The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1927-02-26
By r. PAINE DUTT (London)

Whatever diplomatic victories, however the Brit
ish bourgeoisie may have secured with the aid of
their superior experience and manoeuvrng ability,
examination of the realities of the position will
show that none of these have changed and that the
actual gulf between the interests and policy of the
dominions and Britain remains unbridged. Even in
respect of forein policy all the tangible results in
regard to the most acute questions, negative
Thus on Locarno, the dominions Congratulate"
the British government on the work achieved but
show signs of accepting any of the responsibilities
themselves; the contrary, by the very character
of this "congratulaton," they ostentatiously mark
the pact sole of the British government.
In the way, Singapore, Australia and
New Zealand mote with special interest" the work
done towards developing a naval base, but regret
their inability to shoulder a share of the "heavy-
expense"
Still more conspicuous is this position on arma-
ments expenditure According to official state
ment in March, 1926 the naval expenditure per head
amounted in Britain to 26/, in Australia to 49,,
in New Zealand to 81, in South Africa to 10, and
in Canada to Is cents 711d-a fairly accurate
scale of values. The report defense notes with
regret" the failure of schemes of araments mita-
ton, and registers the formidable expenditure
necessary for naval development. But no proposal
is made to share out this formidable expenditure
Finally with regard to diplomatic representation,
the existing separate representative of Canada and
Ireland at Washington are confirmed and the right
to appoint others recognized while the only lmita-
ton is pious wish that it is Every desirable that
be used" On this the American government organ,
the Washington Post has Immediately drawn the
moral
'"The United States must deal separately here
after with the nations of the British commonwealth"
II the gulf is thus visible even In questions of
diplomacy and war, it is abundantly more visible
in the underlying economic questions. Here the
ference made attempt to touch the position There
no Imperial Economic Conference as in 1928
In the sessions devoted to economic questions, the
crOo Of
set out, but solution was proposed. The
British government representatives endevored to
put on optimistic tone, and boosted that British
trade with the empire had risen in proportion to
total trade from 81 per cent before the to A
per cent in 1925 and that the total value of exports
to the empire in the period had risen to AZ
per cent. But the boast was obviously hollow as
the dominions nominal value of 8 per cent (actually
allowing for the change in money values equivalent
to a stationary or even declining tota) was out
stripped by the United States increase of exports to
the empire in the perio by 109 per cent; while
finally in the figures of domnons trade the British
proportion diminishing.
A liberal observer of the school of Lloyd George
McCurdy in the Contemporary Review has re-
marked the most striking feature of the confer
ence, the fact that for the first time the domnons
representatives appeared public critics the eco
nomic stability of Britain To this it might be added
that the comparison to Britain's isfavor was almost
invariably with the United States. The significance
of this needs stressing.
On the crucial question of migration of decisive
Importance alike for unemployment in Britain under
capitalist conditions and for the British develop
ment OF the dominons, no gress was reported, nor
any hopes held out
The results of the EMPIRE Settlement Act of 1922
alreay declare dat the 1928 conference "incommen-
surate with the needs of the situation" showed no
Improvement: $4,000 in 1923, 10000 in 1924 $4,000
in 1925-ths for the territory of the dominons
representa- one seventh the globe! Nevertheless
the 1926 report recognize that it is Impossible
to look or mass movements" migration in view
of the urban industrial character of the British
population and the agricultural needs of the doinn-
IONS Here, too, is so far deadlock in the plans of
Britaish capitalist development of the empire.
In view of this whole situation what is the unity"
which the British and dominions bourgeoise have
proclaimed to the world? To this question:
1T is necessary to differentate the situation in the
main dominions, as the dominons are not a unity
In Canada non-British influence are strongest
Here United States influence Is already predomin-
ant, as shown in the recent election, and in the