SECESSION QUESTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19453, 8 October 1926, Page 13

SECESSION QUESTION.

SOUTH AFRICA'S POSITION. "PROCESS OF EVOLUTION." STATEMENT BY A MINISTER. [FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.] CAPETOWN. Aug. 26. There is still a good deal of nervous political discussion in South Africa question whether or not the present Government desires secession from the British Empire. Much interest lias, therefore, been aroused by a precise statement this week in the form of a letter by Mr. F. W. Beyers, Minister of Mines and Industries. The letter, which was written at the direction of the Minister and signed by his secretary, was addressed to Captain 1 router. of Gormiston. Mr. Beyers was reported to have said in a speech at Philipstown recently:—"But I, as Minister, am fighting for secession." Captain Irottei wrote to him to ask how he reconciled this statement with his oath of allegiance to the Crown and his oath as a Minister. Air. Beyers, in his reply, said he addressed the meeting m Afrikaans, and also that there were material errors, in the newspaper sports. "The question was raised," states the letter, "whether the .Minister still stood by the ideal of independence, and his answer was, yes. Ho was then asked "what was the value of a mere ideal, and his answer was that, where an ideal is cherished, a seed is sown which may take generations to fructify. He pointed out to his audience that he had for years past publicly stated his opinion that there could, never be any question of absolute severance from the British Commonwealth of Nations until the two great white races, English and Dutch, were substantially agreed upon stepping out of the Commonwealth or community." The Minister maintained in his letter that the right of secession had been admitted fof the past 80 or 90 years by prominent British Ministers and others, ~ and General Smuts, so far as he knew, was the only Dominion Statesman who had definitely denied its existence. The letter then went on to state :-r—----"It, therefore, follows that for the very reason that a person is a British subject he is entitled, under the constitution of any Dominion, to make propaganda for putting absolute equality With the United Kingdom into practice, and even advocating secession. If the ordinary citizen has. this right, it cannot make any difference whether such citizen has. become a Minister or occupies an exalted position. The oath, or the duty of the ordinary citizen, is just as solemn as that of a Minister,. | and vice versa. The difference, if any, is one of degree, not of principle. "The Minister, therefore, hopes," the letter added, "that you will appreciate that what you impute to him you could with equal reason impute to Mr, Bonar Law and many others, and to everybody who has in the past taktn part in the evolution from Crown Colony Government to Colonial Responsible Government, and ultimately to full Dominion status, and even to Gend'-al Botha and General Smuts who, together witb other Dominion Ministers, took part in urging the higher status for the Dominions in the Treaty of Versailles and in the recognition of the Dominions internationally. "It must be obvious that every step in the process of evolution from • the first days that England established any colony must be regarded as a step in the direction of secession, because evolution once begun can, in the nature of things and on tha grounds of liberty and justice, not be artificially stopped from attaining its most perfect form." „ir The publication of this letter has caused a good deal of academic discussion in the newspapers. It has additional interest, however, because of the forthcoming visit to the Imperial Conference in London of General Hertzog, the Premier, and Mr. Havenga, Minister of Finance. It is believed that one of the discussions iij London will be the need for further powers being granted to the Dominions.