The Daily News WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1929. FREEDOM OF THE SEAS.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 November 1929, Page 10

The Daily News WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1929. FREEDOM OF THE SEAS.

It has been customary for many years past for British Cabinet Ministers, and especially the Prime Minister, to.take advantage of the Guildhall banquet, which marks the inauguration of the i Lord Mayor and Sheriffs of London into office, 'as a favourable opportunity for reviewing the national' and international situation. Many important pronouncements have been made at this annual function, but the head of the present Labour Government, Mr. MacDonald, when replying to the toast of “His Majesty’s Ministers” on Saturday last contented himself with uttering platitudes, self praise, and almost colourless references to the outstanding questions of the day. To some extent he was in the awkward position of. a stern denouncer of secret negotiations who had to admit that his chief achievement consisted of private conversations with America’s President, the results of which appear to be more or less nebulous, though capable of proving a welcome contribution towardsworld peace. It will be noted that, when-referring to naval disarmament, Mr. MacDonald stated that “such questions as the freedom of the seas still aroused the old feeling of uneasiness,” and he emphasised that the statement that this most important subject would be raised at the Five Power conference had no justification whatever- The question, he said, had not been raised, and would not be raised. According, however, to a’ cable from Washington, on the Sth hist,, President Hoover is credited with seeking means of hardening the forthcoming naval conference in London to include a discussion on the subject of the freedom of the seas, it being understood that General Dawes, who will represent the United States at that conference, has been acquainted with the President’s views regarding the entire question of war-time law of the seas. Apparently the idea on which tentative action of this nature is based, is to find a formula, if possible, which will bring the two Governments into harmony concerning specific recommendations to the other Naval Powers for a restatement of the laws of blockade, also of search and seizure, as well as the rights of neutrals. In the face of Mr. MacDonald’s assertion that the question of the freedom of the seas had not been raised, and would not be raised, it seems difficult —even impossible—to reconcile, the cabled' statement that the president, it is believed, “canvassed every phase of the problem during the discussions with Mr. MacDonald,” and although no formula could be found at that time for presenting- the problem to the London . conference, the free exchange of views left President Hoover hopeful that means would be discovered to bring up the question "for early consideration. Possibly in the concluding sentence of the cabled message will be found the nearest approach to the truth of the whole matter, for therein it is stated that “Mr. MacDonald is regarded here as disposed to support the plan for discussion of ‘freedom • of the seas, ’ which would assure the security of the British Empire.” Nothing is to be gained by Splitting straws over this very import-# ant question that virtually overshadows the whole subject of naval strength. Obviously the crucial point is not whether an agreement can be reached between Britain and America as to certain abstract principles relat? ing to the freedom of the seasRather is the problem one-to the solution of which the Monroe Doctrine presents an impassable barrier. If America can be party to such an. agreement as will effectually solve the vexed question of the freedom of the seas,, then' it can logically'be held there no

longer exists any - valid- reason why that country should not enter into the League of Nations. Reading between the lines there would appear to be some justification for assuming that this aspect of the subject was not absent from the private conversations between President Hoover and Mr. MaeDonal.d, and it may be that the priming of General Dawes with the views of the President regarding the entire question of wartime law of the seas is equivalent to sending up a kite to ascertain the direction of the wind. It would be neither seemly nor politic for Britain to attempt to camouflage her policy, which is imperatively based upon the security of the whole British Empire. To no other country in the world is. the need for security at sea so vital as to Britain. At the same time, not only would she gladly welcome an appreciable decrease, in the burden of naval armaments, but she would be only too glad to have the co-operation of the United States in -policing the highways of the seas. Neither of these two great English-speak-ing countries are interested in making further conquests, but both , need the assurance of security as expressed in defensive measures. There is nothing contrary to the spirit of Locarno and the outlawry of war in taking reasonable measures for security. What is of importance, however, is that the efforts of President Hoover shall be backed up by the Senate, so that if an acceptable agreement is reached it shall not be repudiated in the same way as that which occurred over the League of Nations.