Irish Impasse

At Geneva, the Secretariat of the League of Nations published a note re- ceived last month from the British Government, the most significant part of which was:

Since the League covenant came into force, His Majesty's Government have consistently taken the view that neither it nor any conventions concluded under the auspices of the League are intended to govern the relations inter se of the various parts of the British Commonweath.

The note was a protest made at the registration, last summer, by the Irish Free State of the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921, afterwards incorporated into the Irish Free State Agreement Act, which established the Free State within the coasts of Erin. Thereupon was injected into the League the whole question of the international status of the British Dominions. Britain contended that the Treaty is a domestic concern between two component nations of the British Commonwealth. Ireland contended that it was an instrument between two separate nations and entitled to registration under Article XVIII of the Covenant*.

Although questions of important policy are involved (such as playing into the hands of the Irish Republicans by admitting that the Crown is no link between the Dominions, or permitting the Free State to appeal to the League over the Boundary Commission's de- cision, which is expected to be un-satisfactory), the real issue is, so far as it Concerns directly the League, Is Britain one nation or seven?**

If she is one, then the Treaty is a domestic concern and the Free State had no business to register it with the League. But, in this case, the British nation has several votes to the one possessed by each of the other nation members, a manifestly unfair situation which the British have hitherto declared did not represent the facts of the case.

If it is seven nations, it would appear that the Free State acted within its rights. But the question is far, far deeper. The Commonwealth is bound together by a common bond represented by the Crown. Dominion Status within the Commonwealth does not legally empower any member to undertake any action which shall or may in any way undermine government by King, Legislature and Executive.*** The mere registration of the treaty seems in no way to invalidate this con- ception of government, but it implies the right of the Free State, if the Boundary Commission fails to settle the Boundary Question between Northern Ireland and the Free State (TIME, May 5 et seq.), to appeal to the League for arbitration of the difference instead of to the Privy Council for final settlement. It thus becomes clear that there is within the Commonwealth a power greater than King, Legislature and Executive, that functions outside the Commonwealth.

Undoubtedly, this difficulty in inter-Imperial relations will have to be overcome by a new Imperial Conference. Meantime, at Geneva, members of the League wonder if there are really two kinds of memberrship--one for ordinary nations, one for the British Commonwealth. In London, Colonel Amery, Secretary of State for the Colonies, after stating that the Government intended to accord to the Dominion High Commissioner in London the same privileges enjoyed by Ambassadors to the Court of St. James, said:

"The outside world will gradually have to learn that the British Empire is both a league of free and independent nations and an individualistic unit."

*"Every treaty or international engagement entered into hereafter by any member of the League shall be forthwith registered with the Secretariat and shall as soon as possible be published by it. No such treaty or international engagement shall be binding unless so registered."

**Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Union of South Africa, Newfoundland, Irish Free State, extent to which it is repugnant.

***A law passed or treaty negotiated by the Dominions which is repugnant to a law affecting the Dominion and passed by the Parliament at Westminster is void to the