The New Zealand Times. FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 1921. THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10852, 18 March 1921, Page 4

The New Zealand Times. FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 1921. THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

The Imperial Conference has emerged out of the debate hopefully, thanks to the Prime Minister’s explanation, which, in spite- of much asseveration to the contrary, nobody seemed to really want. If the Prime Minister will go to the logical end by formulating the main points of his explanation, and if he will add to his statement —if he can—of the Conference agenda whatever (if anything) he held back, the House will have an opportunity of passing a concrete resolution. One of the main points of his explanation to the House is the new status the war has given the Dominions, and the method to be established for the harmonious government of the Empire in full recognition of that new status. What is this status? The simplest answer is that it is the status of partnership. Naturally follows the question: “What are the partnership terms?” The question is regarded as vital by individuals who invariably get the beet legal talent available' to draw up the deeds of their business partnerships. That is one strong argument for the definition of the partnership status; in other words, the terms. Another is the maxjm of the old Romans: “To fail in the smallest details of the things common to partners is most disgraceful.” Here is a principle of honour which can only be safeguarded by a definition of the tilings that are common to partners. A third argument is of good understanding. The need for that is shown by the current criticism that the new status of the Dominions is the deathknell of the Empire. To many good Imperialists the criticism savours of the wildness of gratuitous assumption. But it has a solid backing in the fact that claims are actually made by men presumably reasonable for appeals to the League of Nations from Dominions in all matters, both of local autonomy and Imperial relation. Obviously, if these claims are allowed, the League of Nations becomes at once an efficient instrument for disrupting the Empire, which can only hold together if its unity is strengthened by autonomic independence and singleness of authority in international affairs. These reasons imperatively require a clear definition of status accepted by the Parliament of this Dominion. The Prime Minister should not go to London without it. During his speech in the debate, he denied firmly that the new status can disrupt the Empire. He is, therefore, the man to formulate the definition of status which will justify his faith in it. Another main point is of the nature of the Imperial Executive. That there must he an Executive is as obvious as that a ship must have a captain and crew. The first question is of the responsibility of that Executive. To that the answer is naturally “an Imperial br Federal Parliament.” That will he the case in time to come. It is, however, generally recognised that a Federal Parliament would be premature. For one thing, the central Imperial majority would 'be overwhelming. The subject was touched on during the debate. It was obscured at first by an irrelevant dispute over the question whether the British Constitution is or is note written. Of course, if there is to be a Federal Parliament, there must he a Written Federal Constitution. The factor most interesting to the Dominions was relied on by Mr Massey with the contention that the Dominions would not stand taxation from a Parliament sitting in London. The factor does not owe its strength to the “Boston Tea Party,” for, as Mr Malcolm said in an interjection, Boston had no representation. Representation is not the governing factor, however, to-day, as the experience of Cuba proved some years ago. Cuba sent thirty representatives to the Cortes sitting in Madrid; the Cortes taxed Cuba for purposes objectionable to Cuba; and Cuba-declined' to submit to taxation by a Parliament sitting in Madrid. The governing factor in that case was the central preponderance of the voting power in the representative chamber. Possibly in a Federal Parliament sitting in London the overwhelming British (United Kingdom) majority would be lee§ selfish and more enlightened than the Spanish majorities which made mincemeat of the Cuban aspirations. But is it wise to trust to that possibility? It is not, for the simple reason that if the trust proves misplaced the whole Federal fabric is endangered. We do not know, of course, that an Imperial Executive will have a place on the agenda paper of the Conference. For we do not know whether the Prime Minister was giving his own views as an illustration rather than commenting on what he knows confidentially of the agenda. But it is well to he prepared for possible contingencies, and, considering all things, it is safe to say, at all events, that an Imperial Council

in some shape or other is a possible contingency. As the Empire must be governed by co-operation from all its parts, it is necessary to wait for Parliamentary federation until the popular representation is more evenly divided. To bridge the interval there must he an executive controlling all international affairs of the federation. The best title of such a body will he that it performs the Imperial work, because the junior Imperial partners are not, as is 60 often and So proudly asserted in error, yet quite grown up. They will reach adult age when the time for better-balanced Parliamentary representation arrives. Till then the Imperial Executive will be a regency. The analogy is not too strict, but it is stricter than the Parliamentary analogy, which is the only constitutional alternative. The regency will. not he completely constitutional. But it will be possible, its possibility replacing the Parliamentary impossibility. It will not, on the other hand, be quite unconstitutional, for it will be fashioned with some respect for the representative principle. The Imperial Executive Council’s life will be animated by a germ of constitutional principle, capable, with care, of developing to full constitutional growth in the course of time. The cafe, it is reasonable to expect, will be found by the goodivill and good sense of what we are proud to call “the crimson thread of kinship,” strengthened greatly by the sacrifices and the comradeship of recent years. All this the Prime Minister has indicated in his expression of preference for an Imperial Executive. If he will formulate a definition, Parliament will be happy to strengthen his hands by accepting the same, after consideration.