VI.—THE VIEWS OF ENGLISH POLITICIANS

Otago Witness, Volume 25, Issue 1004, 25 February 1871, Page 17

VI. — THE VIEWS OF ENGLISH POLITICIANS

CONTINUED.

* I In 1860, a war broke out In New Zealand between the natives and the settlers, and forced the question of colonial military expenditure to the surface. The entire military expenditure of the colony had- hither to been charged on the Home Government, in consequence of the latter reserving to itself the right of managing Native affairs. The long bills now presented to the House of Commons speedily awoke resentment, and a. strong party which found its nucleus in-certain zealous but rncharitable agents of Exeter Hall ■was farmed, which urged that either the war should be stopped at once, or the colonists made to pay the whole cost of it. Unfortunately, neither plan could be adopted. It may be a proof of the depravity of human nature, but when savages make a raid upon cultivated districts, burn and destroy everything before them, and massacre old and young without mercy, and sometimes with the most dreadful tortures, the settlers will insist upon fighting the marauders ; and, although it might be logically proved that peace ought to prevail, the Imperial Government had to do with the stern fact that war raged in the country. Nor could the colonists be ordered to put the burden on their backs. Leaving out of sight the , fact that the Home Government had voluntarily retained all responsibility in Native affairs, and that many of the settlers asserted it had caused the war by its own mismanagement, it was obviously impossible for a colony of less than 150,000 inhabitants to assume a load of expenditure under which even th 9 British taxpayer Btaggered. Moreover, a number of persons at home had advanced money to the colony on the faith that England would be responsible in case of a Maori war, and these bondholders naturally objected to a proceeding which threatened New Zealand with bankruptcy. All the Home Government could do was to urge the colonists to help themselves in every possible way, and the colonists were not backward in answering the appeal. They asßumedthe management of Native affairs, and entered en a vaßt scheme of defence, with the view of ultimately relieving the Home Government from the necessity of keeping a large army in the colony. These concessions did not satisfy politicians at home. The magnitude of the sacrifice was not understood, while the missionary party, although quieted to some extent, still busily promulgated the notion that the colonists were keeping up the war for the sake of the military expenditure. For the purpose of shewing the illiberal views entertained in some quarters on the Bubject, I will quote from a speech delivered by Lord Malmesbury in the House of Lords, during the debate on the proposed guarantee to a New Zealand war loan in 1864 :— " There certainly were no aggressive elements in Canada, but the same compliment could not be paid to the Government of New Zealand. The colonists of New Zealand had obtained from this country powers of selfgovernment, and since then they had kept up a constant quarrel with thenatives. They had done nothing to reconcile the natives to their rule, and if they became engaged in consequence in a war with the natives — which shonld be regarded in the light of a civil war, they oxight to learn how to take care of themselves, and not to call on this country for some 10,000 or 12,000 soldiers, thus draining our small army and staving off the retribution for their mismanagement at our expense. If they had had themselves to pay and to bleed for their own defence, we should have heard very little of the present difficulties ; and when people had to pay their own expenses, the amount was far less than if they cound send in their bills to other parties for payment. . , . He looked on this bill as an encourageto all other colonies in the same position as New Zealand to quarrel with the natives, and get up little wars of which they were sure not to bear the burden." When we reflect that before the outbreak of the war, the sole control of Native affairs had. been vested in the Imperial Government, this speech is a striking proof of the ignorance of colonial matters which prevailed among English politicians at that period. Notwithstanding Lord Mahnesbury's' opposition, however, the Bill was passed which authorised the Imperial guarantee to be given to H,000,000 of the L 3,000,000 which the colony had determined to raise as a war loan, being L2O a head on the whole European population of New Zealand.

The expense which the Maori war entailed upon the Imperial Government induced it to advance more boldly along the line of policy which it had so long trodden with hesitating Bteps, and successive Cabinets gave less and less of Imperial assistance to the self-governed colonies. Ultimately, In the early part of 1869, Lord GraaviUe, who had just wcuraed office, wrote to tho Governoi of

Tasmania in these terms:— "The principle that the colonies Bhould pay the full expenses of their own military defence muse now be cenaidered as established in general, and as it is actually applied to the two Crown Colonies of Ceylon and the Straits Settlements, no reason can be alleged why it should not be equally applied to the flourishing colonies of Australia, and 1 think it necessary to inform you that a careful enquiry will shortly he instituted into the expenses of the troops employed in the different British possessions, with the object of ascertaining a rate of colonial payment which will cover the full cost of these troops. You may, therefore, at no distant date, expect a proposal founded on this enquiry, and it will be for the Australian colonies to consider whether or not ib is worth their while to pay the increased cost for the presence of a small body of Her Majesty's troops." It soon became plain, however, that this despatch was only a tentative one, and that it was the object of the Imperial Government not only to make the colonies pay for their own military protection, but also to find the necessary men and material.