The Confederation of the Colonies.

Evening Star, Issue 7484, 31 March 1888, Page 2 (Supplement)

The Confederation of the Colonies.

The following is the • full text of Sir Thomas M'llwraith's remarks on confederation in his address to the electors of North Brisbane : I thoroughly believe in the confederation of the Australian colonies. My labors in that direction are not unknown to you. In completing the work (which I had commenced) by the Federal Council Act, Sir S. W. Griffith had my cordial support. The first session of that council was not fruitful, but it left strong hopes that New South Wales and South Australia would both join in, and a national Australian life commence. A heavy blow was dealt to these hopes by the acceptance of an invitation to the Imperial Government to a conference in London to consider questions which formed the very foundation on which our united Australia was to rest. The result was inevitable. The second session of the Federal Council met, and they had nothing to do. Their raison d'etre had almost gone, for this Imperial Conference had taken out of their hands the question of federal defence. My best labors in public life will be devoted to the great question of confederation. I believe in a united Australia, and hope, in spite of the allurements to draw them from the path of duty, to see our Australian statesmen acting in unison as the founders of a great country. I think the Opposition did quite right in opposing the Naval Defence Bill on the grounds that a defeated and discredited minority ha.l no constitutional right to bring such a measure before the House. Igo further than this and oppose the Bill, as through it Great Britain is evidently evading a responsibility which attaches to her, is throwing an undue burden on her colonial possessions, and by the method of her proposed defence cramping our national life. In ISB2 a conference, at which all the colonies were represented, met in Sydney, and resolved that rhe inland defences of our country should be undertaken by ourselves and the naval defence by Great Britain. Until the meeting of the Colonial Conference last year, Great Britain had nothing to object to this proposal, which is far from being unfair to her. In undertaking the land defences of Australia we were undertaking to defend not only our lives and property, but the property to the extent of 350 millions owned by pcoplo who do not reside here, who live in Great Britain, and who from our peculiar system of taxation are not made in any way to contribute to the coßt of that defence. Now, what has happened since ISB2 that that position is changed, and that Great Britain should ask us to pay a subsidy for defending the shipping on our coast ? Leaving out the smaller class of ships, which, in the event of a hostile fleet being on our coast can secure their safety by scuttling up creeks and rivers where the enemy cannot follow, 90 Eer cent, of the shipping trading in our seas elongs to British owners. The vessels of the Union Steam Ship Company, the A.U.S.N, Company, the P. and 0. Company, the British-India Company, and the Orient Company constitute nearly threefourths of our shipping (not to mention many other smaller companies and single ships), and are purely British companies, with the owners residing in Great Britain. Why Bhould we be at the cost of their protection? If the same British shipping was on the coast of any country in the world not connected at all with Great Britain, except in trade, she would have a fleet in the neighborhood for its protection of much larger proportions than the com-1 bined British and proposed subsidised fleet. | Sir S. W. Griffith attended the London conference accredited by himself, having stealthily concealed his intention from Parliament. What right had he to commit the colony in so grave a matter, and, above all, what right had he to agree that this colony should pay a subsidy to help to support a British fleet on our coast, when only a few months before, as the representative of Queensland at the Federal Council in Hobart, he had expressed himself as opposed to any subsidy being given to Great Britain for their fleet to defend our coast ? In that council he says:—' Ido not think that it is in accordance with the spirit of the times in these colonies that we should contribute to the revenue of Great Britain by a distinct money payment.'" J