Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, FRIDAY, AUGUST 1, 1924. EMPIRE’S FOREIGN POLICY.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume L, Issue 16497, 1 August 1924, Page 4

Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, FRIDAY, AUGUST 1, 1924. EMPIRE’S FOREIGN POLICY.

It, ifs relations with foreign nations is the British Empire to be regarded as a single unit, or is it composed of six separate and distinct nations? That is a question which has to be faced and settled some day soon, otherwise very serious complications may arise. Too issue was raised not long ago when the British arid .Canadian Governments had a difference over the ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne, and at that time Mr. Ramsay MacDonald expressed the opinion that the situation required clarifying. Mr. Mackenzie King, the Prime Minister of Canada, went so far as to say that, as the result of the British Government's policy, there were three confronting Canada : Complete independence; annexation with the United States; or a mote dearly recognised relationship as a self-governing nation within the Empire. The subject again cropped up in connection with Dominion representation on the Allied Conference, now sitting in London. To have admitted the dc.agates of the Dominions to that Conference with full voting power would have given the British Empire, in the view of foreign representatives, an undue preponderance of votes, and therefore it was determined' that some sort oT panel system should be introduced whereby the High Commissioners from the Dominions should take their turn in attendance at the Conference, but that in the voting Britain should act as a single unit. This not very satisfactory adjustment was the best that could be made at the time. The issue is again raised in connection with the announcement made last week that the Irish'Free State is to have a Minister at Washington, and it crops

up still further in the new South African Premier’s declaration that South Africa is to send an ambassador to .Europe. The problem has become so pressing that the Home Government has summoned the Dominions to a conference, to be held in October. Up to 1914 the Empire was developing slowly, and questions of autonomy were settled in leisurely fashion as they arose. If things had gone on as they were going, it is possible that, in time, some plan of dealing with foreign affairs might have been evolved. Ine war, however, accelerated development enormously. The Dominions were precipitated into a conflict of nations; their representatives were given a place in the War Cabinet, and afterwards they had places at the Versailles and Washington Conferences. In a sense, they were recognised? as separate entities, as they had a right to be, in view of their war sacrifices and burdens. The course of events had outrun the machinery for dealing with it. It is in this position that matters stand to-day. We are six nations owing allegiance to the King. In the Kings name we enact all our laws and conduct all our diplomatic business. Now the question arises, can a king be represented in a foreign capital by two or more ambassadors? And if lie can, and if on a particular question two of these ambassadors should disagree. as is quite possible, foreign Powers are almost certain to be given the impression that the Empire is a nation divided against itself. Needless to say, such jin impression should not be allowed to get abroad. In our Empire we recognise that in diversity and autonomy there is strength; that the Empire gains in freedom and happiness from the very looseness of the bonds uniting it. But the world does not know us as we know ourselves, and cannot be expected to look at the matter from our point of view. If diversity is carried into the realm of foreign affairs it will see. only disunion and weakness. In assenting to the Irish Free State sending Professor T. A. Smiddv to Washington as Minister Plenipotentiary for Southern Ireland, the Home Government has made a big concession to purely parochial sentiment. The position of such a Minister is without parallel in the British Empire and creates a precedent that is bound eventually to result in awkward complications. It is quite true that the Minister is empowered to deal only with financial and economic questions relating to Ireland, and under such restriction would be little more than a trade commissioner, but the difficulty will be in rigidly observing the conditions. The proposition that any part of the Empire should be on diplomatic relations with a foreign Government otherwise than through the British Embassy raises the whole question of the* position and rights of the Imperial Government in its a cutest form. If there is a common .sovereignty for all the Empire, there must be common responsibility for the conduct of its- foreign relations. It is suggested that this demand on the part of the Free State follows a precedent set in the case of Canada last year. On the contrary, the example of Canada directly condemns it. It is true the British Government gave its consent to the signing of a Fisheries Convention with the United 1 States by the Canadian Minister in Washington, but the negotiations leading up to it had l been conducted by the Minister as for the British Embassy, with which he is in permanent relationship. The principle of Imperial diplomatic responsibility was insisted unon by Mr. Lloyd George at that time. Moreover, the demand for diplomatic independence, in whatever degree, is plainly ruled out by the terms of the Irish Treaty. - By its first clause, the Free State was given "the same constitutional status in the community of nations known as the British Empire” as the other self-governing Dominions. In the second clause it was more specifically laid down that the position of the Free State should he that of the Dominion of Canada, and that “the law, practice and constitutional usage governing the relationship cf the Crowd or the representatives of the Crown, and of the Imperial Parliament to the Dominion of Canada, shall govern their relationship with the Free State.” No special provision in regard to diplomatic representa. tion appears in the Treaty, and trie concession of such is clearly a big departure accentuating the anomalies of Dominion status in the matter of foreign policy. Plainly there is work for another Imperial Conference. For the Dominions to place the conduct of their foreign affairs unreservedly in the hands of the British Foreign Office is not businesslike on their part, or in accordance with their aspirations and democratic form of Government. As Empire diplomacy obligates them, they rightly believe they are entitled to a say in it. The system adopted at the London Convention is merely a makeshift. The concession of separate diplomatic representation to Ireland or to South Africa merely means that'eventually there will be six foreign policies instead of one. Statesmen of tiie Empire must get together and devise a workable plan. In view of the importance of the subject, Mr. Massey can hardly avoid the obligation to go to London in Octobcr.