The Dominion. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1916. THE IMPERIAL PROBLEM

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2866, 2 September 1916, Page 8

The Dominion. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1916. THE IMPERIAL PROBLEM

.Recently a fair amount of prominence has been given to the' agitation of a" body.'of patriotic people in different parts.of-the Empire who contend that a radical departure in Imperial constitution buil.ling is an imperative need of the time. 'In prompting and stimulating discussion of a very vital topic the advocates .of closer political unioj between' the' constituent members of the Empire .are doing good service, and- are entitled to'unstinted commendation. Welcoming inquiry' and discussion, however, does not in • volve accepting any particular set of proposals as necessarily right. The position we have nache.d is rot that' the need ,for / closer political union of the Empire has 'been demonstrated and tho route by whioh it may be attained mapped oat. Un the contrary, there is a considerable difference of opinion as to whether a change on these lines is and even to some of' those who regard it as desirable tho difficulty of Effecting it looms so formidably as to appear practically insuperable. This may seem a somewhat depressing view, but the saving element in tho, situation is that the initial assumption of those who more or ic.ss definitely, advocate the organic federation of the Empire—the assumption that such a.change is vitally and imperatively necessary—is r.-.ot definitely, established on a foundation of unassailable evidence. The assumption may or may. hot be. warranted,'but it is'essentially theoretical," a.nd.we are not called upon to lapse- into depression oi ( 'lose faith in the political genius of''our nation bccausc no present practical way_ appears' of solving a problem arising out of a theoretical proposition which may ultimately prove to be quite unsound.

Recently we outlined the views of Me. Lionel Curtis, as set out in his book, The Problem of the Commonwealth. Mr. Curtis, of course, is an advocate of the Imperial Parliament idea, in support of which he has collected, a formidable array of evidence. The other side of tho question, or perhaps it would be more correct to say another view of it, , was expressed by Me. Balfour in an address to the oversea delegations of the Empire Parliamentary Association which recently visited London. Two passages in the spcech deserve particular attention. In_one,'Mß. Balfouk remarked that it had. been said, perhaps with some truth, .that we had not the powers of organisation of which nipre artificial communities had shown, themselves capablebut there was a natural growth which, if born of the best things of y the-'.human spirit, might, produce better results thanjany mechanical, organisation, and. such a natural growth was the British Empire. Later in liis speech Mr. Balfour , declared that he did his head much, ; especially at : a moment like this, with the future'constitution'of the Empire. :■. .<

He (lid not ask himself (he /added) whether- it. would bo wise,' and 'if wise easy, to modify tho'constitutional relations between the several v parts of the Empire. He looked forward to that problem with confidence, because ..whether we changed.the 'constitution of the Empire or left it as it, was,• whether, if we changed the constitution, we did so in a far-reaching sense or otherwise, it must always remain 'the fact- that, we were bomnd together essentially and fundamentally because all shared one coni'raon ideal of freedom, liberty, and good government. Tha\: was the true basis on which Umpire was founded, and if we were altogether now engaged in the present tremendous struggle it was because we were-animated bjva sense that we were sprung from one race, that we inherited one tradition, shared one language, and,,-broadly speaking, one set of laws—one spirit of law in any case—had one idea, of political .freedom, and were determined' that these should not be broken into by another nation, however well organised, and that what we meant to preserve for ourselves we would preserve also for other nations.

To some enthusiastic souls 'an attitude of comparative indifference as to whether the constitution of the Empire is, to be modified or not may seem reactionary, but a charge of this nature, if it were made, would be difficult to substantiate. The natural growth of the Empire arid the triumphant vindication of its-exist-ing organisation under the crucial test of the war ' are positive facts, which- must' be taken fully into account in •'weighing proposed political changes. That changcs must oc-. cur goes without saying. To say that the Empire is .the result of healthy growth implies that growth and ■ development must continue. But it is not implied that the future growth of tho Empire must be stimulated by radical innovations in mechanical organisation. It is manifest to all that the_ Mother Country and the Dominions can never revert to the relations that subsisted between. them before the war. The Dominions have demonstrated that they are able ancl willing to assist iu bearing the military •burdens of the Empire and in doing so have established a clear right to be:consulted.now and henceforth

on questions of foreign policy. .But ifc .is. a .great 'deal, to say "that this right cannot be conceded to the . Dominions .in-, any. other way than by setting up an Imperial Parliament in London.