AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6795, 15 May 1900, Page 2

AUS TRA LIAN FEDERATION.

■ •••'v^;- ? ■•-« — ■--:?>■■ -v-r/ ■■•> :<-\:V,---!raO(JRESS OF THE 'COMMON- V " : ' "WEALTH BILL. ' ; PRESS COMMENTS. »-: [Prom Ocr CoKREsroxDEN'T.] ' LONDON. April 6; Th& London Press is gradually awakening to the importance of the Commonwealth ' Bill, and although incomplete explanations are given of the "No Appeal" clauses, the articles on the questions involved in the' Bill are becoming fuller and more correct. The "Morning Post " understands thatthe. Bill vr.il}, be introduced shortly ,a.ft.er Easter, in. the. hope that it. may pass forth-' with into law and be proclaimed on the Queen's next birthday. It points out that the Commonwealth Constitution has been j built up on compromises, and that', this i fact should be borne in mind in considering tho Privy Council clauses, which" so far from having been idly introduced, were' the result- of a. compromise and a concession to the Reeling of distrust of the constitution of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The clauses were not inserted wildly and for no purpose, and if the Imperial Parliament amend them' they must 7 m honour go back to Australia for endorsement, "And here, comes the real danger. We have pointed out with what difficulty, and after what heartburnings, the five colo nies were brought into line. To throw them back the Bill for rediseusskm would be tosend a sword among them. Divisions would^pht up the now united House, and the island continent would rewound with the clamour of fresh parties, fresh ambitions and fresh cries. Queensland, thai shy and wary, colony, would probably take to her heels, ana certainly the apple of discord would be- on the table between New South Wales and Victoria. Tho cause of Federation would, in all likelihood, be cast back tjsn years; and that i s a peril, a rule, which none of us is bold enough to run." • :. "The proclamation of the Bill in its present, form once obtained, however, there are two alternatives open. In the first place, it might be safely left to tie Federal Parliament to amend the sections of the Constitution in due time if by any mischance -they were found to be inadequate; or, secondly, and far better, the Imperial Parliament "mio-hfc take in band, say, next year, the reorgnnfsatlon of the 'highest Courts of Appeal, which has been so long, needed . ... In the meantime there seems but one plain duty before Parliament, and that is to pass the Bill ; and 'we hope and believe • that : the Government sees this necessity, and will allow no intermeddling in so vital a measure, either on the Wart of its own supporters or any- one eke." : The "Daily Chronicle" hopes that it will not be thought desirable seriously to amend the Bill, but it would have preferred to see Clause 74 omitted, or, at least, differently drafted. It states, ns does also .the "Morning Post," that "the real effect of the proposal will be to assimilate the condition of Australia to that, of Canada." But the difference between them, viz., that in matters involving the interpretation of the Constitution an appeal lies from Canada, bub not from Australia, which is the crux of Clause 74, does not seem yet to be'snfficienly comprehended by any of the leader writers. The ."Chronicle " thinks that the m-ovision entitling the Commonwealth Parliament to limit the matters in which an appeal may be had to the Privy Council is aimed at saving . colonial amour propre rather than' at limiting the Queen's •prerogative, .and that that option is not likely to ba exercised. If; it concludes. "Mr Haldane's recent sueeestion \as to the fusion of the Judicial Committees of the House of Lords arid Privy Council, could be adopted forthwith, we believe it not improbable that a modification of the Bill could be procured. In such a fusion we should have an ideal basis for Imperial Federation." The " Daily Telegraph " devotes two eloquent columns to the relation of Australia to the Empire, and points out that yesterday Imperial Federation was a rather confused dream ; to-day we stand on the threshold of the reality — a comparatively simple and inevitable arrangement between just four great communities, the United Kingdom, the Canadian Dominion, the Australasian Commonwealth, and Consolidated South Africa. ? Should, as the " Daily Telegraph " thinks probable, Mr Barton and Mr Deakin appear at the Bar of the House of Commons, the scene will be one of the most singular, memorable and momentous in the history of Parliament. After recapitulating tbe progress of the Australian Federation, the real author, of which was Bismarck, and describing the Constitution as the' most daringly democratic of all the great Constitutions of the world, the "Daily Telegfa.ph " states Western Australia's demand, and declares that New. Zealand's really important aim is to safeguard her' rights to enter the Commonwealth at a future time with the rights of an original State. This, says the "Telegraph," "ought to be settled between the colonies themselves as a subject of domestic concern. At this delicate moment ie would not be the part of wisdom for the Imperial Parliament to interfere, except for the purpose of sanctioning such arrangements.on. these -heads as may be arrived at between the Australasian Colonies themselves." / In the clauses concerning " appellate jurisdiction " we reach, says the " Telegraph," a difficulty which concerns the relations between the Mother Country and the Commonwealth as a Avhole, and directly involves the whole question of Imperial Federation. The clause ought to be the subject of searching discussion in Parliament, as it practically involves the question whether the .Judicial Committee of the Privy Council shall become obsolete, or whether, asthe Supreme Court of the/Empire, it shall develop into the most august tribuual in the world. The example of Australia would certainly lead to a gradual .withdrawal of Canadian cases should the "appellate jurisdiction ' clauses of tho Commonwealth Bill be adopted as they stand. Nothing is to be gained, and much harm is done by .a certain tendency displayed by ultai-Imperialists in England, • whose zeal is very likely to defeat jts own object, to make a rash and arrogant 1 show 'of uncompromising objection to the appeal clauses of the Federal Enabling Bill. This and every other question at issue between England atid her free colonies must be a matter not for dictation, but for temperate discussion, to be carried on with a larger view on both sides to the Imperial 'Federation of the near future : . . No loftier or more interesting question has bsen discussed in the Imperial Parliament. It is one of the opportunities which enable sympathetic, but far-sighted statesmanship) to show its power. But when we find ourselves discussing the Australian Commonwealth Bill from this point of view, we realise that Imperial Federation itself is no longer in the air ; it is upon us. It has become the supreme question, which cannot cease till solved." The' " St James's Gazette " still keeps pegging away against the "old cry of the Bill, and nothing . but the Bill," and the no appeal" clauses which it says, " will have a far wider ;effe.ct than is yef generally imagined. The cause of federation , will ;npt. suffer either by referring, the '■BiU^b; i the.'-I4usltrdTjan' v ij : e'j)ple, or by the Colonial Office suggesting certain amendments. The measurps? %at are to build up the military and' constitutional unity of the Empire will perform their functions far better if they are sdttnd ahd wellconsidered than if they were hurried and imperfect. The Bill will. be amended." ■ In its "Notes of Empire" the same journal says : — "lt is most .gratifying to note that the delegates now in London are bocoming more and more j.a^meriable 'to criticism and less restricted in, their views. Wt» were sanguine that Mr De.akin would soomn* or later make the .admission that tho Hill could b^ amehded' with' profit, and our com* . i jidencg;has: not proved to be nijsnlnewl, ).«• '^deed^b^this time the. delegntos have »P> vHyefl^afitihe^'coiichision 1 that nobody hwe .at 'the seat of Empire is animated by ft-ttjv ttesire to ' wreck Federation.' They- Wft\\\U\§--ly!3eache"d : ifs r in a state: of ulmottuftH fteiv--•sijavenes,s,,.like a. ewe shielding hoy StrfitMy lanrlb. ■■';' Hands off— don't loucliP was* p "we pointed out, " 'the subst^jUH' ' uC tw?fr statements to the Press. On thoir smlval they were seemingly unaware that there tx»

