The Lyttelton Times. WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1886.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXV, Issue 7863, 19 May 1886, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1886.

3 It would be very useful to know definitely whether the English Govern- ' ment has or has not come to an understanding with France regarding the New Hebrides. If an understanding has really been arrived at, and is such as that announced by TJnder-Secretaiy for Foreign Affairs to the House of Commons, the question of the New Hebrides is now entirely ■ outside the pale of practical polities in New Zealand. If the Islands have been allowed to pass into French possession on the terms which have been publicly stated to be the basis of "negotiation, it is the best thing for all parties, for the French, for the British Empire, for Australasia and for the Islands. But whether this be so or not. New Zealand can be required to take no further part in the matter. It is quite true, as Sir George Grey said in his speech of yesterday afternoon, that we have no right to agree to the cession of the Islands, and that having no right to so agree we have no reasonable ground for claiming any equivalent. The question of equivalent may be dismissed until it arises. At present there is no such question before the public of New Zealand. But if we have no right to talk of cession, we have, as Sir G. Grey himself admits in his resolution, some kind of right, however shadowy, based on our efforts to educate and civilise the New Hebrides. Maybe we have the power to cede that right. Agreement to French occupation implies no more than the cession of whatever right we may have of whatever kind. Bui if we can surrender some right, we do not possess the right of passing censure on the conduct of the British Government. It is no part of the duty of the House of Representatives to accuse Mr Gladstone and Lord Salisbury of a desire to commit an act of piracy. It is clear, then, that whether the New Hebrides are ceded, or whether they are not, those resolutions of Sir George Grey, which treat of the rights of New Zealand, are out of place. We have, as a people, of course always a right to protest against any course on the part of any Power which we consider detrimental to our interests, but would the cession of the New Hebrides be, on the terms mentioned by the Undersecretary to the House of Commons, detrimental to the interests of New Zealand, or only to those of Australasia and the Pacific people, which does not concern us over much. These terms involve the end absolutely of French criminal transportation to the Islands, and the cession of Rapa to the British, with its fine harbour placed most conveniently on the line of the Panama route. It probably also includes the cession of the Raratonga group, with which our trade amounts already to an annual .£30,000. This involves additionally the probability of the cession of these countries to the New Zealand flag, but that is a separate question. The terms offer a kind of partition of the Pacific. A partition is not a thing to be justified on abstract grounds, but such a partition as that recommended is undoubtedly a good thing for nearly all concerned. Whether the cession of the New Hebrides is good for the French nation it is not for us to consider, but it cannot be a bad thing for the people of those Islands to exchange barbarism for a civilised Government. On the other hand, it is certainly better for the ; British Power to acquire outposts of great value in the Pacific, than to be altogether thrust out of the race of annexation with other Powers. It : is better for all parties concerned that the matter should : be arranged by negotiation rather than by war, which is the only : other alternative. It is bootless to • enter into the question of whether i the annexation is better for the people of these Islands, because annexation 1 of some kind is inevitable. Last and ] greatest, there is the rccidiviste ■ question. The arrangements pro •I < posed by the British Government and ' accepted by the Government of New Zealand, after special request made J for its consideration, will effectually : stop the flood of ruffianism now being i directed from France, to the utter < demoralisation of the Pacific people | and the great danger of the Anglo- \ Saxon communities of the Australasias. , The House can only pass Sir George i Grey’s resolution on the supposition | that New Zealand must (as Victoria i seems to be ready to do) go to war ; with France, or demand an Imperial ; declaration of hostilities. There is no i other method, if the proposed negotia- 1 tion is abandoned, of stopping the j rccidiviste enforced emigration to ( the. French Colonies. It may be very ( improper of the French to hold up ( the continued stream as a threat, but ] the threat will be fulfilled unless there * are terms, or unless there is war. If * we must not accept terms (and war is decidedly out of the question), we must e i-affer the rccidivistes. If the resolu- | tions do not imply a declaration of war r of some kind, they will commit this j country to the acceptance of French c

convictism, and all its attendant horrors. The theory that the Pacific is rapidly becoming a kind of inland lake, surrounded by Anglo-Saxon possessions, is, or used to be, a favourite with Australian politicians, particularly on occasions of prandial festivity. It is a theory which may be left to the peaceful conquests of mercantile and Colonial enterprise, but no public policy can be founded upon a theory which is virtually a theory of universal conquest. We cannot, in other words, push selfdefence to the extreme of attacking every neighbour we have got, or are ever likely to have. On the whole, then, as the terms proposed by the English Government, virtually accepted by our own, and opposed by Sir G. Grey and the Yictorians, are for the best interests of all concerned, making as they do the best way out of a very serious difficulty the House will be wise to accept them. Above all things, let the House avoid the absurdity of mixing up the Pacific Islands with the Eastern question. That would be an unexpected development, of which our legislators would never hear the last.