this difficult and delicate matter Empire should have single policy and speak with single voice. Before expressing opinion with regard to suggestion that Conference should be held in March, Commonwealth Government feel that they must await return of Sir Littleton Groom, first Commonwealth delegate at 1924 Assembly, expected back 10th January. Whole position will be closely examined immediately on his return, and Commonwealth Government will then be in a position to communicate with British Government as to their views upon Protocol and also as to necessity for personal consultation in order to arrive at single Empire policy. As they see position at present they believe that consultation by cable should enable such a policy to be evolved. In the event of its being demonstrated that it is impossible to deal adequately with matter by cable it will be necessary for personal consultation to take place, but Bruce feels that it is practically impossible for him personally to attend, and grave difficulties are in the way of another Minister being sent in his place. In view of this fact Commonwealth Government urge very strongly that every effort should be made to deal with matter by cable communications. Massey telegraphed 23rd December that he was in communication with other Prime Ministers and would endeavour to arrange to attend in March if they were able to do so. He has now telegraphed that communications from Prime Ministers of Canada, Commonwealth of Australia and Union of South Africa indicate that each has grave difficulty in personally attending proposed Conference, and that each considers consultation by cable preferable. He presumes that Conference will therefore not take place. Though his personal attendance not a certainty, New Zealand Government would attend by a Minister if Conference still desired and can take place. General Hertzog telegraphed 3rd January that it was not possible for him or any of his colleagues in Union Government to attend Conference before middle of August next. Monroe telegraphed 24th December that he was unlikely to be able to attend himself owing to sitting of Parliament but would try to arrange to send representatives from Newfoundland. No reply received from Irish Free State. In the circumstances it is clear that we must endeavour by correspondence to arrive at some common conclusion with regard to the Protocol itself, and the large issues of policy which arise out of its consideration. Similar message sent to other Prime Ministers. -AMERY. BALDWIN NOTE.-Copy sent to Irish Free State by despatch, 16th January, 1925. No 5. The Secretary of State for the Colonies to the Governors-General of Canada, the Commonwealth of Australia, New Zealand, and the Union of South Africa, and the Governor of Newfoundland. 15TH JANUARY. Prime Minister : Begins [TELEGRAM.] Following from Prime Minister for your My message of to-day.* Following is summary of views so far expressed by Dominion Prime Ministers with regard to provisions of Geneva Protocol. Prime Minister of Canada states that Canadian Government has given question some preliminary consideration; it is now being examined by Departmental Committee, and will in immediate future be gone into in detail by Cabinet. Prime Minister of Commonwealth of Australia entirely concurs in view that it would be most unwise to reject Protocol except for some cogent reasons or without endeavouring to formulate some positive alternative policy, but Australia will not allow any abrogation of her rights with regard to immigration and is anxious that policy pursued shall if possible be acceptable to United States. He regards as most essential preliminary to any discussion as to British Empire's policy ascertaining of United States Government's real opinion on subject. Prime Minister of New Zealand stated in his message of 23rd December that he considered whole proposal mischievous and only possible of effect in minor issues between small nations, but recognized difficulty in the way of Great Britain's refusal to concur in some form of general international obligation to refer to arbitration. He stated that New Zealand Government must be largely guided by British Government in final decision, but it was then his opinion that whatever is done now will be rendered nugatory under Article 21 of Protocol by inevitable failure of agreement concerning details of disarmament. In his further message now received he states that one principal objection is to provisions in Protocol accepting Hague Council as a conclusive authority to determine any questions of international law and also to determine what is a matter of domestic jurisdiction. Reference to reservations in Article 3 Protocol is so drafted as to be without effect. Another principal objection is that though defence against aggression is permitted to nation attacked Protocol prevents * No. 4. (18905) A 4 friendly nation coming to the aid of nation attacked without the authority of Council after tedious procedure. Article 8 Covenant of League thus reduced in practical effect. He asks to be informed as to attitude of France, Italy and Japan. Prime Minister of Union of South Africa has no views to offer as yet as he feels that matter ought to be more fully considered after seeing what Committee of Imperial Defence have to say. I have included in above summary and summary contained in my message of to-day* all replies so far received including your own in order that each Prime Minister may see form in which his views have been communicated to other Prime Ministers. Similar message sent to other Prime Ministers. BALDWIN. Ends. -AMERY. NOTE.