THE COLONIES AND THE EMPIRE. (FROM THE "TIMES," NOVEMBER 27.)

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXVI, Issue 3887, 5 February 1870, Page 6

THE COLONIES AND THE EMPIRE. (FROM THE "TIMES," NOVEMBER 27.)

The colonists who are dissatisfied with the ideas of colonial policy adopted by the majority of Englishmen are not very happy in the statement of their grievances. It seerna to be practically impossible to get them to examine the reasons we at home have for supporting the policy they assail ; it is equally impossible to get them to examine the arguments we adduce .against the principles upon which they themselves rely. They repeat the same set of phrases over and over again, and think they are advancing when, in fact, they are only marking time. The speeches delivered at the meeting in Cannon-street on. Wednesday were, for the most part, nothing more than a reproduction of opinions often expressed I before, and with little or no attempt at argument to substantiate them. ir George Grey, whose speech stands out from the rest as presenting clear ancj. intelligible aims, did not ia any w*y address himself to the possibility of realising them, nor did. "he examine the alternative relation between Englishspeaking communities as allied but independent States to show why it should be discredited. But although our past experience is thus discouraging, we aak colonists at home and colonisbi abroad to look at this matter as reasonable men, and try to understand why it is the mass of Englishmen support a policy which they denounce. Let it be understood, in the first place, that no one has ever proposed to apply one rule of action to all the colonies of the empire. The colonieg are communities differing in every conceivable degree from (me qnother in the stages of their development, the growth of their political institutions, the consolidation of their powers, the circumstances of their neighbourhood. There were speakers at Cannon-street from Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Newfoundland, and it requires no explanation to show how these colonies differ one from another The Australian colonies possess perfect legislative independence. The mass of English in Australia probably have brothers in blood still at home differing from them in no respect, except that their resources are not commonly so plentiful iu proportion to their wants ; and if any Australian Englishman were asked what he thought of the reasonableness of taring his brother in the old country to defend himself from his i enemies, he would laugh ab the suggestion if : he did not resent it as an insult. What is to be said of New Zealand ? Self-government is established in New Zealand as completely as in New South Wales ; but the New Zealand colonists have a domestic enemy, and | they find a difficulty in repressing him. They apply to their kinsmen in the United Kingdom for assistance. It happens, how- j ever, that three or four years ago the New Zealanders declared that, if certain assistance — which was given — were then rendered, they wpuld be able thenceforward to bear theip own burdens without appealing tj Britain. It ia plain that the Ministers upon whom the responsibility of >5 governing uS-is thrown'' would fail in their duty to the inhabitants of these islands, if they did ndfc recall to the memory of the people of New Zealand tlie promises they had made. The case m»y be illustrated 'by a very common experience. One brother »»y« to wither, " jf yon will lead me mob

and such capital, I see my way to get a livng for myself." Two or three years pass by, and he cornea back, saying that he has lost what was lent him and wi-nts more. Is it surprising that the first brother should remind the other of his earlier statement, especially if he should honestly add he has children of his own, and find* it difficult, to get bread for them, and. pay the rent of a house to cover them? -Yet it is because Lord G-ranville, as representing the British nation in its relations to the colonies, has expressed himself thus thai the representatives of the colonies ;are i alarmed and indignant. We must be permitted to put to Mr. Wilson, Mr. Youl, and the other Australian coloni&ts these questions :— Is not the citizen of Melbourne as much interested in the' prosperity of New Zealand as the London citizen is ? ; Is j not the brotherhood of blood between Sydney and JTew Zealand as real and as strong :-a between New Zealand and Manchester ? Is the power of the average xVastralian to assist the New Zealand colonist less than that of the average Englishman? If Victoria or New South Wales will guarantee j the loans of New Zealand, money can , be i raised upon their security almost as cheaply as upon the guarantee of the English Government. Before denouncing the selfishness of the English Government, it would be well for them to weigh these considerations, and if the result were a resolution to put to shame our backwardness by coming to the assistance of New Zealand, it would advance the position of the colonial party more than any amount of declamation. ' If we wanted a reason for believing that the relations between England and the colonies must be reconsidered, we should find it in the agitation which has been in progress for these Ia3t few months. The time has come when the real equality of Englishspeaking communities must be pursued to its legitimate consequences. The only practical question is to what ultimate relations statesmen should look forward. Should they picture England and the colonies in the future as States absolutely independent of each other, save so far as they may enter into treaties of offence and defence, or be knit togeJier by the thought of a common origin, a common race, and the possession of the same type of government, or should they regard tham as members of one vast federation, self-governed domestically, but subject to a common authority in other respects, and presenting to the world the front of one Power ? We have repeatedly acknowledged the grandeur and seductiveness of this latter conception, but we have been obliged to confess the difficulties in the way of realising it. One relation or the other must be accepted as the ultimate resolution of the British Empire, and we ask those who protest against the lapse into the first to show how to rise into the second. Unfortunately, we find no answer to our appeal either in Cannon-street or elsewhere, but only language which seems to show that those who use it are unconscious of what the idea of an English federation implies. Federation implies a federal council, and, whether numbers or wealth be accepted a» the basis of representation, it would be equally true that now, and for many years to come, the representatives of England would outnumber all other representatives put together. Are the colonists prepared to submit to such a body the question of tariffs ? Would they be prepared to assent to the abolition of all duties between the members of the federation ? What is it they would freely submit to an assembly so composed ? (FROM THE "GLOBE," NOVEMBER 26.) We have now considered what are likely to be the feelings of the two classes most directly interested in the working of the colonial system. We have pointed out that the material interests of both the working classes and professional classes are directly opposed to separation ; and we have also declared our belief that the idea of that great Sritish Empire, so well described by Sir Gh Grey in his speech at the meeting of last Wednesday, is dear to the heart of the Knghsh people. Then comes the question, ought it not to be equally dear to the hearts of the governing class.es ? Are they to set the first example of staggering under "the weight of England's greatness as a burden to heavy to be borne ? Has it been, reservea for a Liberal Ministry to announce that the colonists are to be dealt with ou no better principle "than that of pounds, shillings, and pence " ? The amu-ang euphemism, as Ayrton calla it, by which such schemes as these are denominated liberal, has oiten been laughed at before. But this is too serious to be laughed at. 4?or if we push the argument to its legitimate consequences, it will land \ia in principles destructive of national independence. If the only point to be considered is this, how much beef a,n,d bread the. English people can get out of the smallest possible outlay, we may as well dismantle our fleets, and disband our armies, and pull down our fortifications at once. This way of putting the case is not so extra va. ant as it looks. The colonists themselves, aa is plain from the language of their representatives, wish to be regarded as iutegral parts of the British Empire, and are as much entitled to sympathy or assistance as Ireland or Scotland. Ihis is the high view, the true imperial and aristocratic view which Lord Chatham would have taken. And when the English people themselves proposed it, what infatuation can have seized upon the Ministry, that they should adopt the pusillanimous and sordid policy indicated by Lord Granville's despatch ?