'"'"'"'" i ..... >. ' - . ■•-.'■ '':'.':{■ ■■ , isted in England a Strong. 'party,. bofb in 1 ,;and out of Parliament, which did not yield !'to the Australians themselves in their' zeal .'for, and championship of, Australia's in* terests. They found, too, as complete a knowledge of ' Australian affairs and grievances as they had. left {behind them at Sydney or Melbourne. Notileast of the ladvantages we possessed al critics of the Bill '-brought over by tHe aelegates_Was our superior and immediate knowledge of the Constitution of the oolonies already federated, and, the workings of that Constitution. The law officers of the Crown can appreciate the difficulties which at first beset federations — particularly those arising fromi inter-State * jealousies. They are aware that within ten years from the passing of .the British North America Act, the Federal Supreme Court, as Mr Haldane ■pomts/lqut-*. was .fiercely i attacked. in ..Canada, and might have endangered^ the Dominion - itself had not the Privy Council existed 'Ho act as an impartial arbiter in interpreting the Canadian Constitution." This last point, is— l may say—consideredbv Imperialists' one of this strongest reasons~for striking' out that part of Clause. 74 that prohibits appeal to the Privy Council in "interpretation" matters. The "St James';" approves Mv ' Haldane's ' proposal < to amalgamate ... the .Judicial Committees of' the Hoilso of Lords and the Privy Council, and points out— what few laymen know — that the personnel of the two Courts is almost identical. "The chief difference an character and procedure seems. to lie in this: that, adjudicating for England and Ireland, Lords Macnaghten, Morris. Davey and Robertson sit in state with . all the imposing accessories, after which they remove their wigs and robes, climb to a smaller apartment -.-upstairs, and adjudicate for the British Empire." • The Bill is also referred to by Mr Beckles Willson in an article on " The New. Colonial Spirit, rt in the "St James's." "The new colonial spirit," he- says, "is yet so new a thing that it is not surprising that we should see 'it discussed timorously. The general restraint and reticence over the Australian Commonwealth Bill is a case in point. If ' this measure related to five mil-, lion fellow subjects in Ireland, not a member in the House but would be quite prepared to rise in hi? place and speak out his mind. But because the Bill concerns five taillions of Englishmen in Australia, as much the Queen's subjects as ourselves, Mr Hogan must not even put a question con-, cerning a clause in that Bill which contemplates a delimitation of her Majetsy's judicial prerogatives." The "Daily Telegraph," in its second article, manta'ins ttiat if Australia, separates from the present inter-Imperial legal system by abolishing -the judicial supremacy of tho Privy Council, C*\iada' must also ultimately claim an equally independent status. The Imperial view has net baen rejected by Australia, it has simply been not understood. The aim of a sagacious Imperialism mmt be to work through Australian feeling. The point of stress must be laid on the state of opinion in Australia itself. There is no doubt, says the " Telegraph," a far stronger feeling than, ds generally supposed against the "No Appeal" clauses. It is precisely in its power to interpret the Caiiiadian Conststuticn that tie Privy Council* is at present the Supreme Court of the Dominion for instance, as of the whole Empire. The withdrawal of Australia from the highest sphere of the jurisdiction of th' 3 Judicial Committee would impair to the most unfortunate extent the position, prestige, and prospects of the only working institution of a distinctly and exclusively Imperial character that we already possess. The " Daily Telegraph " finds' the solution of the difficulty in Mr Haldane's proposal to establish a 'Supreme Court of Empire, the amalgamation cf the House of Lords 1 and the Privy Council, and the addition !of some Colonial Judges. There ought never to have "been any question of finally settling a problem so important, so subtle and so complicated between /Australia and the'- Mother Country without longer and more mutual, discussion of the subject than it has ever received. The temper in which the question is approached on.botn.'sidm will count in. the end. The process of adjusting the first real difference is precisely what ought to put to a safe test the political instinct of the race. In the frank atmosphere of absolute trust between England and Australia all difficulties should disappear.