Untitled

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9103, 11 July 1888, Page 4

A stranger and man of the world, who not long since sojourned for awhile in these islands, and whose criticism of what he saw appeared in print, has expressed, among his more agreeable observations, the belief that the strong jealousy existing between New Zealand cities cannot but seriously interfere with the progress of the colony. Hard indeed it would be for any large-minded visitor not to be astonished, and something more, at the invidious feeling periodcally displayed over, for instance, the San Francisco mail service, a service the benefit of which to the whole colony any such observer can see is beyond honest contradiction, but which nevertheless—as he can also see — assailed solely because Auckland is the particular port of call. No doubt on the neighbouring continent we see the same thing, though less mischievous, because not in the one community. With the quarrels of Sydney and Melbourne, the bitter antagonism ever and anon manifest in the mutual relations of those two huge centres of population, it is difficult to imagine how the Australian federation, which has been so much talked of, is at all possible, or how it can be brought about. If the future is to be judged by present and past appearances, the angry rivals are then much more likely to fight than to federate. The standing feud, or, at any rate, disposition to quarrel, of the two chief Australian colonies, or rather«of their capitals, has once more taken active shape, and this time in a renewal of the Murray River dispute. The Goolwa or Murray, the largest of Australian rivers, forms the main boundary between the two chief colonies. New South Wales claims the ownership from bank to bank, and her

Government has just proclaimed the river closed against fis*hing for twelve months. But Victoria claims half the breadth of the river, and resists .her neighbour's exercise of sole authority ; whereupon, in the Sydney Legislature, the Premier, Sir Henry Parkes, stated that the judicial inquiry over the former dispute had determined that the whole river between the two colonies belongs to New South Wales, whose rights his Government will not fail to uphold. There can be no doubt that if it were not for the old rivalry and resentful feeling on both sides, the question of the ownership of the Murray would have been amicably adjusted long ago, and these disputes could not have arisen. The former squabble was over some islets of little or no consequence, which lie within its waters ; and as for the closing now of the river for twelve months against fishing, that arrangement, if necessary, could not but be approved in Melbourne as well as in Sydney. The fishing is very valuable in the parent river of what.is known as the Murray cod, and as Melbourne lies neareris only a few hours distant by rail—it has a still larger market for the fish than Sydney.

The feud is an old one, and has been transmitted from the day when that outlying district of New South Wales which Sir Thomas Mitchel called Australia Felix, was transformed into the colony of Victoria. As is often seen in such changes, many men in Sydney had their interests touched by the new powers which were centred in the township beside the Yarra. A severer mortification followed when the first goldfield at this end of the world was discovered in New South Wales, only to be capped by the discovery in rapid succession of a dozen great goldfields in Victoria. That good luck enabled little Melbourne to overtake, and soon shoot far ahead of the elder city. It raised her ambition every way. She complained of the limited territory of which she was the capitalsmall compared with that behind Sydney or behind Adelaide. It was then often said that the boundary line of Victoria ought to be extended beyond the Murray. . The idea was encouraged by the fact that the barrier of the Blue Mountains still prevented direct communication between the greater part of the interior of New South Wales and its capital. Thus the judges, leaving Sydney for their circuit in those inland districts, had to go round by Melbourne and return the same way ; and the squatters in that region, unable to transmit their wool to their own port and metropolis, used to send it to Melbourne, and get their stores from thence. It seemed as if the whole of that vast territory was likely to be joined to Victoria, and among its leading men' there was a growing disposition for the official change—when Sydney baffled the annexing tendency and retained her provinces by the great engineering exploit of a railroad over the chasms and precipices of the Blue Mountains. By this connection with her interior, and by certain other great improvements and fortunate circumstances, the elder city made up for lost time, and in turn overtook her rival ; and of late Sydney and Melbourne and the colonies they represent have been running a neck-and-neck race. As may be supposed their rivalry has not abated; it is shown in all sorts of matters as well as in these Murray River disputes.

It was said of old that " the world could not have two suns or two Alexanders," and it remains to be seen whether Sydney or Melbourne is to predominate in Australia. Each has a great deal tc favour its chance of the sceptre. Melbourne has a wonderfully go-ahead spirit, for the great gold discoveries did for Victoria what they did for California, in drawing and concentrating energy and enterprise. On the other hand Sydney has the better commercial site for the future. Facing the Pacific, she will be touched by the Panama route, which, as the most

I direct route, will be the chief line of ! traffic for England, Western Europe, and America with these colonies ; and she is likewise the terminus of the Suez route through Torres Strait. And if the gate at Panama will advantage Sydney, must it not still more benefit Auckland, placed in advance of Sydney, the first port of call on the highway South? As the British Journal of Trade has truly said, "The cutting of the Isthmus must serve New Zealand more than any other Australasian colony." Let us hope that the prospect of Auckland being the port of call may not inflame the anger of our rival cities against the Panama Canal as now against the San Francisco mail service ; and let us hope that there will be no echo in New Zealand of the paltry disparagement of M. Lesseps which so frequently comes from outside, for, as we have often and sufficiently shown in these columns, there is such powerful hostility to the construction of the Canal that if it were not for him it would very likely stand over for another score of years.