THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, MARCH 29, 1935 HOW FARES THE EMPIRE?

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22071, 29 March 1935, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, MARCH 29, 1935 HOW FARES THE EMPIRE?

To the Auckland branch of the Royal Empire Society yesterday Sir Hugh Denison gave his impressions of cur- . rent tendencies in Imperial affairs. Those impressions were not altogether flattering to the immediate outlook, although Sir Hugh- reassuringly emphasised his opinion j that, if British sentiment were vigorously maintained and considerations of Imperial interest---which for the various Dominions was indistinguishable from self-interest —were given due weight, all would yet be well. For the somewhat sombre tone of hiis picture of the present much can be advanced in proof ■ff its truth to some of the facts. That they are not all the facts nobody need be at painsi to assert. Sir Hugh Denison, apparently, would stoutly declare this, but he exercised the common British trait of sober estimation of national successes and failures. His immediate object was the utterance of warnings about danger-points, and it is right that the attention of the Royal Empire Society should be drawn to these. Its members, bent on safeguarding the. Imperial household, can leave to others the acclamation of domestic virtues; their mission is to do watchdog duty against alien encroachments and laxity on the part of any responsible for the corporate safety of the home. Hence the wisdom of clear thought and speech about the risks now besetting the Empire, imperilling its security and solidarity. Fortunately a knowledge of its history encourages confidence in its ability to meet the challenges that prosperous conditions invite no less than do adverse ; yet he would be lacking in loyalty that did not sound an alarm when signs,, of trouble were seen. There are such signs of trouble, and their anxious noting ought not to be confused with despair. If it be true that # "the name of hope is remembrance," it is also true that a touch of pessimism is worth more in a crisis than a shallow, easy optimism. That all is not well with the world outside the Empire needs little proof. In the Berlin conversations just concluded is evidence of the difficulty confronting all urgent efforts to establish a European peace. Political and economic ambitions tend to prolong old national rivalries and to create new ones. In r spite of all efforts to date—some of thelm surpassingly valorous and patient—Europe is seething with political unrest and suffering much economic distress. The description needs to be qualified': the League enjoys a prestige largely restored, despite the withdrawal of Japan and the aloofness of Germany; in the new collaboration of France and Italy with Britain is a basis of wider compacts; some countries, interestingly named by Sir Hugh Denison as having 'strong friendship for Britain, have political peace; Britain'#* progress toward financial stability, through four years of strenuous endeavour, has been remarkable; in some smaller populations—Sweden's is especially notable economic troubles have ceased to vex. Yet the world to which the Empire looks out is generally resti\«;; and because no country can in these days live entirely to itself—a fact so patent that Sir Hugh Denison's advocacy of a self-contained Empire needs care in exposition and acceptance—this restiveness is a menace of which British statesmanship must take account. To speak as if world peace were, within reach, to say nothing of grasp, would argue a defect of vision, and to conduct Imperial business on the a/ssumption that this peace is just round the corner would be folly. The obvious moral is to make the British Commonwealth of Nations a practical reality, both for its own sake in every part and for the reinforcement of. every pacifying impact it ought to make upon the outside world. • Toward this objective the Royal Empire Society can usefully set its pace with redoubled vigour. But undoubtedly there' are obstacles within the Empire. Four danger-points within are noted by Sir Hueh Denison: Ireland, South Africa. Canada and India —all the half-dozen larger oversea territories except his country and ours. Since loyalty to British leadership is so marked in Australia and New Zealand, any tendency to defection elsewhere is a disappointment to these two constituent units. In the Irish Free State the campaign of independent republicanism has gone too far to be ignored ; in South Africa the old trend toward isolated action is apt to revive; Canada is almost inevitably drawn by economic reciprocity toward constitutional sympathy with the United States; and the strong Indian demand for self-government on the model of "Dominion status" has ugly facets. These drawbacks exist, and to assume Imperial solidarity, as though' they did not exist, is impossible. They may be overdrawn in Sir Hugh Denison's picture, but to under-estimate their importance would be a poorer service to and' for the Royal Empire Society and the whole British Commonwealth. What can either do about it? Nothing of compulsion or intolerance can avail: the constitution of the Empire, factual and legal, precludes such an attitude. To understand all the facts is the first duty—the habits of Irish thought as Mr. deYalera 'seeks to direct them, th<> two competing currents of policy in South Africa, the staunch preference even of Quebec for maintenance of a political union of Canada with Britain whatever economic recip-

rocity may develop with the United States, and the intricacies of the Indian problem to the solution o* which Britain is historically committed. The cardinal facts are thaiat present the Empire i 6 constitutionally unstable and that its very instability, ever since the old colonial systepi was shaken and shattered by Britons abroad, has been an inseparable feature of Imperial growth. Thenceforward, eternal vigilance, wise as well as watchful, became the price of union. Rigidity is unthinkable, elasticity is compelled, lest the organism disrupt. To be warned of risks is needful as a stirring to thought farseeing and patient. A'S for action, to dig channels for living streams is better than to wall them in with restrictions of inadequate capacity.