NEW ZEALAND'S REPRESENTATIVE AT THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 17 October 1921, Page 2

NEW ZEALAND'S REPRESENTATIVE AT THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE.

(To the Editor.) Sir,- 1 notice In t.o-day's issue of the News, a leaderette to the effect that the appointment of Sir John Salmond as New Zealand’s representative at the Disarmament Conference

is a great mistake. On the contrary, I would have considered it a very great mistake if any of the Ministers of the Crown had been appointed, with the exception, of course, of Sir Francis Bell and the Prime Minister. Sir John Salmond has an Empire reputation as a jurist, and as an author of standard legal works. Moreover, in the United States his recent legal publications hare been regarded

sis the best of their kind that have been pui lished during the past, five years. The New Zealand representative, in any case, will only by a member of the British delegation, as New Zealand will not have any separate status at the Washington Conference. It is quite probable that the British Government will allow Sir John Salmond to be the legal adviser to the delegation as a whole, as Sir John Salmond's reputation is as great in England as it is in New Zealand. For many years Sir John Salmond was a collaborator with Str Francis Pollock iin the publication of his numerous legal woifka, and two of Sir. John Salmond’s legal works at least are standard works both in England aiid America. It is absurd to suppose that the attainments of the average Minister of the Crown in New Zealand would compare in any way with those of Sir John Salmond, either from the point of view of intellectual capacity, general education, or knowledge of constitutional history, or international law, or, even general history of our Empire. At the best, they may be classed as successful politicians in this little country, and they would have no prestige whatever in a vast country like the United States by reason of being a Minister of the Crown in New Zealand, and their Intellectual attainments, general education and special knowledge would cut no lee whatever in Washington. No other Judge, past or present, of the Supreme Court Bench of New Zealand can be said to have had the general all-round knowledge that Sir John Salmond possesses—not even the Chief i Justice, who, besides being a very old man, has had his experience confined entirely to New Zealand. Sir Robert Stout was a politician first, and a Supreme Court Judge afterwards, and he could not be said to have had at any time any training as a legal textwriter, as n student of constitutional history or international law, or a wide and varied academic training and education such as Sir John Salmond has had. The point that you do not appear to realise is that whatever a man's reputation is in New Zealand, it will count for nothing in Washington, and it. is merely sheer intellectual ability and knowledge that will carry any weight or conviction at the Conference. In conclusion, the only regretable feature about the whole matter is that, the Prime Minister has seen fit to put New Zealand to the needless and useless expense of sending a representative to Washington. The decisions arrived at by the Conference will all be by n show of hands, and the British Empire, of ccurse, will have only one vote. In such a case it seems absurd that where France may send one representative to exercise France’s one vote, the United Kingdom and the numer-

ous colonies between them will send possibly a dozen or more representatives, who will only have one vote between the lot of them. As the military and naval requirements and circumstances of Australia and New Zealand are Identical, it would have been much better for Australasia to have sent one representative, and the representative’s expenses could have been borne pro rata on the basis of population. However, I thank you for giving me the opportunity of endeavoring to remove the slur on the reputation of one of the ablest and most learned men that New Zealand has produced. With regard to my remarks in connection with the Ministers of the Crown. 1 do not wish to belittle their attainments in any way, but while I am willing to concede that they may worthily carry out their duties in the New Zealand Parliament, they would nevertheless make a very poor showing Indeed ic. Washington.—l am, etc., E. S. RUTHERFURD. Stratford, Octobet.l4, 1921. [The fact that Sir John Salmond has a reputation as a jurist does not necessarily qualify him for the position to which he has been appointed; rather may it handicap him. Our representative nt. the Conference should be able to represent the views of New Zealand, and how can he do this if he Is out of touch with political thought? The ideal man, of course, lor the position, after the Prime Minister, is Sir Francis Bell, and it is a great pity he is not available to make the trip. Though New Zealand and the other British Dominions have no vote they certainly will have a voice in the deliberations, and for that reason New Zealand should be represented hy the best man available. We nm no desire to minimise or criticise Sir John Salmond’s attainments, which speak for themselves. hut v.e do say lie is unfitted by his training and environment for the peculiar position he is asked to fill, and that the Chief Justice, on the other hand, has the very qualifications that would enable him to well and. worthily represent the Dominion. Why the Government have, in the circumstances, gone past him would be interesting to know. —Ed.]