NATIONS OF THE EMPIRE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18772, 28 July 1924, Page 10

NATIONS OF THE EMPIRE

, v . ■■ ' THE ISSSmS . o^. LAUS.^'*K£. ]j STATUS OF THE: EXPOSITION IN. CANADA. . j ' INSISTENCE ON CONSULTATION L- ! [aoa. oub ows coaKBS-'OiraEiJT.) j li. . " TOEONTO. June 28. I if Alfikm is expressed in Britain because j ij Ifuo refusal of Canada to ratify the 1 Treaty o! Lausanne and because of fore- % casts about Canada's futnro mads by Can|j ' adian leaders in the' Parliamentary debate IS on the subject at Ottawa. Much o* the !| alarm % based on an imperfect under- | standing of the Canadian point of view !' and ambitions. It is therefore unneces--1 sarjv, , , i Thu Canadian Government refused even j to submit the, treaty to Parliament for 1 ratification, a decision which has not been f challenged by the Opposition. The de- ! dsion was based on two reasons: I 1. Canada was not invited to the conI ference which prepared the Treaty. Sko a was instead informed that Lord Gurzca , | and Sir Horace Runboid would represent j ffl the British Empire, including Canada. r,a | || collateral message gave reason why f ' Canada could not be directly represented. | The ban of secrecy has been placed oc. I thii latter message by the Bntisn GovII ornment, so that Canadian Ministers ha?e & not been able to diva) go it, but Sir | Edward Grigg, British M.P., has given 1- out that the reason the British Dominions 1 could not have direct representatives was f that France was prepared to demand 8 similar representation for her y CCUOiirea I colonial subjects. " f !2. Canada does not approve the terms | if: of the treaty itselC. This reason was not I originally put forward by the Canadian 'il Government in refusing to accede to tne $ British Government's request, but was | indicated inferentially by the Prime Mm 1 I ister, Mr. King, in the debate. This view •1 was confirmed more explicitly by Mr. % Meighen, Leader of the Opposition. Mr. I Meighen said: "The policy involved m | the treaty and especially in the Straits 1 Convention is, I think, a mistake, and a | policy from which it was the duty of I ■'his 1 Government to avert the British 1 plenipotentiaries." To illustrate, he re- | caii.i that in 1921 Great Britain had | beera determined to review the Japanese | Alliance, but had been diverted from. $ its decision by 'ihe representations of If - Mr. Meighen, hirbsfclf, who as a Canai| dian aaderstood soma aspects of world I policies, particularly the attitude of the < United States-, better than did Britain

