THE MOTHER COUNTRY AND THE COLONIES.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume 14, Issue 114, 12 April 1870, Page 3

THE MOTHER COUNTRY AND THE COLONIES.

(To the editor of the "Times.") Sib, — The present attitude of the Imperial Government towards its colonial dependencies is watched with deep interest in every quarter of the globe. As an Englishman, residing in South Africa, I am desirous of placing before- my countrymen a few of the opinions and arguments I hear used by the colonists on this important question. ' The startling xinanimity prevailing among statesmen of all parties on this point, and your own concurrence in their views, will not, I think, prevent your allowing the colonial voice to be heard in its own defence. The colony of the Cape of Good Hope is threatened with the immediate removal of the Imperial troops, and even with the disbandment of that purely local corps, the Cape Mounted Rifles. We have every prospect of soon being left to the protection of the frontier police, a small irregular s colonial force, numbering a few hundreds, whose duty it will be to patrol a border at least 1,000 miles in length, and to keep the peace between the colonists and ihe native tribes, the latter numbering, perhaps, 100,000 able-bodied men. Those who recollect the savage and sanguinary nature of former Kaffir wars will aduaic that our position in case of an outbreak will be extremely perilous, and that, making every allowance for differences of race and disposition, the horrors of the Sepoy rebellion may possibly at a future day find a parallel in South Africa. "And why," ask the colonists, " should we be summarily deprived of the protection of her Majesty's forces ? We are as truly her liege subjects as the Scotch, and far more loyal than the Irish. Our Governor is appointed by her, permission being graciously granted us to pay his salary. There is not an appointment in our Civil Service independent of her confirmation. Our local Judges are hers, and we cannot even have the pleasure of indulging in law without our suits going finally before her Privy Council. No member of our Parliament can take his seat without swearing allegiance to her, nor can any hostile vote of both Houses combined eject her elected and irresponsible officials." To all this there is the usual retort, " You are not subject to Imperial taxation ; you cannot, therefore, expect Imperial -protection." But colonists are unconvinced by this argument. " Taxation and representation go together," they reply ; "you have not offered us Imperial representation, you cannot demand Imperial taxation. We pay no Imperial taxes it is true, but you pay no colonial ones. We are taxed nearly as heavily as you, but it goes to Her Majesty's Colonial and not to the Imperial exchequer. Throw our contributions into the general treasury of the Empire, and you could no longer dispute our right to the protection of the army." This, it may be said, is impracticable. It cannot be called unprecedented. No one has disputed the right of loyal Irishmen to protection; yet, is-it-not a fact that they do not pay ail the Imperial taxes ? Does not taxation fall with a lighter hand on Ireland than on England P In order to carry out the present policy to i is legitimate conclusion we assert that if Hie colonies of Great Britain merit support from her army, her commerce should no longer receivethe protection of thenavy. " Wiiat we maintain," they say, "is that so long as we owe you allegiance — so long, but no longer — you owe us protection. Whether we pay a little more or a little less, and into which of the two exchequers our contributions go, are arguments equally beside the question, and the demand that will sooner or later be made is Protection or Freedom. This freedom, if conceded, would not ruin England nor benefit us ; but would England concede" it ? Is she prepared to make rivals of her own offspring, and to look on unmoved while we contract alliances and adjust traffic with other countries?" I cannot believe it. The colonists do not see that any reduction is contemplated in the numerical strength of the British army. The forces, it would seem, are to be drawn from the extremity of the Empire, and concentrated in that small sea-girt island, where God grant civil strife may never come, and to the invasion of which the accumulated resources of the great Napoleon were found unequal. Why is this centralisation ? Is it to give England a more commanding position among European States, and thus enable her to join in continental quarrels ? Should this be the result of the present line of action, the British taxpayer will live to rue the day he consented, from economical motives, to remove the troops from the colonies, and thus countenance a policy so eminently penny wise and pound foolish. Again, sir, it may reasonably be asked, will the effectiveness of the British soldier be promoted by the change ? Are sham fights "at Brighton- and gay reviews at Aldershott better schools for the morale and discipline of troops than active service in the colonies P These, Sir, are the opinions of many colonists, and in the main they are mine. I, too, an Englishman, deny the justice and the wisdom of the present policy. I deny its justice, because we seem to expect allegiauco from our children though we refuse them support, and I deny its wisdom, because it will lead, slowly, perhaps, but surely, to the severance of 'friendly relations between us, and I tremble lest a day should come when we shall have to face the hostility, not only of our cousins across the Atlantic, but of our cousins the whole world over. I for one do not wish to see the British troops now employed in protecting rising communities and new centres of civilization withdrawn to the swamps of the Curragh or the doubtful comforts of Enightsbridge. Imperial Home withdrew her legions from Britain, yet Britain flourished and Home fell. Is Imperial Britain about to pursue a similar policy P The sun never sets upon our Empire now. Is the day approaching when it will set, and for ever? — I am, &c, L. L. M.