-Copy sent to Irish Free State by despatch, 16th January, 1925. No. 6. The Secretary of State for the Colonies to the Governors-General of Canada, the Commonwealth of Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, and the Irish Free State, and the Governor of Newfoundland. [TELEGRAM.] 19TH JANUARY. Please inform your Prime Minister that following statement will be issued to Press here to-morrow for publication on morning of 21st January : Begins: The correspondence with the Governments of the Dominions and India as to the possibility of arranging for a special meeting of the Imperial Conference in March to discuss the questions arising out of the Protocol for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes indicates that the exigencies of Parliamentary and other business render it impossible for a representative meeting to be held in London at the time suggested. In the circumstances the only possible course seems to be to endeavour by correspondence to arrive at a common conclusion on the issues involved, and His Majesty's Government have informed the Governments of the Dominions and India accordingly. -AMERY. * No. 4. No. 7. The Governor-General of the Union of South Africa to the Secretary of State for the Colonies. [TELEGRAM.] 26TH JANUARY. Your telegram of 15th January.* Geneva Protocol. Following for Prime Minister from my Prime Minister :— Begins: Ministers after careful consideration of the proposed Protocol regret to have to inform British Government that they feel themselves unable to accept the same or to recommend its acceptance by Parliament. The reasons which have led Ministers to arrive at this conclusion may without going into details be stated as follows: 1. It seems generally admitted, and Ministers share that feeling, that the League of Nations as at present existing, with America, Germany and Russia standing aloof, cannot over any length of time achieve its great and primary object of ensuring peaceable world, and must, unless these great nations become members, necessarily as time goes on assume more and more the character of political alliance. To accept Protocol, Ministers feel, would be only to make it more difficult for countries at present outside the League, notably America, to become members, and would consequently contribute very materially to making it impossible for League to attain its real object and so give an additional impulse to the diversion of its activities in the direction of an alliance having as its object the maintenance of a balance of power. 2. It is quite impossible even approximately to calculate or tell in advance what are going to be the obligations and consequences direct and indirect which may accrue from an acceptance of the Protocol or what may be the many and various international complications to which it may give rise. 3. By accepting the Protocol the character of the League will be so modified that no nation being a member of it, subject to the provisions of the Protocol, can rightly be said any longer to retain its full measure of sovereign rights. This, Ministers deem a matter of very grave concern, in view more particularly of indefinite character of the obligations which are sought to be imposed and of the practical consequences it may have for the weaker nations not possessing influence derived from power to add prestige and weight to their interpretation of the obligations thus assumed. 4. Ministers feel convinced that while public feeling in the Union may be taken as sincerely in favour of a real and genuine League of Nations, it is generally felt that the * No. 5. League, as it is at present, has not yet arrived at that stage, and that to have obligations of the Union under Covenant extended any further is not in the interests of this country. 5. In matters of such a grave nature as the relationship and obligations of nations over against the League professedly instituted with a view to the guardianship of the peace of the world, but under present conditions more especially the protector of the circumstances and requirements of particular nations and countries, Ministers feel they are called upon to exercise particular vigilance and to bestow particular attention upon the peculiar position and interests of South Africa, and are of the opinion that these interests demand that no international obligations should be entered into which may entail a participation and interference by the Union in matters which do not, or only remotely, concern her and whereby her real and proper interests may eventually be jeopardized. Ministers have considered question as to making suggestions which may serve as amending proposals to the provisions of the Protocol. They find, however, that, from the very nature of the circumstances which have necessitated the drafting of the Protocol, no amendment or substitute to its provisions can be expected to prove acceptable unless it carries with it an extension of obligations and responsibilities under Covenant. As already stated, Ministers are convinced that that would be against the interests of this country and contrary to the wishes of the people. Under these circumstances Ministers must advise that they have no suggestions to offer. Ends. -ATHLONE. NOTE.-Copy sent to Canada, the Commonwealth of Australia, New Zealand, the Irish Free State, and Newfoundland by despatch, 17th February, 1925. No. 8. The Governor-General of New Zealand to the Secretary of State for the Colonies. SIR, [Received 4th February, 1925.] Government House, Wellington, 6th January, 1925. I HAVE the honour to transmit to you, at the instance of my Prime Minister, the accompanying memorandum dealing with the proposed Protocol for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. I have, &c., CHARLES FERGUSSON, Governor-General. |