The Dominion. FRIDAY, JANUARY 27, 1911. THE COLONIES AND NAVALWARFARE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1036, 27 January 1911, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, JANUARY 27, 1911. THE COLONIES AND NAVALWARFARE.

Since we last wrote upon the new code of rules of naval warfare which aro known as the Declaration of London, the campaign of protest against the ratification of .what Loed Charles Beresford has called "a disgraceful betrayal of national security and national power" has spread and strengthened. The interests of the colonies are very seriously involved in the Declaration, and tho people of this country may bo excused if they wonder why the Prime Ministergdoes not make a statement upon the matter. To an inquiry by One of our representatives Sir Joseph - Ward replied merely that tho matter will be discussed at the Imperial Conference. Whether ho has any opinion upon the Declaration, or oven whether he has any knowledge of its provisions or of its bearing upon the situation of New Zealand is a matter upon which it is legitimate to entertain somo doubt, since he has never given us any evidence that those Imperial problems, hgwever important they may be, greatly interest him which are neither very simple nor "popular.". Nothing could be more unfair than to expect him to come out with a plump and plain verdict upon questions so complex and difficult as are involved in the Declaration; when experts at Home differ profoundlycvcn about tho meaning— apart from the merits—of the crucial clauses, dogmatism would, indeed, bo inexcusable in anyone who is not an expert in international, law, in naval warfare, or in the principles of foreign policy. A statement of a certain kind, however, should be forthcoming from tho head of the Government, as we shall show in a moment.

The state of tho controversy, in the meantime, must be glanced at. As we mentioned in our last discussion of the subject, chief interest centres in tho new provisions respecting "conditional contraband," of which food and foodstuffs are'the most important itcms._ The Foreign Office contends that it is an enormous gain to an island Power, dependent for its food upon other countries, to have food definitely sot beyond tho possibility—nay, they say, the certainty—of being treated as "absolute"- contraband, liable to capture in all circumstances. But since any port in Britain may be ;:onsidored a base of. supply, and since "conditional" contraband is immune only when carried to a neutral port under a neutral flag, Britain's food supplies in war-timo, incur exactly all the risks of absolute contraband. The most that can be said is, as the Daily,, Mail argues, that Britain is not any worse loff so far'as her food supplies are. concerned. This, howover, loaves untouched the point that any European Power—Germany, for instance—is far bettor off. Germany, can get almost anything short of powder and-shot—she can get food, boats, floating docks, airships, clothing,- horse shoes—without the least trouble by haying her needs carried in neutral bottoms to a neutral-port. Even the Westminster Gazette's defence of tho Declaration is'wanting in force; it is driven to the- last trench of declaring that "Britain's safety lies in her power to keep tho sea open, not in any international agreement." What tho Gazette moans is that, Britain's sea-power makes all treaties insignificant—is, in.fact; a sort of supremo Declaration in itself. This may be true; we all hope it will bo true in practice; but it is only playing with the question to make any such assumption. We must note the Manchester Guardian's observation upon the effect of the new rule that the Declaration transfers from captor to owner the onus of proof as to the immunity of any challenged contraband. The Guardian dealt with this serious point last month in this very clear passage: • ■

In time of war every place in England would be potentially n base for every other. Liverpool, for example, might be described as a base for the armed forces of the Crown at Manchester, assuming that the Territorial Forces had been embodied. At present tho burden of proof that a cargo of flour consigned to Liverpool (for foodstuffs aro scheduled as conditional contraband) was in fact intended to be made, into bread for tho use of the Manchester Territorials would on tho English view of the law rest on the captor. The captor would find it very difficult to prove. But under tho Declaration tho burden will lie.on the owner of the captured goods to prove that'the cargo is not so intended. Proof in these matters will be exceedingly difficult, and "merely" transferring the burden of proof from the captor to the owner will make all tho difference between normal condemnation and normal immunity.

Now as to tho duty c-f tho Prime Minister. What wo think he should tell the public is the attitude he will take up, not upon the meaning and possibilities of tho new rules—which only careful consultation can .finally decide—but 'upon- the extent to which tho Foreign Office should in general modify its plans to ichinie with the ultimate interests of New Zealand. The Australian Government has apparently been at the pains of making up its mind, and has exposed its mind in the resolutions it will present to the Imperial Conference. Sir Wilfrid Laurier has not studied tho matter, but he is having tho Declaration analysed order that he may come to a definite decision. What has Sir Joseph Ward done? and what, if anything, does lie mean to do? He was allowed by Parliament to treat itand tho country in his usual cavalier manner in respect of the New Zealand resolutions for the and he cannot reasonably complain if his critics declare either that ho has a wrong notion of his position or that his reluctance to take Parliament and the country into his confidence is a reluctance to expose his nonposscssion of any firm, clear ideas on the questions involved. It seems to be almost assured that, for the first time in history, the colonics may cause the abandonment oralterI ation of British foreign policy in

the last and highest region of international politics. This country has a right to know how much liberty its representative means to allow himself in circumstances so momentous for the colonics and the Empire. It is plainly his duty to make some statement that \yill enable him to obtain a general instruction from the condition of public opinion.