Shall England Let The Colonies Go?

South Canterbury Times, Issue 6240, 12 June 1890, Page 3

Shall England Let The Colonies Go?

Some oce writes to the London Daily Chronicle as follows There seems to be a good deal of menace in the minds, if not the language, of our fellow subjects in some of the colonies. They are all ngog to shift for themselves and to escape from the tutelage of Downing-street. Well, the question is not, as it seams to mo (and there is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh both in Canada and Australia, as well as in the United States), whether we wish them to go, but rather are they ready to go P Have they become fitted for all that is implied in self-government ? Do they feel their feet so surely that they can take upon themselves self-protection, for example ? They are eur children, come of a sturdy and independent stock, and our duty to them has been done if they have had the protection duo to them in their nonage and the education to fit them for the battle of life in the spots they have chosen for themselves, or we, in the exercise of a judgment half selfish, half benevolent, have chosen for them, but in which, however it came about, their lot is now cast. The analogy of a family will not mislead us if we wisely fnllnw Snma of t.ho children ofonrhil*

family have stayed at home, either because they loved the old homestead too well to leave it, or because they looked in due course of time to succeed us in the heritage. Others have gone away in a huff, as it may be, and perhaps at the time against our will ; and though having a lingering and a strong love for the old home and all that the words imply, yet nursing in their hearts a feeling of anger at our interference with them when they made up their minds to set up for themselves. Yet others have seen that the old house is not big enough for them all, and have put their shoulders to the wheel far away, with the pluck and self-reliance of their ancestors, and now believe they have no longer any need of those loading strings of which theywere glad enough for a while, these counsels of prudence which were seldom given selfishly and usually with a real wish to do the best for those who, after all, are as fond of us as we are of them. If they think they can do bettor in business for themselves instead of remaining as the

outlying agencies of the old house, or, better still, entering upon a new deed of partnership and becoming outlying branches instead of agonceis, it is for them to decide. If they are not capable of the decision, if they are letting ‘ I dare not ’ wait upon ‘ I would,’ ” if they believe that we have any desire to keep them for selfish reasons, they hare in the first place sadly degenerated, and in the second have contracted a moral obliquity which they did not inherit from, at any rate, the existing generation of home-stayers. In some points of view it might be well for us if they should elect to go. At present, while educating them to protect themselves, we pay for their protection, some more some less. If Canada should decide to set up wholly for herself we should save the men we now send to look after the guns of Quebec and Halifax, and wo should have no need to keep so many ships as wo do on the North American station, for the protection of which ships not a penny is recoupd to us directly or indirectly, since Canada does not admit any of our products without charging the same rates of duty that are imposed on the products of other countries—indeed, it may be doubted if wo even stand on the footing of the most favoured nation, if all that is said is true. Then what have we to lose if Canada “ cuts the painter ” P Her tariff is as hostile to us as is that of the United States itself. The writer deals with the case of Canada at come length and then discusses the case of

Australia : If wo now turn to Australia we shall find the lesson that in quietness and confidence is our strength no less strongly marked. Every Australian colany except How South Wales is protectionist, and that exception is not from any desire to please or benefit us, but on principle hitherto. It is to be feared, as one of your correspondents in Sydney pointed out the other day, that the mother colony is on the point of following the bad ■example of her neighbours and daughters. In any case, if Australian Federation is effected, the majority that has hitherto existed in favour of free trade will be voted down by the majority that in the other colonies has been in favour of protection. A tariff not improbably based on the present tariff of Victoria will then eomo into force, and this

tariff no more than the Canadian one makes any distinction in favour of the old land. Indeed, in the course of the last few weeks it has been increased, in what way even the Agent-General hero is not yet fully informed, but, broadly speaking, in respect of furniture and soft goods. Ten pounds duty on a dogcart may not seem much, but £SO on a brougham and £lO on an omnibus strikes the mind at once. A pound per 1,000 is charged for firebricks, and, 3a 9J a pair for boots and shoes will seem to Leicester very bard measure for its principal industry. Dress hats pay a duty of 4a each, whether they are made in London, Pari?, or Berlin. Silk umbrellas and parasols are charged half-a-crown each. Nearly everything eatable pays 2d a pound, except where it pays 3d, and salt pays £1 a ton. Twenty to 30 per cent ad valorem appears to be the ruling principle of the rates of the Victorian tariff, but on some things it runs up much

1 higher. Where then, to use a vulgarism of ‘ of American origin, does our pull come in to recompense us for the amount wo arc spending yearly on the squadron at present commanded by Rear-Admiral Lord Charles Scott, who pleased the Australians much more than ho gialified his own ducal house by some year I ugo§ taking an Australian wife of Irish origin ? The nine vessels we usually keep in those waters cost a pret'y penny, and are at least twice as numerous rs they would bo if wo were not bound to protect tho shores and harbours of tho Filth Continent. Sow the Australians have just begun to undertake the duly of policing their own waters, bat for many a day to eome they must have our help, unless they are willing to spend a good deal more money than they have in their minds now, and which they must find if they carry out tho muttered menaces that come to us from the Australian cities. If is plain, then, that the colonies have much more to gain than we have by the continuance of the existing relations. And they may be well assured that no statesman of any school in this country will raise a finger in any other way than one of warning to hinder any self governing colony from catting the imperial connection. At tho same time the colonists should be given to understand that nobody wants them to go. They can please themselves about it. But there is a deep feeling in this country, far deeper than has jet found expression in Parliament or even generally in the Press, that separation is a sorry business for either party to think of.