OUR SECRETIVE FOREIGN OFFICE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 61, 10 December 1907, Page 4

OUR SECRETIVE FOREIGN OFFICE.

The fact that the agreement between England and Russia was signed without any discussion in Parliament, and three days after Parliament rose, and that no facts arc known concerning the actual terms of the agreement, has caused considerable criticism. It is contended that such secrctivepess and such isolated action by the Foreign Office is out of harmony with democratic ideals.

"The matter has been the subject of many questions in Parliament," writes the Daily Chronicle. "The answers on the part of our Foreign Office have always insisted on the necessity of secrecy, and it is noticable that the terms of this most important arrangement with our old rival in Asia are absolutely unknown, beyond what conjee- 1 tore may imagine. That this is so points to an anomaly in our democratic Constitution, and goes far to justify the German Chancellor's assertion that the British Foreign Office is the most secretive in Europe. The very fact that the agreement has been concluded within a few days of the prorogation of Parliament shows the same tendency, for no questions can now be asked, and we are still left in the dark as to the meaning and upshot of the terms. A FLAW IN THE CONSTITUTION. "No doubt foreign affairs require to be handled with special caution, but it seems to be a flaw in the Constitution that a treaty or alliance or any kind of agreement can thus be concluded with another Power without the smallest knowledge or consent on the part of the people's representatives. Such an agreement is one of the most important actions that can be undertaken by any Government, for it binds the future, and a nation can hardly ever set it aside without discredit. No matter how complete the country's confidence in its Foreign Office may be, there is obviously here an element of serious danger. The country has no opportunity of judging the terms of the arrangement till the fact is accomplished, and theli criticism comes too late for practical effect."

"Sir Edward Grey has done exactly what the late Government did in the case of the Japanese Treaty. He has delayed a controversial act until controversy has become impossible," contends the Daily News. "It is with reluctance that a Liberal newspaper criticises the act of a Minister whose personality exercises a magnetism amounting almost to fascination over the House of Commons. But there comes a point when a regard for democratic ideals overrides personal considerations. A secrecy which culminnates in an action which seems so v ke a defiance of Parliament strains loyalty too far." IN FAVOR OF SECRECY.

"As for the 'flaw' which has been discovered in the Constitution, the nation has cause to offer thanks," thinks the Scotsman. "It occurs in th? constitutions of most civilised States, however democratic may be the spirit of their government. The principle that invests the treaty-making power in the Head of the, State, and that leaves it in practice in the hands of his accredited Ministers, lias been regarded as an essential of the prompt and successful conduct of the business of diplomacy. The notion of the antiRussian section of the supporters of the Government appears to be that the methods of our Foreign Office arc too 'secretive,' and that treaties and other agreements into which we enter with foreign Powers should be submitted and discussed while still in the making, and should require the sanction of the Legislature before beiiif; ratified. It is hardly too much to say that if this rula held good in international proceeding, of whirh this is not the transactions it would not be possible to conclude any treaty whatever."