BRITAIN AND LEAGUE

Hokitika Guardian, 16 March 1923, Page 4

BRITAIN AND LEAGUE

ADDRESS 13V PROF. CONDLIFFE.

At a recent gathering at Christchurch. Professor .1. B. Condliffe gave an interesting address on “Great Bri-I lain and the l.eaguc of Nations.” i

Professor Condliffe said that he did ( not belong to that brand of cheeriul i pessimists who held to the beiioi that ] The disintegration of the British Empire ! was imminent. The idea was an old j one. and great English statesmen in the past had held that the colonies would .like ripe fruit, fall away from the parent tree. It was not until the Sotindancso war, when New South Wales oll'ered to send troops to help Britain that it began to he seen that the colonies were a definite asset and willing to take an active part in the support of the .Motherland. I lie feeling of confidence in the colonies grew greater after the Queen’s Jubilee celebraions. when they all took part, and later during the Boer War. 1 hen came the Great War. This proved that unity at a time of crisis was not enough, for there might easily come a time when the call would not he answered by all the colonies, and unless a new constitutional system was built up among the different parts of the Empire, friction might result. 'I he urgency for this new constitutional system was caused through the war, hut the extremity at the need was largely a result of peace. The British War Cabinet realised it. and accordingly a full recognition of the national status of the different colonies that composed the Empire was given in the \ ersailles Treaty. All the colonies wore consulted before its signing, and the treaty itself was ratified in the Parliament of each. This was a great new development in the Imperial constitution. "It is useless to do as some do,” he said “and make a comparison between the British and Homan Empire. The Roman Empire was a military autocracy. and it lasted just ns long as military control was exercised. As long as they could divide and rule all was well but like all autocracies it began to rot at the centre.” Talking of the Brilisli Empire, he said that the loss of the American colonies was one ol the greatest political tragedies ol history, slid hut for it. the last war miglil have easilv been avoided. Hu- British Empire as ii Stood now was unique in ilvariety. Ireland was a separate ■‘stale, with the King as the only bond that h< Id it to the const it iition. fri land c,veil no allegiance to Westminster ami to the House of Lords. Il was just the same with the colonies, they were ciitirely independent of the Motherland. The Parliaments of the colonies ranked equal and co-ordinate with the English Parliament. The Crown was now Ihe only link between the dill cront parts of Hie Empire. The absolute position of the colonies was not clearly

defined until the Irish Peace, and then a- Ireland was granted Dominion ,latus ii y,as necessary to put down the exact meaning of the term. All this was the direct result of the political evolution of the nineteenth century. In tracing lliis evolution lie said that the first Empire-—A ineriea—was b'-l through tactlessness. 1/ogalK England was perfectly instilled in asking licit the American colonies should pay their >i- ii-.- ol luxation lor the < oiitiniium e ii, a war that was being waged on their la-hali. hut England's policy was tactless and unimaginative, and the .-nine mistake would never he made again. In 1837 there was a rebellion in Can ida, and it was necessary for England to do something. A man was -cut out to make a report on the position. and that man was Edward Gibbon Wakefield, who was what might be railed the Prophet of Colonisation, mid lie saw - bow certain developments must make for the constitutional freedom ol the Empire. In New Zealand the people could make treaties, they could ; do what they liked with public bond-. ; and they could look after their native j races. The only restriction was that ! thee had to accept Home guidance in' liic matter of loroign policy. Canada was the only country with freedom in this rosped and she might conclude with foreign Powers treaties alleetillg Canada alone without the consent <1 the King. In spue of the generous recognition ot the dominions as being <;11 equality with the British nation, there -as no imams hy which the colonic-, had a voire ill matters ol peace and war, ami in i hat they had to l ely absolutely oil ! lia* judgment ot the Motherland. It ,

, . Et-r • eh.it a divergence of opinions was to be found. General Smuts, the able.-l statesman in tin* Empire to-day, held that Great Britain had no right in commit ‘smith Alrien to war without having first consulted it. Nyu Zealand on the other hand, was quite prcpaied to lollow England. The divergence was not really so great as ii seenidl, and the opinion of General Smuts could imt he termed ‘‘nonsense,’' as some people had termed it. it a great crisis came it was probable that the Empire would pull together, hut that was not enough to warrant the present policy of imn-coiisiillaliou. Sixteen thousand New Zealanders were lying dead as a result of the last war: they'had taken their part ill the struggle ami it was only right that the country should now take its adequate share in responsibility for the foreign policy which concerned the Empire as a whole. It was true that the Premiers of the dominions were kept in touch with Imperial alfairs, hut there should he regular consultations, hy means ol which the dominions would know' the developments in foreign affairs. Ihe pro sent state of Europe showed that the prospects were anything liut peneetul, and war was not Par from the surface. It was not just for the colonies to trust the judgment of the Motherland in these matters of foreign policy, for the trusting of the Motherland was merely to have trust ill the judgment ol the particular party that happened to lie in power at the time. Some people made the plea that trie preservation of unity was more important than the constitutional development of the parts, hut the only safe way to preserve unity was to make the colonies feel that they had a. responsibility, otherwise there would come a crisis in which some of them would refuse to take up arms. Iu showing the relation between the British Empire and the League ot Nations the speaker said that the British influence was predominant in the League’s Covenant. The procedure of the League was exactly the same as that in the Empire. The League as it j stood was only a partial League—all | nations were not represented, and it , vas a body struggling with great iliffi- I ■nitios. The Covenant itself was weak. I Hit all these could he considered as , emporary difficulties. It was, however, aife to say that a great step had been akeu in international affairs. The .cagne should he supported, and it houhl evolve into a League of peoples -not governments. The League Seereari at.— a hand of international civil ervants. were working patiently at lonova the whole year round, and they ere seeing international affairs in a i iffoi cut light. They were forming a ot l v 0 f opinion which must do good in 1 io future. People said that the , ongue should stop war. hut it could , >t do that if the peoples of the , it ion s were determined upon war. The -st step towards the prevention of war

ion without which the League could not 1 operate. The British Empire had a j unique opportunity in this matter, be- ! cause within it were to he found all the. problems that confronted the nations. There was' an instance in the recent tariff dispute between New Zealand and Australia. That was settled ' by conference. The Britisli League of Nations had a unique opportunity for paving the way towards the World League of Nations, ff the British Empire could make a success of it so could the world at larjj;o.