FUTURE OF THE PACIFIC.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1745, 16 August 1905, Page 52

FUTURE OF THE PACIFIC.

THE 1 NEW HEBRIDES. IMPORTANCE OF THE GROUP. RESOLUTION OF THE FEDERAL PARLIAMENT. MELBOURNE, August 10. In the House of Representatives today Mr Johnson moved the following resolutions: —■ That in view of the certainty of enormous trade development along the Pacific route to the East when the Panama Canal is opened, the question of the control of islands suitable for use as naval bases between Australia and Panama is of the highest importance to British and Australian commercial interests. That the strategical position of the New Hebrides, with the exceptional harbour facilities there, renders it imperative, in the interest of British and Australian commerce, that their control shall not pass into the hands of a foreign naval Power. For theso reasons it is desirable to provide ovory reasonable facility for the promotion of British and Australian settlement in the New Hebrides. In speaking to his motion, Mr Johnson urged the necessity of Australia doing something to counteract French influence in the New Hebrides, which was now all directed towards annexation*

Mr J. W. ~ McCay (late Minister of Defence) said it was lamentable that Britain was alone among the nations m seeming to think it was not her constant duty to watoh the interests of her possessions in the Pacific. The British Government appeared unable to recognise the importance of the matter, and the serious consequences to Australia if the islands were absorbent by foreign nations. Australia had serious ground for complaint, and it waa time she spoke out definitely and emphatically to the Imperial Government. Several other speakers similarly considered that the time for diplomatic representations had passed. Mr Dugald Thompson (late Minister of Home Affairs) considered the motion should be in a more definite form. He moved:— That representations already made by the Commonwealth Government to the British Government should, in the interests of natives and settlers at the New Hebrides and of Australia, be nenew r ed and strengthened. That the immediate establishment of a joint Land Commission is imperative, so constituted that its decision would be just, prompt, and effective. That the delay which has occurred is deeply regretted, and no settlement will be satisfactory to the Commonwealth which does not decide the possession of the New Hebrides. Further, that the only ownership acceptable to Australia is that of Britain, which is justified by history, the development of trade with the islands, and the wishes of the native population. Mr Johnson accepted Mr Thompson’s motion in place of his own. Mr Deakin said the Government was in entire and hearty sympathy with the motion. Australian interests were necessarily strongly directed towards securing the islands, so as to prevent them being used as hostile bases. Nothing had been done since the AngloFrench agreement was signed. He would include the motion with a despatch which he -was sending to the Imperial Government containing a report of a deputation which recently waited upon him. The motion was carried on the voices. MELBOURNE, August 10. Mr Thompson, in moving his resolutions in the House of Representatives yesterday, said the movement for the annexation of the New Hebrides by France was largely contributed to by renegade Australians, who had become naturalised French subjects, some of whom got considerable assistance in the shape of French money. If all the money had been devoted to the object for which it was given there was no doubt that British interests would at' the present moment be out of court as far as the New Hebrides was concerned. The debate was marked by great earnestness and unanimity. Mr Johnson suggested that New Zealand should join in the representations to the Imperial Government. SYDNEY, August 11. The “Sydney Morning Herald” says: No settlement of the New r Hebrides question will be regarded as satisfactory to Australia unless it involves the hoisting of the British flag. How that is to be managed we do not profess to explain. That is the business of the Imperial Government, and just now, when France is bubbling over with expressions of esteem for Britain, might be an opportunity of effecting the desired change. STATEMENT BY r ADMIRAL FANSHAWE. BRISBANE, August 10. Speaking at the National Agricultural Show, Admiral Fanshawe reiterated his arguments for a strong navy. He believed there was common ground of sympathy between politicians here and in New Zealand as to the navy. Whether Australia could support a larger army or a large naval force or not, it was at least desirable that no military force should approach these shores. MELBOURNE, August 10. In the Senate to-day a member called attention to Admiral Fanshawe’s statement at Brisbane in reference to defence, also to Mr Seddon’s disposition to increase the New Zealand subsidy to the navy. He inquired if the Minister of Defence would ask Mr Sodden what reasons there wero for proposing such a course. The Minister (Senator Play ford) promised to consult Mr Deakin on the subject. GERMANY’S POSSESSIONS. LONDON, August 10. Count Mottornioh. German Ambassador to Britain, in the course of an interview with Lord Lansdowne, assured the British Minister of Foreign Affairs that now regulations regarding the administration of Germany's possessions in tho Western Pacific would he issued immediately. Tho German Government hoped these would prove so satisfactory as to do away with the necessity of pressing further claims