CROWN AND COMMONWEALTH

New Zealand Listener, Volume 37, Issue 949, 18 October 1957, Page 11

CROWN AND COMMONWEALTH

Sir-Mr J. Malton Murray’s little pot-shots at the Commonwealth structure do him no credit, either as .a marksman or as a New Zealander. He aims with more malice than justice, and his ammunition is recognisable as part of the same old low-calibre job-lot which professional anti-British propa-’ gandists in their less enterprising moments scavenge from ancient battlefields. In Mr Murray’s opinion-which he elevates to the status of "the facts" -the British Commonwealth and Empire was built by the "self-centred operations of individuals, groups and nations who never dreamed of building such a world-wide association." To support this airy generalisation he instances Cromwell’s campaign in Jamaica 300 years ago: he ignores the tremendous developments of the last century -the truly formative years of the Commonwealth as we know it today-and the influence of such men as Rhodes and Wakefield, who not only dreamed of building such an association of British peoples, but worked all their lives to make this dream a reality. Countless thousands of British pioneers worked td the same end, though their motives-various as their

individual temperaments-ranged from disinterested devotion to an ideal, to the desire for new wealth and new homes in new lands. The predominant influence in Commonwealth development, however, has always been a spirit of co-operation, the result of what Godwin Smith called "the connection of blood, sympathies and ideas" and allegiance to common purposes. Perhaps the outstanding modern example of this co-operation was the tremendous Commonwealth effort which alone saved the free world from destruction during the early years of the Second World War. Although as a result of this we may now rank third as a world military power, the British system of alliances and bases offsets any temporary disadvantage in the possession of armaments, and the political experience and leadership of the Commonwealth still remains a decisive force in international affairs. .Mr Murray goes on to express the opinion that all the "peoples over whom we have held dominion" suffer from "under-nourishment, illiteracy and general backwardness." Instances of these conditions may be found all over the world, including parts of the myriad,

multi-racial communities of the Commonwealth, but it is nonsense to contend that they exist amongst all the peoples "over. whom we have held dominion." Mr Murray need go no further afield than his own country for proof of the progress of an indigenous population under British guidance. The advancement of native peoples, and progressive training for self-manage-ment of their own affairs have long been cardinal principles of British colonial policy: there is ample evidence of this in the emergence of one selfgoverning Dominion after another in recent years. Mr Murray’s final lament-‘"the glory has departed and we have to adjust ourselves to the new conditions"-re-veals the measure of his perception. Fortunately for the welfare of mankind, this negative "lie down and die" attitude has never beén a British characteristic. The Commonwealth, like every other living organisation, is in a state of constant change and development. The new conditions which obtain today ate not by any means devoid of "glory": on the contrary, there never was a time in the long history of the Commonwealth when its many peoples were faced with such tremendous issues and immense opportunities within and be-

yond its frontiers.

F.

C.

(Sumner).

(Abridged,- Ed. )