Colony’s First Premier

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLVII, Issue 21529, 16 December 1939, Page 41 (Supplement)

Colony’s First Premier

J. F. FITZGERALD Champion of Freedom Q.N the occasion of the centennitl it is interesting to recall that since the establishment of Responsible Government to the present time there have been 40 Prime Ministers or Premiers hailing from all parts of the Dominion. James Edward Fitzgerald, the first to occupy that position, although really before the inauguration of complete responsible Government, was closely associated with this part of the Dominion, his half-brother having been for a period the editor of “The Timaru Herald. ’ The life and achievements of Fitzgerald constitute something in the nature of a romance and are in many respects not dissimilar to those of other Empire builders, who under the Union Jack played important parts in building up the great congeries of nations which comprise the British Empire. The first Legislature met in May, 1854, the first Parliament consisting of a large percentage of able men and

consequently the initiation of auton- ■ omy was undertaken under promising j auspices. The total population of the | Colony in 1854 was only 31,243. Fitzgerald was an Irishman, born | in England, and at the time of the ' opening of New Zealand's first Parlia- I ment was 36 years of age. He was j educated at Cambridge, being a studentl at Christ’s College, and on completing ' his scholastic course travelled exten- ! sively in Europe, greatly broadening' his interests and cosmopolitanism. ; Two years later he joined the staff of I the British Museum. While there he ' joined a debating society, where his powers as a public speaker rapidly de- ‘ veloped until he was regarded as one of the most able and eloquent mem- i bers. He became “infected with the I Colonial microbe,” and he looked to colonisation as one of the ways of j saving England. The battle of Colonial expansion was a difficult one; stern opposition was offered to all I proposals for the undertaking of ad- ■ ditional responsibilities overseas. Fitz- i gerald, with all the enthusiasm of his I race threw in his lot with those who | formed the Colonial Reform Party. In 1847 he issued a circular in favour of founding a colony in British Columbia, but this proposal was strenuously opposed by Ministers of the Crown, who were unable to visualise the part which, in later years, the dependencies were to play in Empire affairs. Later he published a book examining criti- i cally the Charters of the Hudson Bay [ Company, The opposition to the North American proposition was 100 j strong to be overcome, and then he turned his attention to the South Pacific. He became a member of John Robert Godley’s managing committee, and when the founder of Canterbury set out for New Zealand in December, 1849, was chosen to succeed him as Emigration Agent in London. He him- | self set out for New Zealand in Sep- |

tember, 1850, a passenger by the Charlotte Jane. On arrival at Lyttleton on December 16, 1850, Fitzgerald became the editor of the “Lyttelton Times” which was first issued on January 11. 1851 at the same time filling the positions of Immigration Agency and Inspector of Police. In 1857 he was stricken with illness which forced his retirement from politics. He resigned the Super- j intendency of Canterbury and in the | following year he left for the Home I Country. From 1858 to 1860 he re- I mained in London holding the office ■ of Emigration Agent for Canterbury, I and was largely responsible for direct- • ing many highly desirable emigrants to this province, the immense poten- ■ tialities of which formed a never i failing theme for eloquent addresses, in which he painted alluring pictures I of the great future that lay before the province. Fitzgerald must ever remain enshrined among the leaders of the Dominion to whom the term “statesman” can be rightly applied. The task before him was very different from that of the present day leaders; but its importance cannot be minimised, and no one familiar with the circumstances under which he laboured can deny but his work w'as “good” in the Biblical sense of the term. His lecture on Government can be read to-day for its wisdom and its lesson. He ever kept in view the need of freedom. Here is what he said in 1870: — Now it seems a prevalent idea in these days, that liberty depends solely upon the share which the people obtain of political power. Hence the enlargement of the franchise and the more complete subordination of the Executive to the Legislature are spoken of as if they were the only guarantees for the preservation of liberty. But all that these things can do is to render government more subservient to the will of the popular majority. That, no doubt, is for certain purposes desirable. But how does it protect personal liberty? A majority may be

as intolerant and tyrannical as an individual, and more so, because a tyrant has a head to be chopped off if the worst comes to the worst, the majority has not. The tyranny of an individual is the evil of past times in civilised nations; at the present day, of still semi-barbarous peoples. But in free countries there Is increasing danger of the tyranny of the majority of the hour. An act Is no less unjust when done by a multitude than when done by one. Liberty is equally destroyed if stabbed by a monarch or trampled under the feet of a mob. Hence in the struggle for liberty in past times it was not sought merely to render Government popular, to substitute representative authority fcr hereditary right, to subordinate the will of the one to that of the many; it was found necessary to surround power, no matter in whose hands it might be, with a network of contrivances for its just use, amongst which we have had this handed down to us as the surest guarantee for personal liberty, the entire exclusion of those whose duty it is to administer the law from all political power, and their independence of those in whose hands the executive government is placed. And they are but shallow politicians who fancy that, because the representatives of the political majority of the day have become the depositaries of political power, the guarantees against its unlawful use which have been handed down to us from the past may be safely removed. I venture to speak thus, because there is a school of politicians who, in the eager desire for further improvement and perhaps in a somewhat over strained admiration for their own age, regard too lightly what we have received from the past. Let us not mistake forms for principles; and. rudely as we sweep away the technicalities and contrivances of a past age whenever they stand in the way of substantial improvements in the political machine, at least let us endeavour to understand the great principles of the structure we propose to improve. I think no one can have watched the working of the democratic governments established in most of the British Colonies without perceiving a tendency to rely too largely on the powers of the execu-

tive government under the impression that, because it represents the majority of the hour the ancient restraints upon the authority of the executive may be safely set aside. And, if I regard w’ith such apprehension the results of this doctrine, it is from no pedantic regard for antique forms, but because it seems to me to tend towards a resumption by the supreme authority of those various powers of Government, the disposition of which as separate and independent depositories was. and ever will be. the surest if not the only real guarantee for personal liberty. . . . Far distant, apparently, is the promised era. when men shall beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into reaping hooks. The worship of phj’sical force will, perhaps. long be the reigning superstritution of mankind. But, if there Is any difference between one Government and another, if there be any standard by which we can measure the value of Government, surely our judgment should pronounce a government better or worse in proportion as it leads or obstructs the people under its rule in the march towards a higher national life. Mr Fitzgerald took an intense interest in all social development, and it can never be said that he was on what Is termed the Conservative'side. But above all he was a man of the highest rectitude and unbiassed in the performance of his public duties. He did what he believed to be his duty, undeterred by fear or favour. He was one of the public senants of the Colony of whom New Zealanders must ever be proud. Among the many able men who gave their lives to lay the foundations of the Colony, he was perhaps unique in his public spirit, in his high character, in the variety of his intellectual abilities and attainments, for he was orator, poet, artist, financier, statesman, essayist and philosopher. And as long as the name and remembrance of New Zealand and her pioneers endure, James Edward Fitzgerald will be revered and his memory honoured.