce jester- j I dav. before a number of representative | ' citizens, by Mr. Lionel Curtis, who has been j i :i leader in the " Round Table " inquiry ; i into the problem of British Imperialism, . i The gathering had assembled at the in- . vitation of Dr. H- Dean Bamford and Dr\V C W. McDowell, who presided, apologised for Dr. Bamfords unavoidable absence. Mr. Curtis explained that though he had not come to New Zealand for the purpose he had been asked to Veil the i storv of the " Round Table " movement. It began in New Zealand six years ;.go, . although the original impetus was to be found in the circumstances attending the Union of South Africa. After the South African war the Trans- , vail and the Orange River Colony were organised as Crown colonies unaer the , government of the High Commissioner ot j South Africa. Each had different tariffs. 1 and the- Transvaal Government had the power to determine, by adjusting the rail- j way charges, how much of the large carry- j ing" trade from the coast to the Wit- . watersrand mines passed through the j ports of Cape Colony, Natal, or the Portuguese port of Delagoa Bay. No 1 sooner had peace been signed than the | lour South Africa colonies found them ' selves at daggers drawn. The authority i of the High Commissioner only prevented : open rupture. Latent dissensions were , suppressed for five years by concessions j made to Cape Colony and Natal such as ! no Prime Minister dependent for office i on the votes of the people of the Trans- j vaal could possibly have given. In i 906 j the new British Government decided to j establish a responsible government in the Transvaal and Orange River Colony, j There was no doubt at the time that the 1 establishment of this government would j be followed by immediate rupture re- I specting all the arrangements made by the High Commissioner for settling the Customs and railway relations between inland colonies and those on the coast. The Union of States. Thus thoughtful South Africans found themselves faced with a sudden recrudescence of the " South African Problem." Some of them decided to state the problem, and it was found that it arose, not from the conflict of the British and the Dutch, but from the conflict of four separate States. Each State might suc--1 eeed in settling its own internal questions, : but there was no government or Parliament in South Africa competent to settle all the questions at once between the four separate communities. The eolution of the problem it was found could 1 only be effected by the establishment of a "national South African government. ; But the fact had to be faced that the ' Government of South Africa, when estab- ' lished, would consist inevitably of the ' Boer generals whom the British had been ' fighting. Then, at the very moment when the union of South Africa became

a practical question, Sir Edward Grey i was convinced that Germany was com- i passing the destruction of the whole Com- J wealth, and he forced the British | Government, among other things, to I summon the Dominion Governments to the Defence Conference of 1909. The advocates of th„ union of South Africa had to face the possibility that men like Hert'ZOg and Beyers would be in control. They knew that, in the event of war, men like that would proclaim the neutrality of South Africa,, which, in plain language, meant independence. Then there would be the Imperial Government j calling upon South Africans as British subjects to fight for Britain's cause, whi'e ] the South African Government would be j forbidding them to fight. ' ▲ Canadian Inquiry. Moreover, went on the speaker, the doctrine had been preached that a British citizen in South Africa must enjoy exactly tho same control of all public affairs as a British citizen in the United Kingdom. The latter, however, controlled by his vote the Government responsible for the issues of peace and war. The former had no control, unless the South African Ministers declared independence of the Imperial Government. That was the question which must be sifted to the bottom. Thus in 1909 three of -the advocates of union went to Canada to inquire as to the Canadian view. Mr. W. S. Morris, of New Zealand, was one of the trio. In Canada and in England inquiries met with the answer that the Empire was "one and indivisible." But the Empire consisted of autonomous, sovereign, and co-equal States, and how was the foreign policy of those States to be conducted? So far as peace and war were concerned, said Mr. Curtis, the British Dominions were not self-governing States, they were dependencies. These were conditions which, from force of circumstances, could not continue for manv years longer.

Solving the Problem. | Those were startling conclusions, said Mr. Curtis, and he was asked to take the memorandum containing them to Australasia for criticism. He arrived in Wellington in July. 1910. A small group was formed, partly of University and partly of business men, to study the problem in collaboration with the South Africans who submitted the memorandum, and groups were called into existence in Auckland, Chnstchurch, Dunedin, and Wanganui. j Others were established in Australia and subsequently in Canada, India, and various ! parts of the United Kingdom. Mr. Curtis • went on to say that as a kind of general | secretary he received the criticisms of the ! various groups on the memorandum, and he began the preparation of a report, the first volume of which was completed before the outbreak of war. It would be published shortly under the title of "The Commonwealth of Nations." When war j broke out he undertook to prepare a I popular report on the question of how the j peoples of the Dominion were to control the issues of peace and v.-ar. a question I which must become acuta when peace re- j I turned. A draft was printed for private j circulation amongst groups last year, under the title of "The Problem of the Commonwealth." It had since been rewritten, and was to be published in New Zealand and Australia under his own name, j New Zealand's Case. i Mr. Curtis proceeded to state his case ! from the standpoint of New Zealand, i Peace or war, he said, the issues of I I national life and death, were the greatest !of all national interests. Ministers ;n . Wellington were not responsible at prej sent for the issues of peace and war, and j could only be made so by telling foreign . . nations that in future peace and war ; would be made for New Zealand, not in 1 ; London, but in Wellington. That meant I ' ': a declaration of independence, and severi anoe from the British Commonwealth. I Such a course adopted by the Dominions \ I would mean disruption. The only alternative was to make the Ministers new 1 j responsible for Imperial affair? no less ' I answerable to New Zcalandors than to j Englishmen. To do that the present Im- ; perial Government must be divested of all ; business solely relating to the British 'Isles. Britain must have a Dominion , Government uf its own fur internal 'j affairs. The Imperial Cabinet and Parlia- . j ment could then be reconstructed so as to be representative of the United Kingdom 1 and of all the Dominions. A measure to ' | effect such a change could only be drafted '[by an Imperial Convention." and would • j have to be ratified by the people of all i the countries concerned. Only so could ' I the British Commonwealth' continue. • J Without the principle of self-government the Commonwealth would break up. and 1 it was the Dominions rather than Britain • which tvotiid be called upon to decide ' whether or not the change should be mad*.