The Daily News. SATURDAY, MARCH 13, 1920. NATIONHOOD OF THE DOMINIONS.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 March 1920, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, MARCH 13, 1920. NATIONHOOD OF THE DOMINIONS.

America having raised the question of the right of the British self-governing Dominions to be directly represented on the League of Nations has opened up a matter of vital import, affecting the whole constitution of the Empire. It is quite conceivable that from an academic point of view there is ample scope for argument, but, in principle America's attitude is quite untenable, and both Canada and New Zealand have expressed views in direct opposition to America's on this point. Admitting the unity of the Empire in no way involves the loss of status by the Dominions as separate nations, the mere possession of the right of self-government is in itself irrefutable evidence of nationhood, though possibly it may appear to be anomalous that a self-governing Dominion, which has a Governor-General appointed by the Crown, should still claim to be a nation within the meaning of the League Covenant. Mr. Massey enunciated the position clearly when he said: —

"I could not possibly agree to any suggestion that New Zealand should give up its right to take part in the League of Nations as a Dominion of the British Empire and as provided in Article One of the Covenant and an annex to the latter. On the contrary, T am confident that New Zealand will stand with Canada and insist on our nationhoods as Dominions continuing i.o be recognised. Although we have always had nationhood within the Empire, we have to think of the future rather than of the present, and if we

give away our rights anil privileges now or consent to important reservations on the part of other members of the League, then a time will come when the citizens of the. overseas countries of the Empire will blame ns, and very properly, for our wan! of foresight." '

If it comes to a question of either giving away our rights or altering the Constitution by eliminating the governorship, there should be »"i hesitation in electing to adhere to our rights, hut a crisis of this nature is improbable. There' is no vestige of "control" of the Dominions 'by Britain. To all intents and purposes so far as Government is concerned they are separate entities as nations, though united Imperially. In this respect they differ materially from India, which is absolutely under British rule. Confusion has arisen owing to the wording of the Article failing to express clearly whether it was separate governments or separate nations that are entitled to representation. The Canadian Government takes the unequivocal and determined stand that Canadian representation is essential if her right of nationhood is not to be abrogated, and this policy is supported firmly by Mr. Massey. We fully acquiesce in the views expressed in a recent issue of the Auckland Star, to the effect that if wealth area, population, and trade count for anything, then the great Dominions are fully entitled to be represented as nations, both in the International Labor Office and in the League of Nations. They are 'intimately concerned in all that affects the Far East, Africa, Asia and the United States. They can rightly clai-.n to be heard on questions both of foreign policy and trade, and they will more and more insist on having their rightful status as among the great nations of the world.