TN PRAISE OF EDWARD GIBBON WAKEFIELD

Press, Volume C, Issue 29620, 16 September 1961, Page 3

TN PRAISE OF EDWARD GIBBON WAKEFIELD

IRmiewM bp A.R.J E4w*rt GiMaa Wakefield. Builder of the British Commonwealth. By Pxal l Bloomfield. Lensmanc. 3N ■ PPDespite his education at Harrow and Balliol College, Oxford, and his experience as literary editor of the English ■Listener,” Mr Paul Bloomfield does not appeal as a scholarly writer. He has tried to write a biography which is. at once popular and impressive, but he appears to have strained too hard after effect His biography of Edward Gibbon Wakefield is certainly longer than the earlier ones by Dr. R. Granett erid Dr. A. 3. Harrop, but it has less to commend it in other directions. Mr Bloomfield has had access to material not available tot his predecessors and he has thus been able to devote twice as much space to the formative years of Wakefield’s life culminating in his imprisonment in Newgate gaol for the abduction of a fifteen-year-old heiress. But despite the strong claims advanced for the recognition of Wakefield's greatness as indicated in the sub-title and in the publishers' blurb, Mr Bloomfield’s biography contains little that is both new and impressive. So far as a trend in the writing of biographies can be detected, it appears that the

production of adulatory accounts was succeeded by the wiping of caustically critical or works which, in turn, were followed by r.iare or less scholarly assessments doing justice but no more to their subjects. The pendulum appeared to have come to rest in this intermediate position when Mr Bloomfield gave it a hearty crack which sent it swinging once more to the side where praise abowids. Of course, -it ia possible That he had no intention of writing for serious students of history: he may have hoped his book would be read for pleasure and, as he himself suggests in his preface, as a tonic for the British who have been underrating the significance of the Commonwealth in the world today. It is perhaps typical of the author that he should devote his opening chapter to a dramatic account of “Hie Abduction” the incident which forced Wakefield to work behind the scenes and subterranfdwsly. This chapter and the fourth one on “The Trial” are two of the best in the book. Mr Bloomfield excels at this kind of writing. Indeed, his book clearly surpasses the earlier biographies of Edward Gibbon Wakefield when his life between his birth in 1796 and his release from Newgate in 1830 is under consideration. The narrative account of the ride which ended at Gretna Green with the "shumpine” (champagne) provided by old David Laing who married the couple »s very good.

The discussion of Wakefield's investigation into the effect of imprisonment, transportation and capital punishment is also good, although when Mr Bloomfield turns to the subject of colonisation he tends to mike too many allusions to more or less irrelevant works and, people. Every New Zealand schoolboy knows the main outlines of Wakefield's career, how he helped to formulate the principles of systematic colonisation, participated in the foundation of South Australia. assisted Lord Durham in his famous mission to Canada, played a prominent part in organising the New Zealand Company which founded the settlements of Wellington, New Plymouth and Nelson, and. with its associated bodies, the colonies of Otago and Canterbury, and. finally, migrated to this country and took a leading part in the debates of the opening Parliament. There can be no doubting the very considerable importance of this man with his finger deep ir. so many colonial pies. But Mr Bloomfield is not satisfied with what historians have done so far: be is determined that his hero must have his meed of praise. At any number of points, he inserts a strongly-worded statement on behalf of Wakefield’s influence which seems to go beyond the claims of justice. Thus, even in the chapter on Newgate, the author insists that Botany Bay, meaning the transportation system, was abolished more by Wakefield's and his disciple Molesworth’s influence than anyone rise's. This is very much a matter of opinion. Certainly, there were strong opponents of the system both in Britain and in New South Wales who were in no way influenced by Wakefield. Similarly, no-one doubts that “A letter from Sydney”, Wakefield’s first statement of his views on colonisation, was important But Mr Bloomfield holds “It is the first blueprint for a British Commonwealth” and that a paragraph which stated that the ylontsts. “qualified, entitled

and powerful to govern themselves . . . might either take a share in framing the general laws of the empire, by their representatives in the British Parliament; 0r... they might frame their own laws, in a Colonial Assembly” contains the essence of the idea which has materialised in a Commonwealth of Nations. Later Wakefield is credited with ’ having “brought into existence a new Australia and a New Zealand to which poor country people could be helped to emigrate.” Wakefield’s influence in both southern Dominions was certainly great, but to credit any one man with such an achivement is to go too far.

