Evening Post TUESDAY, JULY 14, 1885. AUSTRALASIAN FEDERATION.

Evening Post, Volume XXX, Issue 12, 14 July 1885, Page 2

Evening Post TUESDAY, JULY 14, 1885. AUSTRALASIAN FEDERATION.

The Federal Council Bill now before the Imperial Parliament, even if it passed in the shape in which it got through the House of Lords, that is, as LordDEsmr finally approved it, would not be of much use to this colony, but the amendments which the present Government intend to make or acoept in the House of Commons will render it utterly impossible for this colony to have anything to do with it, and will probably render the Act altogether a dead letter. The Under- Secretary for tho Colonies has intimated that the Government intend to move the omission of tho proviso which enables any colony withdrawing from the Federal Union to repeal the Acts of the Federal Council as affecting itself which have been passed while it was a member of the Union. In regard to this there must, we think, bo some mistake, for as the Bill stood all such Acts were to remain in force until altered or repealed by tho Federal Council itself. We are not aware that any amendment was adopted transferring the power of repeal to the Legislature of the colony withdrawing, although Lord Debby had intimated his willingness, in order to meet certain objec-

tions 'urged by New Zealand and New South Wales, to amend the clause so as to provide that, if a colony withdrew, the Federal legislation should thereupon cease to apply to it, but no intimation of this amendment having been accepted by the Lords has reached the colony. This, however, does not much matter now, for later cables state that Mr. Goschbn is to move the omission of clause 31, which was inserted by Lord Deebt, giving power to any colony to withdraw from the Federal Union by its Legislature passing an Act to that effect. It ih added that the Government will accept this amendment, and that Lord Debby, the author of the clause, will not even call for a division on tho question. The excision of this clause will, we believe, render the Bill totally inoperative. We doubt very much whether any four of the Australasian colonies will commit themselves to an irrevocable union. Four might be found to give a fair trial to what is a very doubtful experiment, and if the Council of Four Colonies worked well, others might be induced to join the Federation after a time, but no colony is likely to be anxious to hamper itself by entering a union from which there is no retreat, which, whether it works well or works ill, must be continued unless the Imperial Parliament can be moved to dissolve it. New Zealand, at least, would never for a moment think of joining a Federation of that kind. The matter, however, is not one very vitally affecting this colony, for, as Sir Juuds Vogel has so well pointed out in his memorandum on the subject some time ago transmitted to the Colonial Office, it would not suit this colony to bind itself blindly to accept -whatever the legislation of tho Federal Council might be. New Zealand, we hope, will always preserve its legislative independence, so as to insist that no laws shall be made binding on it which have not received the sanction of its own Legislature. This is the principle for which Sir Julius Voobl contends, and it is one in which we are confident he is supported by general public opinion. As the Imperial Government would not concede this point, the precise form in which the Bill passes ceases to be a matter of practical interest to us. The shape in which it will probably pass is such, however, as to make us more than ever grateful that we are not likely to be brought under its operation. Instead of advancing the cause of true Federation, we believe that this Bill will now retard that movement, and prove a serious obstacle in the way of bringing the Australasian Colonies into closer accord with each other. This will be cause for regret, as there are many points in regard to which closer union between them is undoubtedly desirable. An ill-assorted and irrevocable union such as it is now proposed to establish, can, however, onlyproduce discontent and jealousy, -which, in the end, will lead to further practical estrangement.