DOMINION NATIONHOOD.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 17782, 16 May 1921, Page 5

DOMINION NATIONHOOD.

EMPIRE TO COMMONWEALTH. CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES. STAGES IN-EMPIRE HISTORY. BY H. DtTNXAN HALL, M.A., B. LOT. Author of " The British Commonwealth of Nations." No. n. If we would understand the significance of the forthcoming Imperial Conference we must be able to answer certain essential questions. These revolve round two fundamental issues, which may be indicated as follows:—(1) What will be* the status of the Dominions in the conference? What is the effect of this status on the unity of the Empire? (2) What is the nature of the Imperial Conference itself? What are its powers and functions? How ' have recent changes affected ite powers and functions? It is impossible to give any answer to these questions, or even to understand the questions themselves, unless we have a clear understanding of the nature and extent of the great constitutional 4 develop ments of the last four years. But these recent changes are the last stages in a great historical process, a process about which there is still a good deal of ignorance or confused thinking. It is advisable, therefore, to give a short sketch of the earlier stages of this process, in order that the more recent stages should be viewed in their true proportions and relations.

This process may be summed up in the phrase Empire to Commonwealth. By virtue of the continuous application of the principle of progressive self-government, the British people (which in the 18th century had lost an empire through a half-hearted attempt to apply the opposite principle), destroyed in the 19th century a second empire, gaining in its place what is infinitely more precious—a fellowship of \indred peoples, which, for lack of a better word, we may call a Commonwealth.

In their early stages the British colo- i nies in Australasia were merely subordinate provinces on the fringes of a vast 1 British State. The maintenance of this j relationship up to a certain point was, of i course, essential to the very existence of i the colonies. The difficult transition be- " tween subordinate outer provinces and in- i dependent daughter States was largely , due to the publication of the Durham re- j port on Canada in 1839. The principle of, I responsible government advocated by ] Durham—the idea that in respect of local ; matters a colony should govern itself i through a Legislature, with an executive ( responsible to that Legislature—was ap- , plied first of all to the Canadian colonies, 1 and -a few years later to certain of the 1 Australian colonies and Zealand. < National Development of Dominions. But one of the essential features of re- ' sponsible Government, as o Durham con- : ceived it, was the distinction just suggested between local and Imperial concerns. In the latter category fell questions, such as foreign policy, trade relations, and other matters, involving relationships with outside peoples, g The theory was that in respect, of snchfe questions th.6 colony should remain a dependency of the Mother Country. The 80 years from 1840 to 1920 have witnessed the gradual breakdown of this conception of a limited responsible Government. The great landmarks in this breakdown have been: (a) The successive declarations made by the colonies of their right to control their main external relationships (e.g. tariffs, 1859-?- immigration 1888, etc; -foreign policy, 1919-20); (b) the formation among each group of a national Federal. Government—Canada in 1867, Australia in 1900, South Africa in 1909. (c) the successful assertion by the Dominions in 1917-20 of their right to stand on a basis of constitutional equality with the United Kingdom. Hew Method of International 'Government. This gradual development ■ of• a group of new States out of* the original British* State, created in the Empire a difficult problem of international government. Toward the end of the 19th century there was felt the need for some new , machinery whereby the whole group of "British States could settle their mutual relations and..devise and execute a common policy in respect of other nations. What form was this machinery, to take? Two methods figured largely in discussions on the subject. One wag.the matio method," that is the "control of common.relations by;-means vpf official intermediaries. The obvious 'inadequacy* of i this led to the discussion (of a second method, that of the super-State,. or, as it is now usually called, " Imperial Federation," involving the setting up.above the existing Parliaments and Executives of a super-Parliament and Executive. This second method did not then receive and has never since received much support in the Dominions.- The method actually adopted to meet-the need was"* ins sense a new "As a result of a number of detached conferences from 1887 to! 190J, a new*'/institution, called the Imperial Conference;, came gradually, into being. This institution embodied a hew method Iq£ international government,: the. essence of which was the control t>f international relations by«-means of regular Cabinet conferences. " • -"■' The Imperial Conference.

This method, which has in essence been adopted as the method of the League of Nations, is still in its; early stages, and the forthcoming Imperial Conference willwithout a doubt mark an important step in its development/In view of this fact, it is essential that the nature of the Imperial Conference, and of the recent developments in its structure, should be understood. The conference is essentially a meeting of Governments, and "the rule of the conference, based upon, much experience, is that Cabinet Ministers only, and not intermediaries of any kind (e.g., High Commissioners), shall represent the Governments. The conference) is thus a meeting between principals, between those who are finally responsible (subject to the control of their Parliaments, to which the responsibility of the Ministers is in no wise impaired by reason of their attendance at the conference), for the execution of any' tentative decisions which may be arrived at. Our experience of the problem of international government is already sufficient to show that, short of an inter-

national super-State (the most effective method of securing some sort of control over international relations), is not to interpose some fresh hody of representatives (whether directly elected or nominated by the Governments or Parliaments from' outside their own members), but rather to bring the actual Governments or Parliaments face to face in conference.

But the great defect of the Imperial Conference before the -war /was the fact that it met only once every four years; in the intervals the British peoples dropped back into the eld trough of diplomacy. The war threw a blinding searchlight on a need which existed before the war—the need for "continuous" rather that " intermittent," Cabinet consultation.

The Constitutional of 1917. : ! :3?his need found expression in the passing by the Imperial War Conference of 11917 cf tha-most important resolution ever passed by an Imperial Conference. This resolution marks ithe virtual completion ;pf: the final .stage in the progress from to Commonwealth. It is in a sense the charter of dominion nationhood. It forms the- foundation upon which New Zealand's future, relations with the other British peoples will be based. <,Seeing that the public has not •been made suffi; iciently familial' with this 'resolution, it is important that it should be quoted in full. After providing for a. special constitutional conference after the war, to re-;

adjust ■' the constitutional relations of the component parts of the Empire," the resolution proceeded to lay down the principles of the settlement. "'". . . Any. such readjustment," it said, "-while thoroughly preserving all existing powers of self-government and complete control of domestic affairs, should be based upon, a Ml recognition of the Dominions as autonomous nations of an Imperial Commonwealth, and of India as an important portion of the same, should recognise the right of the Dominions and India to an adequate voice in foreign policy and in foreign relations, and should provide effective arrangements for continuous consultation in all important matters of common Imperial concern, and for such Eeoesaary concerted action, founded on consultation, as the several Governments may determine." The resolution will be seen to fall into three parts :—(1) It gives a decision on the question of principle, rejecting Imperial federation, or the idea "of a superstate, in favour of the idea of a commonwealth of autonomous nations. (2) It adopts the principle of equality of nationhood. (3) It suggests the lines'upon which the development of machinery of co-opera-tion should proceed. The recent crucial developments in respect of these two last points, and their vital importance from the point of view of the forthcoming Imperial Conference, will be dealt with in my next article.