In his selection of quotations, Mr Bloomfield is determined that only those most devoted to the praise of Wakefield shall appear. Thus, he quotes Dr. Grenfell Price as giving almost unqualified admiration to Wakefield at the time of the South Australian centenary in 1936: “To the genius of this extraordinary personality, the Empire largely owed the occupation of New Zealand, the loyalty of Canada, and the enlightened policies which retained the Dominions overseas. Although no statue perpetrates his memory in Adelaide, Edward Gibbon Wakefield was the founder of the State.” What he does not mention is that Dr. Price was then a Lecturer in Geography in the University of Adelaide. Nor does he quote Professor Douglas Pike who is the acknowledged authority on the history of South Australia! What Pike says does not fit his book! Pike says: “A great part of the writing of South Australian history has been devoted to finding the founder. Wakefield, Torrens. Gouger, Whitmore, Hutt, Bacon, and Angas all have their champions. They all, and many others, contributed to the establishment of the colony and should have the honour of it.” As one might suspect, Wakefield was important but only one of a number.

In dealing with the Durham Report and Wakefield’s visits to Canada, the author indicates how ill Durham was and how dependent he obviously was on Wakefield. In his chapter on the authorship of the famous Report, he indicates that Wakefield’s influence was clearly dominant and that Durham was indebted to Wakefield almost throughout Later, he says of Wakefield: “In fact he inspired the Report, with all that it signified for the future Commonwealth.” To say this is to do less than justice to Durham, who, while he had able assistants, most certainly wrote his own Report. Charles Buller, one of those assistants, actually denounced as a “groundless assertion” the view that Lord Durham did not write the Report which bears his name. Next we have the resurrection of the somewhat hoary legend that Wakefield forced the annexation of New Zealand on Britain by despatching the "Tory” when he did in 1839. In taking up the New Zealand Company attitude on this and on the subject of James Stephen, Mr Bloomfield scarcely does justice to the research done in the pre-

sent century into the Colonial Office records. He should have consulted Professor Paul Knapland’s study of Stephen’s work at the Colonial Office to learn that Stephen was not so much opposed to the colonisation of New Zealand as he was to the personal influence of Wakefield. In his Pelican history of New Zealand, Professor Keith Sinclair has pointed out clearly that “the allegation that the New Zealand Company forced the British Government’s hand is exaggerated ... Lord Glenelg had determined to acquire sovereignty over at least part of New Zealand months before the Tory sailed.” Futhermore, Mr Michael Turnbull has gone a long way towards reversing the legend by insisting that Wakefield acted as he did in May 1839 “because he knew that the Government was preparing to take decisive action in New Zealand.”

On another subject, too, Mr Bloomfield discards the findings of modern scholarship in favour of the myth which Miss Irma O’Connor, a grand-daughter of Wakefield, favoured, namely, that Wakefield was responsible for the New Zealand Constitution Act of 1852. Actually, Edward Gibbon Wakefield never claimed that he had done more than ensure the passage of the bill in that year, but others held that it was his bill. While it is generally recognised that many hands participated in the production of this particular constitution, Sir George Grey has long been known to have been its principal author. Mr Bloomfield knows this, but he seeks to preserve credit for Wakefield by saying “ it was left to New Zealand’s man of destiny to work out her constitution with C. B. Adderley

. . . on the basis of Governor Grey’s own suggestions.” Actually, Wakefield’s draft of a constitution was not the one on which the bill was based.

The section of the book devoted to Wakefield’s career in New Zealand is very disappointing. In view of the material uncovered by Mr P. A. Stuart in his unpublished thesis on “The New Zealand Political Career of Edward Gibbon Wakefield 1853-54”, the slight treatment given by the latest biographer suggests that he was in a hurry to | complete his book. This impression is perhaps confirmed by the spelling mistakes allowed to stand e.g. p. 79 “liason”,, p. 91 “insititutions”, p. 223 “Prebyterian” and p. 320 “procedeed.” Issue could be taken with Mr Bloomfield over other smaller items, but enough has been said to indicate the type of book he has written. He is nothing if not devoted to the cause of his chosen hero. In his preface he asserts that Wakefield was “ the founder of an Empire and builder of the Commonwealth” and his concluding words are that Wakefield was "the builder of the Commonwealth.” This thoroughly readable and, in places, quite entertaining biography has been somewhat spoilt by the extravagant claims made by the author. Surely he has his tounge in his cheek and knows that the Commonwealth is too big to have been built by any one man