The Star. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 26, 1870.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 526, 26 January 1870, Page 2

The Star. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 26, 1870.

jS&k: 3&ont a week or ten days after £3ter arrival of last English mail, the JSe-a* regaled its readers, day by day, T*wfe?fc» cose of Lord Granvilltj's famous tSeK^aieb. Our contemporary inauoged, a»»?;k>w, to get at least seven or eight sM*fiv??3 out of the subject, and this, it Msttt he admitted, displayed no small .asfi»sttl> of ingenuity. Wo had ioftooGbmtX at the time, to say a word or §J»*»bo?ifc these article?, with a view aS facing the proper value upon fSsfraa, but we refrained, for the obva«s9 reason that only one opinion ■&M&3 be entertained about them. We -9®gfo<} to see that the Press has itself, sjj&J&is saorning'd issue, expressed the sw^ we took of the articles we refer ti»_ 3t declares, and we admire the «*ojr&gß of the declaration, that such d&ea'siona «s it engaged in are "end&es*3cSri\ aimless," and tbat they ore, MoßStfyASi*,. "silly bunkum." That is &eti&<rVy what we thought, and we are 55*:sd$ ih«t the Press has relieved us doaas the disagreeable necessity of say*s?»& a?tiele in which the Press, re?sjs«i» ih& above opinion of its own gyrsvsat* performances is devoted to -SSe- later-Colonial Conference recently Bs^at Sydney. Apparently, our cou.-. twas>p&f ary is ignorant of the fact that SS» 4Jo>jt'erence wns, to use an Amert--(&t£k s>»TAae, a " fizzle." Strictly speakings i*>fil J eed, there was no ConCereKC.ej Sties. tlt& simple reason that ouo of the . ppfSEsr/p-a) colonies—^and perhaps others, ite> wq arenbt quite certain on this pppriiJ—^id not send reprepeutative?; W* refer to Victoria. The so-called then, was only a friendly a»*li;ng between a few colonial poli?wsfts>ia — only that and nothing more. *!£>»»» to be regretted on its own ace*ass.j!/3nd we are sorry that the Pr#ss afcsiSfiJ have been misled about the 5»32t i i\ There ought to have been a CW&zence, and because a few subjects S&sfc v*e?e talked over found their way atftc 4he newspapers the Press cpncStdsa that there was a Conference. 'JBk?* tvas no such thing, however,.!** itfey »t?Jct meaning of the word, and oobm gently jio formal business was tssKisAeigd. We are afraid that Mr "^sag& v } -will not have much to report w~heri £&» it-sasmbly meets, beyond the fact, i^'ifc 3» pleases him, that he. enjoyed a ;gS»as&si and iiot altogether unprpfit--holiday. The iPress makes merry in a truly 33sasa way — sadly and with glooci — awgy the supposed, position of New SSa&kjd,. if it should declare 3s> independence. " Fancy tins •^MkMIs Island, containing a total of about 140,000, setting an independent republic "(pi it be a monarchy ?) with us its flag, its army and n^itfj -liisoasaadpr .u.t. ipreign Courts, iv

<c cousofg at foreign parts^ iis treaties, ;'* its u&ia&ces, aod ere suppose iv ["course o£ t^sse tts wars* What a " gloriocs &£,y it tir&l ba vvlieu the " Prealdettt of £{13 — by tfoe way what " will be the aarzie of the new State " (?) — deduces was* wpoa the North, c; ami orders oafc tfse Moa auu GiizelLe " to Moefcstde t£ie poet of Welling- " taa 5 " This mdie&tep, let ua hope, that the, JPi'ess and its friends have ojveo. up theie tuagwiScent idea about Nevr Zea.ls.ad foeosziiing a " greatnation," the v Msstreesof the Southern Seas,** ih& £ * txAez of the destinies of the Paeilse," aod «. liost of other fine things. Btifc tt aSso £adieates that the Prt&s Esaa no ties of an independent State apart; frosx tsseSesa trappings and fiiio sau^ slcficsjLcefi for the " governing elasees." Ifc i« very ktad of the Press to tell us that " Great Britain can and will " protect fcer co!oq(«s from invasion '• by means of hec superiority over " other poa?era ai, sea."' But can we rely upon either tiie ability or willingness of Qpeafe Britain to do what the Preos says? Xs the " superiority "an estabitahed &>c£? 4Suppose Great Brifraia goes to Kar with oue or more of the Contaaeatai powers — with] Kussia aa<i Fraace, for instauce — could slie profcecfc hes colocies ? Wo doubt it, and Ihesefore we cay that our connection witfi Great Britaiu places us in a podtttoa of <JAog<jr ia case of a European wsr. It is a fine thing to talk about tlto "superiority" of the British navy over tbo navies of the other powers, about its invincibility, atid ail tlie rest of It. But is it a fact that can be safely relied on ? That £s tfie psnnt. Wo are sorry to be eompeiiod to differ from the Press a%o«fc Canada, but the fact is there are restrictions on the trade of that eoetntrjr, axid these restrictions are imposed by the Imperial Goverumeufc, whose coloaial policy is about as eeWb&h as it well can be It is absurd to try ait 4 iguore this, or to gloss over cur actual position in relation to Great Britain. That position implies a, strong element of da«ger to u» tinder eertein circumstameefl. Do we gam anything by our connection witb Great Bit tain ? If so, the Press will no doubt tell &s wftat.