The Dominion. THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 1909. THE LAGGARD DOMINION.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 590, 19 August 1909, Page 4

The Dominion. THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 1909. THE LAGGARD DOMINION.

The cable messages of yesterday and to-day relating to Australia's arrangements for sharing more fully in, the naval defence of the Empire will be read with mixed by New Zealanders.'But even so, we may all cheerfully congratulate our friends across the Tasman Sea upon having been able to make an arrangement which satisfies both Australian national sentiment and British Admiralty. policy. Similarly we can extend our congratulations to the people of .Canada. In the meantime, what is our own case 1 To put the matter quite frankly, it is not at all satisfactory. When ho left New Zealand Sir Joseph Ward had given us no proof that he had any clear idea as to the part which should be taken by this country. He did not ..consult the country. He did nothing, indeed, except repudiate the idea of local naval activity. A fetf years ago, we think, he would have been reflecting public opinion on this point, but there has been such a remarkable change in expert opinion that in dismissing the Australian idea with no little contempt Sir Joseph has sot himself against the weight of opinion in the Empire. If it be urged that the Conference was suddenly sprung upon us, the reply is sufficient that both Canada and Australia were able to act as.clearly and effectively as if notice of the Conference had been given , ten years ago. Sir Joseph Ward was able to got in ahead of . everybody with a sensational offer of a battleship for which the country cannot pay without borrowing the cost 'of it. But where is he, and where is New Zealand, when the real test of earnest and far-seeing statesmanship is applied? He has been an uninstructed amateur amongst experts with policies .in their pockets. He has not even been able to say what New Zealand sentiment is upon the subject. Naval defence was discussed at the Conferences of 1897, 1902, and 1907. The public gaon of Ganada and Australia treated those discussions seriously. Neither Mr. Seddon nor Sir Joseph Ward ever showed that the question of naval defence-was. one which they should make a public topic. They went ■ Home, and talked very Imperially indeed, and looked extremely well. But on returning" to New Zealand they both forgot all about naval defence, except >to keep a promise'to increase this country's annual subsidy, and turned with zest to the more congenial business of running the country to suit "the party." And the result has been that while in Australia and Canada public opinion has been matured and been given practical effect, New Zealand is. in the unhappy case of not knowing what it ought to do or what its representative can say or- do on' its bohalf. .It is inconceivable that Sir Joseph Ward has said and done absolutely • nothing at.all; hut we certainly have not yet had any official assurance that he has not been presuming to tell' ; the Admiralty what he has been reported as telling people in the street, namely, that he insists on the carrying out in its entirety of New Zealand's "offer of a battleship. This country loiig ago earned the. reputation of being the most ardently Imperialistic of all the overseas dominions. Yet Canada and Australia have arranged their plans for .participation in. the naval defence of tho Empire, while ,we are in the dark as to what we 6ught to do. If Sir Joseph Ward brings back some proposal with him, the country will have to begin thought just when Australia has finished thinking. Tho sensational Dreadnought offer served the purpose-of the moment, but it already sinks into insignificance when compared with the practical demonstrations by Australia and Canada of their recognition of tho real responsibilities attached to the great question of naval defence. New Zealand has been in tho van often enough, but in this matter it would appear to be the laggard.