The Dominion TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1943. THE MEANING OF THE EMPIRE

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 14, 12 October 1943, Page 4

The Dominion TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1943. THE MEANING OF THE EMPIRE

To an Anglo-American audience in London, the British Home Secretary, Mr. Herbert Morrison, recently presented a picture.of the British Empire both timely and inspiring. The characteristic tendency of British people toward self-depreciation renders it desirable that some one in official authority should, on appropriate occasions, correct misunderstandings'this spirit of humility is apt to create among people in other countries inclined to take superficial appearances for reality. British people have said very little about their own magnificent war effort. Mr. Morrison has demonstrated, with an impressive array of facts, that no other country can, up to the present, compare with it. This recital of achievement was made with no purpose of national aggrandizement, but with the simple object of presenting the truth to those inclined to doubts and criticisms, of whom there are. not wanting many even within Britain herself and in the Dominions overseas. . Of the two points dealt with by the speaker, that m which he explained the “meaning” of the British Empire was the most instructive to uninformed and prejudiced minds. A great deal of nonsense is still talked about “British Imperialism,” and “Imperialistic policies and aims.” Much of it comes from so-called “intellectuals,” whose myopic vision and single-track minds have caused them to Stray from the hard realities of facts and events. Decrying the Empire was not so long ago a familiar practice with some of our own Socialist politicians and agitators. The British Home Secretary, himself one of the most prominent figures in the British Labour Party, takes a veiy different attitude. To him the Empire means something well worth believing in and preserving. “I do not share, he said in. the addiess under notice, “in the belief of some Americans that the British Empiie is something for which to apologize. T. hat depends upon .what one may mean by ‘Empire’.” And he added:

I think the facts warrant the statement that every community in the Empire which is capable of assuming self-government lias it . The Empire stands for cohesion, not domination . . . What we want is, surely, to hold fast to every fragment of cohesion and unity in the world, to build it up, and to give it a fuller meaning and fit it into a wider pattern. That is the real meaning of the British Empire today.

The British Empire and the United States are each, in its own way, an example to the rest of the world of that successful association of units described as a community of States. The-, only real difference between them is that the State units of the American commonwealth were fitted into a constitutional pattern, while the British Empire represents a slow evolution of scattered fragments into an association which has neither any resemblance to the old idea of Imperial mana, nor any pretence to a deliberately fashioned design.. To the extent that it could be called a system it answers satisfactorily the test question usually applied to any system, which is, does, it work? If and when adjustments appear to be necessary its elasticity enables these to be made without any great difficulty. Foolish people who rant about British Imperialism need reminding that not one of the great selfgoverning Dominions within the Empire can be compelled to stay in it if its people should decide to sever their connexion.