Manawatu Evening Standard. MONDAY, SEPT. 23, 1929. THE OPTIONAL CLAUSE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 252, 23 September 1929, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. MONDAY, SEPT. 23, 1929. THE OPTIONAL CLAUSE.

By a curious coincidence, just about the time Mr H. E. Holland, the leader of the Labour Party, moved the adjournment of the House of Representatives on Thursday, in order to raise, as a matter of urgency,- the delay which he said was occurring in the matter of New Zealand’s acceptance of the Optional Clause of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, the evening papers were publishing in their earlier editions cable messages dated September 18th stating that the whole of the Empire delegations, with the exception of the Irish Free State, were ceremonially signing the optional clause, on an agreed on form, at Geneva on the morrow. The Irish Free State had already signed, so that now the whole of the Empire is committed to the acceptance of the clause and the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, with the reservations laid down. The British Labour Party, in its bid for office at the general election, was pledged to “the immediate signature of the optional clause and the consequent acceptance of the jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of International Justice in all justiciable disputes” (vide “Labour and the Nation,” a pamphlet issued by the Socialist Party, endorsed by the present Prime Minister, Mr J. Ramsay MacDonald as covering the Labour policy). When Sir Austen Chamberlain, the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, was interviewed by a deputation from the executive committee of the League of Nations Union, headfed by Professor Gilbert Murray and Lord Cecil on June 27, 1928, he saidj in reply to their representations regarding international arbitration, that there were a great many disputes which could not be settled by arbitration, so called, but which. might be settled by conciliation, since such disputes could not be determined by any rule or consideration of law. Concerning the optional clause of the Permanent Court of International Justice, he expressed the opinion that, after the reservations, which everybody, including the deputation, wished to see made, had eliminated domestic jurisdiction, the affairs of the Empire inter se and maritime law in time of war, matters would not really be very much advanced. Under existing / conditions, he added, the Government did not think a useful purpose would be served by signing the optional clause, with the reservations they

would have to attach to it (vide the Times, London, June 80, 1928). During the British general election, Mr Stanley Baldwin pointed out that it was not clear whether the League of Nations Union suggested the adoption of the optional clause with, or without reservations. But it had been common ground to all important parties that certain important reservations would be necessary. So long as that was the case, it was not clear that anything would really be gained by such a conditional acceptance and the last Imperial Conference decided against it for the present, while reserving the subject for further discussion as events developed. So far from the Kellogg Pact making the signature of the optional clause more important, it made it less so, for the pact in itself tended to close the famous gap in the covenant. The principal objection to the acceptance to the optional clause appears to have been the possibility. of its bringing matters, which might be reasonably claimed as of purely domestic concern only, within the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, such, for instance, as the exclusion under immigration laws of Asiatic immigrants, a matter in whicli both Australia and New Zealand are vitally concerned, to say nothing of tne Union of Soutn Africa, where immigrants from India are discriminated against. There were, of course, other objections raised, and the possibility of an appeal being made to the international Court of Justice by any State against another, both haying accepted its compulsory arbitration under the optional clause, in matters regarded as merely of domestic concern, had to be guarded against. Mr Holland, in raising the question in the House, seemed to be under the impression that, because the British Labour Government had urged the acceptance of the optional clause by the Dominions, they should sign without making any reservations. Mr Baldwin, Sir Austen Chamberlain, and the delegates at the last Imperial Conference all seem to have recognised the danger of accepting the clause, now binding Britain and the Dominions to the compulsory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of International Justice, without certain reservations, so that, in the signing last week, it is pleasing to note that, according to a Rugby wireless, message, the formula of acceptance excludes from the compulsory jurisdiction of The . Hague Court'disputes falling exclusively within the British jurisdiction and disputes between a Dominion and Great Britain.