EMPIRE RELATIONS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19969, 10 December 1926, Page 11

EMPIRE RELATIONS

THE CONFERENCE REPORT. CRITICISM IN THE LORDS. REPLY BY EARL OF BALFOUR. (Free* Association—By Telegraph—Copyright.) LONDON, December 8. (Received Dec. 9, at 5.5 p.m.) In the House of Lords Lord Parmoodrew attcution to the Imperial Conference aud criticised the report upon the relations between the units of the British Empire. He questioned whether it was wise to lay down general principles of equality before essential differences had been disposed of by inquiry. He asked whether “freedom of association” also meant “freedom of separation.” The Earl of Balfour, in reply, said that Parmoor seemed to have approached a difficult and complicated question from the wrong viewpoint. He could not imagine a policy from which he differed more profoundly than the suggestion that before laying down the general principles on which the Empire was now constituted all difficulties must be removed, and all technicalities settled. Could anything be more lawyer-like and less statesmanlike? Lord Balfour asked what would happen if the dominions wished to separate. What sort of notice should be given? They might as well consider all the causes of divorce before deciding the problems of matrimony. That was the wrong way to work. The way to get rid of the difficulties was for the Prime Ministers of all the dominions to discuss the question in all its aspects and agree on the broad principle that no control was exercisable by any one selfgoverning part of the Empire over another. Foreign critics were disposed to say that by standing upon an equality the units of the Empire were bound to separate. His view was the opposite—that the British Empire was a more united organism than ever before. There could not be equality in function, however, for this must depend upon the circumstances of the moment. “But this does not conflict with the fundamental equality of status, which is the only permanent bond between the self-governing portions,” he concluded. Lord Parmoor, withdrawing his motion, said that he was quite in agreement with Lord Balfour. —A. and N.Z. Cable.