herself.' A Demand for Admission. Mr. Meighen's criticisrfc qf the Government was based on tha fact that Canada, despite the notification that she could not be ! represented at the Lausanne r Con - feicnce, had not insisted on being represented.- He did not accept the reasons given by the British Government as conclusive. Canada had not been invited to Paris or Washington, but' she had . eventuallv secured recognition; at both places. Whereas Mr. King acquiesced in Canadian non-participation, perhaps, as some suggest-, glad to be free of the; responsibility. Mr. Meighen would .Rave > insisted on Canadian delegates being admitted, even if they had been obliged to kick in the doors. And after gtting in, he .would have had them dominate and convert the British delegates. No one can say that Mr. Msighen has not a. high conception of Canada's; pace in world politics. Canada, he /isompiained, under. Mr. King's policy, has Bat by in a "sort of snllenness," or Sit least in "lonely questioning isolation."' 'As a result Canada,'instead of maintaining t,hb status recently achieved in Imperial and world politics, had reverted to the position of colonial dependence she occupied 50 years ago. ' Two Homely Illustrations. The London' Morning Post complains that Canada, like tha gentleman who, discovering he haa a stomach, will talkabout nothing' else but his stomach, having discovered she; has a status will talk about nothing else but her status. To whicfi one Canadian replies that tho London Morning Post is like a woman, who discovering that her son is growing up ! takes no pride in his growing stature, hut only petulantly comolains because the 5s losing the baby tfiat she wants to keep on petting, humouring, or chastising cording to her whim. " One point was cleared up by Mr. King in the recent debate, .and that is that Canada does not claim to bo entirely bevond the pale of the Lausanne Treaty. It is the King who ratifies all treaties. "When ho ratifies Lausanne, on the advice of hi 3 British Ministers, it will bind all his-Dominions, including Canada. A number of implications follow on this admission by Canada's Premier, now made for the first time in connection with Lausanne, though he claims it is quite consistent with all hi 3 prevous statements: 1. Canada is no . longer at war with Turkey. 2. Canada, bound : by a treaty which she did not help to prepare, and will not sigia, does in one sense appear in the role of a colonial dependency, thus giving colour to Mr. Meighen's complaint. o. If Lausanne, signed by the King, on advicei of his British Ministers, is binding on the whole Empire, is not the Halibut Treaty with tha United States, signed by tha King; on the advice of his Canadian . Ministers, also binding on the whole Empire? This would meet thr point raised,.but abandoned by the United States Senate. In this role, Canada ap pears not as a colony but as a leader of ■ Empire. ' ; - There remains the point as to how far Canada, by her refusal to ratify Lausanne, has dissociated herself from obligations under that treaty. What are thß Obligations? There is perhaps no part of t-Jie world in which Canadians have less direct interest than in Turkey, _ and the Near East generally. There is little understanding of the issues involved. There has been little interest in the actual negotiations. Probably not one Canadian in ten thousand knows whether Lausanne itself is in Switzerland or Asia Minor. From this point of view, the aloofness of Canada from the hegotiations is understandable. Bui tho Near East is one 'of the chief powder boxes in the world, and a treaty has been signed concerning it. And that treaty, according to the King's admission, binds Canada. ■ ■ , . . If a world war or any' war occurs affecting any phase of that treaty, what will foe Canada's obligations ? Mr. King says that by declining to ratify the treaty we have circumscribed our obligation. We have assumed only a limited liability. We havs accepted the treaty in so far only as it makes peao) for us. If Britain under the treaty, or because of it, should make war, obviously Canada will also be at- war again. But Mr. King's poi'at is that bocause of our non-responsibility for the treaty, we will be under no obligation, moral or otherwise, to contribute to the war. A Moral Modification. It has always been true that when Britain is at war, Canada is at war. And ■for a long time it has also been true that what contribution Canada makes to any war is a subject for her own. Government and Parliament to decide. So that in this respect, technically, Lausanne breaks no new ground. But there seems little doubt that because of the circamstances in which f he Lausanne Treaty was made and the altitude of tho Canadian Government and ' Parliament toward it, the obligations of the Canadian people to contribute to its : ienforcement have been considerably lessened On the moral side. - It is an inconclusive outcome. It satisfies neither the ultra-Imperialists, who would have Canada express; no view that did not coincide with Downing Street's on any subject, nor the ultras-autonomists, who strain at apy leash. Nevertheless, it has undoubtedly mado a real contribution to the working oat of the intricate problem of the foreign relations of the British

Dominions, a problem which hitherto has been allowed to rest entirely with the British Foreign Office, but on which the Dominions now desire to speak for themselves. Its concluding his address in the debate, Mr. King made some remarks regarding the future of Canada which seem to have been misunderstood. Ho said there were four possible lines of developComplete independence; (2) annexation to the United btatea; a more clearly recognised nationhood within the British Empire; (4) break up of confederation and reversion to separate colonies or dominions—this last unthinkable to Mr. King's mind. The mere statement of thifisc'. altemar tives, although their existence is a , com.tnonplace of Canadian thought, seems to Wave caused alarm in some quarters, an which apparently dlid not. take -.count of Mr. King's own declaration of ith. He said: —"l take my dtand from tfcn point, of view of Canada, a nation wjj'hin- the British Empire, pot Canada a coi\ i ny, not Canada in any inferior or subi -rdinete position, but Canada a couiA'ry which has giiineid equality of si&trt '• with ether Dominions and with the r Coimtry." ■■■'.! ' . Thet e wore, he went on, three ways of attains! ig this community of nationhood:— (1) Bjt - an Imperial Parliament at Westminster; ncifc, he believed;;', a "possible; thing'(2) by 'an Imperial Council—"a thorough iy bad thing"; (3) "by thai different Dominions possessing self-govern-: caant, having full recognition given their status of self-governing Dominions, and in these Imperial affairs, there being; worked c«it in the best, possiblo wsty, eSective nisans for consultation and cooperation between the different Dominions and the Mother Country. I do believe that every step we take to make, clearer to each othe,r nation within the British Empire that -we believe in our nationhood and realj se to the full our rights of self-governmemt, wUj make for that future development or), safe and secure lines, and I I believe, as against the rest of the worid, it will make future unity and strength of. that, ilrcipire." Mr. Meighen* who rarely agrees with Mr. King on any topic, in his succeeding address explicitly agreed with him on this. "I think," he said, "the Prime Minister expressed what is a common attitude of mind. of the entire Canadian people." '