The Dominion. THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1911. NEW ZEALAND AND THE EMPIRE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1112, 27 April 1911, Page 4

The Dominion. THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1911. NEW ZEALAND AND THE EMPIRE.

• « No doubt a good many people turned yesterday to the cabled summary of the interview with Sie Joseph Ward in London for some explanation of the "Parliament of Defence" of which he spoke so vaguely in his speech in Sydney on his way Home. They might reasonably have expected that as the run from Auckland to Sydney was long enough for. the selection of the title and the frame, the journey , from to London would have been.

long enough for at any rate a rough skctch to bo drawn on the blank canvas. Sin Joseph Ward, however, is just as vague as ever. lie was abundant in his statement of facts that are fairly obvious enough to be taken for granted. He was "not oblivious" of the protection afforded by the British Navy; "at the same time he could not shut his eyes" to the fact that the growth of the Empire necessitates a review of the situation with the view of strengthening the whole thing; and so on. That is all very satisfactory, of course, even if it was hardly worth saying, and still less worth cabling out here. Not so satisfactory, however, are those points in the interview at which the Prime Minister approached definiteness. Collecting the solid matter of the speech we find that it amounts to this: that in Sir Joseph Ward's opinion the colonics should have greater original powers, and that New Zealand "stands for" "an adequate share of responsibility" for naval policy and "representation on an Imperial Council." The comment of the Sydney Morning Herald upon the interview as a whole strikes us as very just and pithy: "Relieved of its rhetoric," the "Herald" says, "Sir Joseph Ward's proposal claims for Australia and Now Zealand equality with the Motherland in all the complex detail of direction of tho Empire. The claim is beyond our rights and powers. If Britaiu falls, we fall; therefore, we have not the right, and this proposed equality is beyond our power. In spite of our development we can do little to help Britain in her tremendous task; the intricacies of foreign relationship, delicately balanced around the whirlpool centre of Europe, are especially beyond the function of the Dominion, which will be on the outskirts for a long time to come. The. best help wo could render would be to help ourselves."

We shall not attempt here to develop this criticism, since we have already written along the same lines on many occasions and shall have to say more about it in the future. It is sufficient to note our satisfaction that our influential contemporary is realising the necessity for making the colonial public face the facts. There has been too long a tendency in the Australasian, press to play the part of the Greek chorus when Imperial affairs arc being_ discussed. .What principally requires to bo said at present is that the colonies already enjoy a full autonomy, and can hardly be made more free, as nations, excepting by ceasing to havo any political connection of any kind with the Mother Country. Is this what Sir Joseph Ward has in mind i The statement that New Zealand "stands for the old flag and a white country" is quite accurate enough, but upon what authority can the Prime Minister say that New Zealand "stands" also for "representation on an Imperial Council" 1 He never consulted the country or Parliament upon this point: between 1007 and 1910 the matter was never mentioned. When it was mentioned, iri_ the list of resolutions that were laid before Parliament last sessionresolutions that Parliament was not allowed to discuss—there began a series of criticisms in the press, the general tone of which, as our readers may remember, was unmistakably unfavourable to the Council idea. These unfavourable criticisms appeared in newspapers supporting the Government as well as in those opposed to it. And yet the Prime Minister says that New Zealand, which he declined to consult, but which proceeded to express its opinion on its own account, is with him in this matter. The public will probably be able to realise how unwise Parliament was in permitting its representative to treat the whole business of representing New Zealand at the Confcrcncc as his own personal I affair.