DOMINION STATUS

Waikato Times, Volume 117, Issue 19545, 6 April 1935, Page 13 (Supplement)

DOMINION STATUS

(Professor A. B.erriedale Keith In Manchester Guardian.)

THOUGH IT IS ONLY within the last fifteen years that the term “ Dominion status ” 'has become familiar’ in political terminology, the creation 'Of the status must be traced to the Colonial Conference of 1907, and to the decision then arrived at to place on a permanent basis the system of periodic conferences between the constituent parts of the Empire. The Conference agreed to institute an. Imperial Conference to meet every four years, of which the Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom and of the self-governing colonies would be members, meeting on a footing of equality; tire Secretary of State for the Colonies was also- to be a member, an;i would act as president in place of the Prime Minister of tire United Kingdom in the latter’s -absence. As a sign of recognition of the special position of the colonies in question the new term “ Dominions ” was adopted as their designation. The distinctive character of their status was emphasised by excluding India from membership -of the Conference; the Dominions were essentially self-governing territories in all internal matters and thus stood apart from India as well as . from the Crown colonies and protectorates. The first meeting of the Imperial Conference in 1911 further defined their position. On the one hand, emphatio rejection was accorded to the suggestion of the New Zealand Prime Minister for Imperial federation in a tentative form; on the other, i-t was agreed that not only must the Dominions continue to be consulted on all issues of foreign policy which directly affected their interests, but that in future they should be given the opportunity of Associating Themselves With the United Kingdom in determining the broad lines of British foreign P° lic YIt was, however, made clear that, in the last'resoit, in issues of war and peace and alliances the final decision must rest with the British Government, whose fleet, army, and Diplomatic Service afforded the essential basis xo effective participation In world politics. The further development -of the status thus achieved was greatly accelerated by the share taken by the Dominions in bearing the burden of the Great War and by the demand of the Prime Minister of Canada that the sacrifices of his people should be rewarded by recognition of the birth of -a new nation worthy to rank in power and place with all save the great States of Europe and the United States of America. The British Government readily conceded the justice of Sir R. Borden’s claim, supported as it was by the other'Dominions, save Newfoundland. The objections of foreign Governments were overruled, and the conclusion of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 saw the grant of a definite international status to the Dominions other than Newfoundland. They became distinct members of -the League of Nations side by side with the Biitish Empire, to which was assigned a permanent seat on the League Council, while it was expressly agreed that the Dominions would be eligible for election as -tempoiary members, a contingency realised in 1927, since which date a Dominion has always been represented on the Council. Moreover, Canada insisted successfully that not only should the Treaties of Peace be Signed Separately for the King in respect of each Dominion, but that ratification should await Dominion approval. This settlement, achieved amid the turmoil of the determination of the terms of peace, necessarily left much that was obscure in the status of the Dominions, but the procedure thenceforth adopted rested on the fundamental principle that the Dominions w r ere entitled in external affairs to that complete autonomy which long before they had achieved in internal questions. This principle of e-quality could only be made fully effective by drastic revision of the existing legal Constitution of the Empire, ■Which had long" ceased to correspond in any measure to constitutional usage. The Imperial Conference of 1921 felt that matters miMit be left to develop without immediate legal changes, but the position was vitally altered by the conclusion of an agreement for a treaty with, Ireland on December 6, 1921. The leaders who claimed to speak for Ireland accepted the status of the Dominion of Canada as that of ifhe Irish Free State, and in framing the Constitution of the Slate in 1922 they made it Clear That They Claimed Sovereign Independence, modified only by recognition of a Crown common to the Slate and the other members of the British Commonwealth of Nations. Before the Free Stale Constitution could be approved by the British Government certain modifications were insisted upon, and it was only accepted by that Government subject to the maintenance of appeal from the Supreme Court of the State to the Privy Council and to the reassertion of the paramount legislative authority of the

WHAT THE TERM MEANS AND IMPLIES.

'British Parliament. To 'secure the removal of these restrictions and to develop the possibilities of achieving fuller international status inherent in Dominion status became the Immediate objective of the Free State Government. In external affairs the Free State could rely on the position won by Canada. That Dominion was a member of the League, and the Free State promptly secured admission- thereto. That Dominion had won in 1920 the right to send a i Minister Plenipotentiary to Washington, though Jt had not acted on that right; -the Free State established representation. Canada in 1923 had claimed that a treaty affecting her alone need he signed only by a Canadian representative; -the Free State asserted the like right. At the Imperial Conferences of 1923-30 the Free State acted with Canada and the Union of South Africa -in demanding full control of foreign relations and the right of separate action. This was conceded’, subject only to the duty of communication of information to other parts of the Commonwealth. In 1931 the Free State Government eliminated the British Foreign Office from all connection with its’ foreign affairs, placing itself in direct communication with the King, and thus made it clear that it claimed sovereign independence under the -British Crown. In internal matters equal success was achieved. The Free State asserted the right to select and dismiss the Governor-General, and In 1931 the Statute of Westminster virtually renounced British legislative supremacy, permitted the abolition of the appeal to the Privy Council from Dominion courts, -and gave extraterritorial validity to Dominion laws. In Australia, New Zealand, and Newfoundland the Statute is not yet operative; Newfoundland, Indeed, for -the time being, under financial stress, has renounced her self-government. But the Statute,is effective in Canada, the Free State, and the Union, which In 1934 used her new -freedom to enact her sovereign Independence. Moreover, -the Union Prime Minister has asserted, without contradiction by the British Government, that the Crown must now be regarded as divisible and that -the Union may now secede at pleasure from the Commonwealth and Remain Neutral In British Wars, For the Free State the treaty of 1921 appears to negative either secession or neutrality as possible, nor has Canada claimed either right. The Great War, which had so stimulated the growth of Dominion status, evoked In India claims for equality with the Dominions, and her great services were duly rewarded- in 1917 by admission to the Imperial Conference and the' promise of reforms leading to the “progressive realisation -of responsible government in India as an integral part of the British Empire." Indian opinion justly interpreted this as a definite pledge -of ultimate achievement of a position equal to that of the Dominions, and any doubt which might have existed as to the sense of the declaration of 1917 disappeared when India was accorded a place in the League of Nations together with the Dominions. It was therefore -only a formal recognition <of an inevitable conclusion when, in 1020, with the permission of the British Government, Lord Irwin asserted that Dominion status was the ultimate goal of British policy for India, an assurance reiterated by Lord Willingdon m 1933. Nor did the Secretary of Stale for India repudiate this reading of the situation when 'on November 22, 1933, -he insisted that Dominion status was not the immediate end of: the Governmental proposals nor -did it mark the next step in Indian reform. It -is. however, clear that the assurances given by Lords Irwin and Willingdon are to be read as subject to the paramount principle -asserted in 1917 that India must remain an integral part of the 'British -Empire, and that Dominion status must not be held to imply the right to secede Such a right, indeed, would be wholly incompatible with the position of the Indian States, whose accession Is essential for the formation of the proposed Federation, for the Princes value in the highest degree their Direct Relations With the Crown. But, apart from this point, it is clear that, if Dominion status were at once to lie enjoyed by the federation the Princes would be precluded from entering it. Their adherence is now possible because the Grown retains in respect of executive government and legislation final control over Federal authorities, and can so exercise that control as to avoid action inconsistent with the rights of the States. From the point of view of the Princes it would be essential, before Dominion status was achieved, that their position should be. so defined and safeguarded in the Constitution that the Federal courts could afford them that protection which the Crown would no longer be able to assure to them.