THE New Zealand Herald. AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1888.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9209, 12 November 1888, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald. AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1888.

The Imperial Government of England has only itself to thank for that insolence of demeanour which is becoming now the rule in the attitude of colonial Governments towards the mother country. The system of conciliation, and humouring, and petting the colonies, which arose out of the silly action of New South Wales in sending a contingent to the Soudan, would have turned more balanced heads than those of colonial Ministers who have raised themselves to prominence commonly by qualities in which self-assurance and bounce are predominant; and in the Queensland difficulty, now arising out of the appointment of anew Governor, every right-minded colonist will be glad to see the symptoms of returning common sense in tho deportment of the Imperial Government. Itwill be recollected that before the death of Sir Anthony Musgvave, the late Governor of Queensland—an event which was evidently precipitated, if not caused, by the irritation and worry to which lie was subjected—the Imperial Government conceded the claim set up by Queensland Ministers to control the exercise of the prerogative of pardon in the Queen's representative, and in so doing gave a victory to the Ministers over the Governor, which no doubt by its humiliation to him, caused the latter's death. Not content witli this, and crowing, as it were, over the grave of the dead Governor, the Premier of that colony demanded that he should be consulted before any specific appointment of a new Governor was made. At this the Secretary of State for the Colonies put his foot down, emphatically repudiating any such right on the part of the Colonial Ministry, and promptly appointed Sir A. H. Blake to the Governorship. Whereupon the Premier, Sir Thomas Mcilwraith, has the impertinence to inform the Secretary of State that the appointment lias caused great dissatisfaction and indignation in the colony ; and in sympathy with this no doubt, the Brisbane papers appear to be working up an unfavourable public feeling to greet the new Governor.

Now in this, the question is not raised of the propriety or otherwise of a colony electing its own Governor. That is a question capable of discussion, and arguments of considerable force may be adduced for and against the principle. If such a right were established, provision would be made for ascertaining the will of the people, as effective if not as elaborate as that which attends the choice of a President of tho United States of America ; but the claim that a Ministry which in the chapter of accidents happens to be in power, should have a voice or a veto in the selection of the Governor, who is to represent the Queen, preside at its Cabinet meetings, determine resignations of Ministers, dissolutions of Parliament, and generally exercise a controllinginfluence in the collisions of party, is a manifestation of insolent presumption to be expected only from a colonial politician. In the case of a Governor elected by the colony, the Governor would come into Council with his Ministers, armed with the strength of the people's will, and would in virtue of such election possess a force that would dominate his counsellors ; but let it once be allowed that Ministers have themselves a voice in the selection of the Governor, and their nominee would be a mere puppet in their hands, and the adoption of such a principle would lay the train for a political tyranny which a colonial Parliament and n colonial people would promptly unite to overthrow. The demand made by tlicQueensland Ministry is merely the outcome of that bumptiousness which

has come of their being enabled to humiliate their late Governor ; and as the Imperial Government contributed to that by their concession of a claim put forward with some insolence, and without precedent, it is to be hoped that the Secretary of State will have learned from the result the folly of attempting to remove friction in the relations of the colonies and the mother country by feeding the inordinate vanity of colonial Ministers. It is possilale that before many years have passed the question of colonies electing their own Governors may be raised; although the experience we have acquired from watching the process of election of President in the United States, and the trouble, the worry, the expense, the loss of time, and the chronic danger of civil war, which tliat exercise of political freedom appears to entail, has not prepared colonists for any very great enthusiasm in favour of a movement in that direction. But that colonial Ministries for the time being should have a voice or a veto in the selection of the Queen's representatives in these colonies would be an innovation, against which all right-minded colonists should rise to a man.

Wβ observe that the London papers are backing up the preposterous claim. One says that the action of the Secretary of State will make against the Federation of the Empire ; and another says that a Separation fund movement has resulted from this checking of colonial ambitions. It is the London papers that have done more harm than any other cause in encouraging the insolent and mischievous propensities of colonial Ministers in preferring claims that, if granted, would militate against the welfare of the colonies as well as of the Empire. They write without any responsibility, and without the slightest knowledge of the feelings that prevail with the sober and sensible sections of colonial populations—indeed, of all colonists except a few crackbrained ones, who seem to be for ever seeking to drive the colonies to extremes, and in directions that colonists do not want. Who but a fool would think of a Separation Fund now-a-days 1 Who wants Separation 1 What sensible man is there in the Australasian colonies who does not fear Separation—if it were within the limits of possibility—as by far the greatest disaster that could befall every interest in the colonies, financial, civil, political alike ? Who does not know that abandonment by England—in the present stage of our development at least— would be the immediate absorption of one or all of the colonies by France, Germany, or China 1 And how dares a London newspaper to imply that there is such arrant folly existing among colonists that they would take offence at a very proper snubbing to a few colonial Ministers, and rush madheaded to attempt what all colonists would resist to the death % It is time that this Separation bogey was laid, It is unknown in these colonies ; and ignorant London journalists should by this time of day be aware of the fact; and .should cease to trot this bogey out every time that some wrongheaded Minister takes it upon himself to say or do some particularly stupid thing. And it is time that colonists themselves should take occasion to make their views known on this class of question. The Imperial Government is showing a wonderful and a generous earnestness in providing for the defence of the colonies. The people of these colonies thoroughly appreciate this ; and if it were possible it intensities the feeling in favour of a closer and more cordial connection between the colonies and the mother country. .But every now and then the sense of propriety and of loyal attachment is offended by some senseless action like this on the part of some colonial Minister ; and forthwith the London papers scream out that the colonies are huffed ! The colonies have indeed reason to be annoyed at being misrepresented after this fashion ; and we have no hesitation in saying that they will cordially rejoice if the Imperial Government will deal a little more firmly with the personal pretensions of self-asserting Ministers, and no longer mistake them for the public opinion of the colonies.