THE NEW IMPERIALISM.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CI, Issue 11885, 8 May 1899, Page 4

THE NEW IMPERIALISM.

It is evident from the cablegrams, wfl publish this morning that the indignation aroused by Lord Salisbury’s recent departure fyom the tenets of. the New Imperial* jgm, which was so loudly proclaimed at the time of the Diamond Jubilee celebrations, is not confined to the colonies. Lord Rosebery, who has always risen superio* to mere party criticism, has expressed his opinion of the Budget proposals >n no ambiguous terms. ; “It is impossible,” he said,, when addressing a gathering of the City Liberal Club the other day, “to imagine a more impolitic and melancholy method of practising Imperialism than that of taxing colonial wines.” - No one who understands and appreciates the growing patriotism of the colonies con fail to agree with his Lordship. ‘Sir Michael Hicks-Beach’s contention that the amount derived from .Australian wines is tob paltry to justify a departure from the settled fiscal policy of the Mothej Country betrays a very poor conception of the great interests involved in the. question. It was not the amount of duty imposed upon the tea sent to Boston that cost Great Britain her American colonies at . the close of last century, but the. viola* tion of an important constitutional prinqiple. It is perhaps not a principle, but merely a sentiment, that is. affected in the present instance; but if the, Imperial authorities continue -to ignore Australia’s desire for reciprocity they will inflict a serious. blow upon the loyalty of the ■■ colonies. Lord Salisbury is displaying the same strange fatuity in regard to the Pacific cable. Sii Sandford Fleming, who ought to know something about such matters, considers that ,Great Britain’s recession is a fatal blow to the scheme of State-owned cables, and a grave retrograde step in the. Imperial .movement. , Lord Rosebery emphatically condemns “ the miserable contribution ” offered by the Home Government, and even the London “ Times ” thinks thai “a great Imperial undertaking” ought to be treated in a broader manner and with more generosity. It is certainly as unfortunate as it is strange that Lord Salisbury should have selected this particular moment to show his indifference to the interests of the colonies.' These outlying possessions may in the near future be called upon to make great sacrifices for the maintenance of the integrity of the Empire, and the imposition of fresh taxation and the discouragement of their national undertakings are not the ways to prepare them for the ordeal.