ENGLAND AND HER COLONIES.

Otago Witness, Issue 1005, 4 March 1871, Page 17

ENGLAND AND HER COLONIES.

XXI.— THK SStiOND QUBEY-— CONTINUED.

Aa to. the colonies. By separation, they would free themselves from liability of being involved in England's wars; they would be able to negotiate with foreign States, and exercise unfettered control over their own destiny. These are immense advantages, but let us look at the other aide of the account. Freedom from England's wan doei not mean exemption from war altogether. As in dependent States, they would be liable to be drawn by circumstances into conflict with other countries, and must keep up the nucleus of an army and navy. The Canadian Dominion has already a considerable military force at command, and with her large resources would not feel the burden ; but the cost of arming and maintaining a few ships of war would rest most oppressively on the revenue of a email community like New Zealand. Even if the Australian colonies were to federate, the expense would be little less. It is constantly argued in the colonies that, if they were independent, other Powers would guarantee their neutrality ; but those who advance such an argument can scarcely have examined its basis. When a guarantee of this sort ii given,' it is quid pro quo, and what have the colonies to offer in return for such a favour ? Why should Germany or Russia, for instance, guarantee the neutrality of Australia if it were a sovereign State ? Neither holds any vested interests in the colony, and the plunder of its seaport towns and galleons would furnish profitable employment for their navies. There ig no balance of power to be preserved between neighbouring States. The colonies must not expect other oountries to guarantee them everlasting peace, in order that they may grow rich and be happy and comfortable. They must be prepared to share the ordinary trials of mankind.

These remarks are equally applicable to the movement which has lately been started in favour of securing the neutrality of the colonies while they remain dependencies of England. It is contended that Buch a proceeding would not be without precedent ; Hanover and the lonian Islands being quoted by way of example. But the Brightest reflection will show that the illustration is not appropriate, since neither of these countries eyer formed an integral part of the British empire ; whereas, Dew Zealand is just as much a portion of that. Empire as Scotland ; and must be held equally liable to share in the national misfortunes. The movement has received popular approbation in the Australian colonies, probably because of its being more pleasant to live in secured affluence than to run the risk of losing one's property and life. Unhappily, virtue sometimes requires us to make sacrifices ; and I greatly fear that, bo long as we enjoy the benefits of a connection with England, we must also suffer the disadvantages. It ia a political partnership ; and we cannot say to the people at home, " Let us make an equal division of profits, only you bear the losses." Other countries will regard the matter in the same light. Fancy New Zealand addressing the Czar of Russia thus : — " Sire, we find that, from a commercial point of view, we shall gain by continuing a political connection with England — we therefore propose remaining her dependency ; nevertheless, it would be extremely disagreeable for your Majesty's cruisers to levy contributions on our seaport towns, and to capture our merchant •hips. We ask you, therefore, to conaider us as neutrals in the event of your going to war with England ; in return, we offer your Majesty's subjects the privilege of purchasing our wool (which they don't want), our flax (which is intended, to drive theirs out of the European market), and our wheat (which they can grow much cheaper than we do)." However absurd suon a proposal may look when set down in plain words, it truly expresses the attitude which the colony must take up in asking for a guarantee of neutrality. We could not make such a request consistently with self-respect ; and even if we could, I doubt whether it would be advisable to prefer it. The vice of the oolony is its devotion to money-making, and were the restraint now imposed by national duties removed, public spirit would be weakened, and the corruption which springs from the licentious enjoyment of wealth might pervade the land. Pecuniarily, the colonies would be heavy losers. When they went into the money market to borrow, as they very often do, they would find that lenders are not accustomed to give so much for the debentures of a minor State, relying on Its own resources, as for the securities of a larger one, noted for its fidelity to monetary engagements. True, the colonies are not England, in one sense of the -word ; but all investors feel that England's power is at command to force the dependency, if need be, to fulfil its obli-

gations, and prices of stocks rule accordingly. Did no other reason exist, this alone should induce the colonies to hesitate before asking for separation. Every young country needs a constant supply of foreign capital, and if this bo checked, or exorbitant terms demanded, the development of the country is seriously retarded. The amount of benefit hitherto derived by the colonies from home capital is no criterion of the benefit that may be derived from this source in the future. A safe outlet will soon be imperatively required for those huge accumulations of capital which, by the very nature of things, must grow bigger and bigger every year. It needs but a miad comprehensive enough to devise a scheme by which the colonies should become the recipients of the major part of these accumulations ; and a constant stream of capital would flow through every artery of England's dependencies. One condition of success is that all parts of the empire be consolidated. No amount of theorising will influence the money market, or extract a penny from the pockets of the capitalist. Security is the first, second, and third virtue which he looks for; and security ia precisely what a little State, encompassed by enemies, can never offer. Next, a very serious evil would result if the colonies were to secede on the ground of pecuniary interest ; that is, for fear of losing material wealth by the chances of war. If it be highly important that a young man, setting out in life, be imbued with noble principles, infinitely more important is it that a young community, just emancipated, Bhould be incited by lofty aims, and a desire to fulfil a proud destiny among the nations. No principle of natural life could be more unhealthy than a policy in which the acquisition of material wealth is all in all. However trite the words may sound, it may be properly repeated that no nation yet acquired true glory by its riches ; its false glitter may have dazzled the wrrld for a moment, but was speedily forgotten in admiration of other peoples whose labours tended to develops the moral and intellectual faculties of man. When the United States rebelled, they did bo for the purpose of maintaining great principles ; and if they have deserted their first love, a warm glow yet lingers in the nation's veins, and preserves it frpm corruption. But if the proposed dismemberment of the Empire took place, the colonies would start on their new career with no such impel* ling motive.

There are likewise other advantages which the colonies enjoy by their connection with England, such as having Governors free from party influence ; a common and impartial tribunal to which important legal questions can be referred, and the veto by Her Majesty on the acts of the local Legislatures. The inchoate state of colonial politics renders it of the highest consequence that a supreme power should exist capable of checking the extravagance of lawgivers, many of whom are ignorant of the fundamental principles of government. The veto is seldom used, and more seldom unwisely ; but the knowledge of its existence has a powerful deterrent effect. I have not spoken of immigration as bearing on the question at issue, because, it being equally important to England and the colonies that the surplus labour of the former country should find its way to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere. I apprehend that, in the event of separation, either party would still offer facilities for the transfer of this population. Still, to ordinary minds, it would seem that a State ought rather to encourage its citizens to remain within its own borders than to swell the numbers and wealth of a rival.

Summing up what has been said, the balance of advantages would appear to be immensely in favour of a continuance of the union. To England, it offers a long career of her present glory ; to the colonies, a great national life in place of the petty aims of petty Stiteß.