AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 11371, 14 May 1900, Page 5

AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION.

WARM CONTROVERSY, OPINIONS OF THE PRESS. By Telegraph.-Press Association.-Copyright. London, May 11. Mr. Chamberlain informed Mr. Griffths, representative of the West Australian Goldfields Separation League, that Sir Jno. Forrest's decision to submit the Commonwealth Bill to a referendum'removed the chief grievance of the goldfields petitioners.

Mr. Asquith, speaking at Colchester, said it was best to concede everything that Australia unitedly demanded unless such was manifestly inconsistent with the maintenance of the full integrity of Imperial unity.

London, May 12.

A Blue Book dealing with the Commonwealth Bill has been issued. Mr. Chamberlain, in his final memorandum, declared that the referendum had not indicated or qualified the ratification of the Bill in every detail of the Constitution. He denied that the Privy Council was a Court incapable of defence, aud declared that the amendments indicated no mistrust of the colonics.

The four delegates replied that the question of appeal was a vital matter and not a mere detail.

In acknowledging Mr. Dickson's explanation of why he had not signed the memorandum regarding the appeal, Mr. Chamberlain expressed appreciation of his great services.

The Times considers that there is a remarkable consensus of Australian opinion in favour of the amendment, and expresses confidence that riper judgment, even on the part of opponents, will justify Mr. Chamberlain's attitude.

The Chronicle finds it difficult to understand the Government's cold and formal stickling over every shred and tittle of prerogative.

Mr. Kingston in a letter to the newspapers, repudiated as monstrous the suggestion that the claim of Australia to decide a purely Australian question was equivalent to an attempt to dismember the Empire. He declared that Lord Lamington's extraordinary intrusion into the affair was unseemly, unonstitutional, and unfair. He ridiculed the protest of Chief Justices Way and Darley, and implied that they were actuated by selfishness in view of prospective benefits in the shape of peerages. He protested against City Justice Way's extraordinary extra-judicial secret intrigue.

The Daily News says if the Australian people are behind the delegates it would be idle, mischievous, and dangerous to try and thwart them. If not, then the best solution is to pass the new Appellate Bill concurrently with the Commonwealth Bill, leaving the Federal Parliament to adopt the new Court. The paper protests against Mr. Kingston's suggestion that the Chief Justices are using their influence because they hungered after salaried peerages.

The Pall Mall Gazette deprecates Mr. Kingston's personalities. If the Government is firm and moderate there is no prospect of Australia indecently rejecting the new Court.

The Westminster Gazette holds it to be dangerous for the Colonial Secretary to take a hand in Australian politics. The Imperial spirit was not always so strong there. Mr. Chamberlain expressed the hope that the delegates would not hastily return.

It is understood that they will remain some time.

Mr. Barton, in an interview, said that interference in the internal affairs of the Commonwealth was mischievous and meddlesome. Mr. Chamberlain mainly relied on the opinion of a defended minority.