PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
mmimmilu
Reference :-
C.O.885
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
Fourteouth Day.
9 May 1957.
EXTENSION OF
BRITISH INTERESTS IN THE PACIFIC,
(Chairman.)
extent to which Mr. Deakin was going into the past history of this subject, and I am not prepared to follow him throughout, and I do not know that he will expect me to do so. I think he admitted that the actual authority of Great Britain was subject to some limitations in the Pacific and had always been.
Mr. DEAKIN : It extended as far as "Tahiti."
cannot
CHAIRMAN: He said that it was "indefinitely" under British authority, and I think another expression he used was, that Australia "practically had" more extensive interests than had been admitted. I am not sure that that carries us very far, because, after all, we have to hear in mind that when you convert indefinite interests into actual interests you assume an amount of responsibility, and you become liable to an amount of cost which does not apply to the indefinite possession, and of course we in this country, though we are willing and desirous to do all that we can to protect the Dominions beyond the Seas, and have been so in the past and now hope to be equally energetic with your assistance, there is a limit to the extensions which we can contemplate, and certainly to the rapidity with which those are made. If other nations--which, after all, we exclude from interest in the Pacific Ocean - -have advanced and established themselves in certain parts of it, I do not think that is quite justifiable to impute to us on that account that we have caused what I think Mr. Deakin described as a sense of aggravated loss to the Commonwealth or to Australasia. At all events, if there has been that sense, I hope that he will take into account the other considerations to which I have drawn attention, and believe that it was not at any rate from any intention, I am sure, of our prede- cessors any more than it is of ourselves to cause aggravated loss, or in any way to undervalue the sense of interest which I can understand is more present to them out there than perhaps it is possible that we should feel. I do not think that I shall serve any useful purpose if I follow through the details of the history of the New Hebrides which Mr. Deakin has given. I will only just remark this, that I am informed with regard to the British Resident that he has a legal status, and I know that the amount which he has been able to do has been recognised, recognised not only by his superiors but by others who are in no way responsible for it. Therefore, so far as that is concerned, I will only say that I deeply regret if there has been the feeling which Mr. Deakin described as exasperation from the series of incidents. I deeply regret it, but at the same time I cannot altogether admit that we are to take full responsibility for that, or that we are perhaps quite so guilty as Mr. Deakin's eloquence would make us appear.
I must say a word or two, I think, as Mr. Deakin has put aside the details of the convention, not with regard to the details of the convention, but to what he has said with regard to the manner in which that convention was negotiated. He referred to a despatch signed by himself on the 29th August, which he quoted, and I will not repeat the quotation in the second paragraph, but I should like to draw attention to this: that he went on to mention (it occurs in paragraph 3) certain conditions under which the Joint Protectorate might be appointed, and he said this: "It would be most acceptable, if the conditions upon which the Protectorate is to be established or any amendment of them afterwards, in addition to receiving the approval of His Majesty's Government and the Republic of France, were subinitted for the consent of the Commonwealth and of New Zealand prior to their adoption by His Majesty's Government." That was the request which he made in August 1905. Now, Mr. Deakin said, or rather implied, I think, that there was some cause of complaint as to delay in dealing with these matters. I was not responsible, of course, for the first part of it, but I should
+
C
133
9 May 1907.
EXTENSION OF
say for my predecessor that this letter was dated August 29th. That letter of Fourteenth Day. August 20th would not arrive until a month or five weeks afterwards--that was a time when Parliament was not sitting; but on November 4th a telegram was sent to New Zealand. The New Zealand Government replied; that reply was not received till December 5th; and on December 9th steps were taken to proceed with the arrangement.
Sir JOSEPH WARD: What year was that?
CHAIRMAN: 1905.
Mr. DEAKIN : beg your pardon; the delay was not in the procedure, but in informing us of the procedure and its meaning.
CHAIRMAN: I am coming to that, I think you also thought there was delay there.
Mr. DEAKIN : No.
CHAIRMAN: So far so good. It went on and, of course, we came into office soon after that, and at once proceeded with the commission which our predecessors had started, and it went on without any delay. But Mr. Deakin makes two complaints against us in that respect. In the first place that the Commission was not announced to him--I cannot explain that without further inquiry-I do not know how it happened. If it was my inadvertence I apologise, but on a change of Governments sometimes these things may occur. Anyhow on the second complaint I should like to say a word or two, and that is that the characteristics of the Commission appeared first in the newspapers and first reached Australia through the newspapers. Now I ought to say that I took the most careful precautions myself to preserve the strictest privacy with regard to all the documents of this Commission with the object of their reaching the Australian and New Zealand Governments before anybody knew anything of it all. Accidents will happen and in this case an accident did happen. I should also just like to remind Mr. Deakin that at the time this was going on a colleague of his was in this country, Sir John Forrest, and he brought me a message, I think, in regard to the Convention to which I attended to the best of my ability, and therefore we had through him the advantage of communication with those who are responsible to Australia in these matters. I do not say that in any way to imply that Sir John Forrest came to me with any authority to represent the Australian Government, but at the same time--
Mr. DEAKIN He was a member of it.
CHAIRMAN: He was a member of it, and I took advantage of his being here to converse with him on the subject. That was how it stood. We did our best to keep the thing secret until it reached the hands of the Common- wealth Government. I admit we did not succeed entirely in doing so, but there it stood, and then the Governments in Australia and New Zealand had their opportunity of suggesting amendments.
Now, Mr. Deakin has referred to a passage which has often been referred to in which it is said that "the draft convention must therefore be confirmed or
{ 49270,
LI
BRITISH INTERESTS IN THE PACIFIC. (Chairman.)