MR GAVAN DUFFY ON AUSTRALIA.

West Coast Times, Issue 291, 29 August 1866, Page 1 (Supplement)

MR GAVAN DUFFY ON AUSTRALIA.

(from the home news.)

At the last meeting for the session of the Society of Arts, held on Wednesday evening, May 30, the Hon. Gavan Duffy read a paper on " Popular Errors concerning Australia." The chair was occupied by Mr Ayrton, M.P. The room was densely crowded, and among those present were: — Sir Francis Crossley, M.P., Sir Patrick O'Brien, M.P., Sir Stuart Donaldson, Sir John Gray, M.P., General Harris, Mr Sergeant Armstrong, M.P., Mr Charles Gilpin, M.P., Colonel Kennedy,"Mr Dillon, M.P., Mr Marsh, M.P., Mr M'Kenna, M.P., Mr Tristam Kennedy, M.P., the Hon. Captain Harte, Mr Henderson, M.P., Captain Gridley, M.P., Mr Pollard Urquhart, M.P., Mr Russell, M.P., Mr Brady, M.P., Mr Blake, M,P., Mr Hawes, Vice President of the Society of Arts, Mr Richard Swift, Mr M'Mahon, late M.P., Mr Sergeant O'Brien, Mr Cashel Hoey, Mr James Tevan, Mr Tidd Pratt, Mr Edward Wilson, Mr Fitzgerald, Mr K. E. Bardeibb, ' Mr Hughes, F. R. Smith, L.L.D., Mr N. Nelson, &c.

Mr Duffy, who was warmly received on rising, commenced by speaking of the common interests and sympathies which ought to bind together the colonies and the British Islands. They were men of the same race, with the same laws and institutions, the same material interests, the same intellectual enjoyments ; and within the lost dozen years four hundred thousand English, Irish, and Scotch men had passed from these islands to that continent —

" Yet," continued Mr Duffy, " there were few countries in the world of which the people of England received impressions so erroneous and untrustworthy as of the Australian colonies. The colonists were persuaded, and upon no light grounds, that the rivals and enemies of England were treated with less harshness of judgment than was habitually exhibited towards them by many public writers in this country. Instead of regarding this great social expedition of our people to new regions with some of the interest and sympathy never denied to military expeditions — instead of recognising in their remarkable labors, in the cities which they have founded, the wealth which they have added to the storehouse of human comfort and prosperity, and the states which they have created and governed, con« quests to be proud of, they were habitually represented as little better than the semi-barbarous and chaotic republics of South America. When one came to inquire what was the root of

this prejudice, it was found to spring from a belief that the Australians, hav~mg a grsat trust committed to them in the complete power of self-government, had abused it, and run riot in licentious excesses. It was amazing how widespread and deep-rooted this belief had become, considering the slender foundation upon which it rested. In what respect had government failed in Australia ? Those who have had the duty

of governing these communities for the

last ten years considered that they were engaged in a deeply interesting and pregnant experiment, which had been conducted on the whole in a manner to deserve the applause — and not the censure — of thoughtful men. A community composed of the middle and lower classes attempted, practically for the first time, to work the complicated machinery of the British Constitution, not only without the counterpoise supplied at home by the personal influence of the Sovereign and of hereditary rank and wealth, but in connection with a franchise which, from the circumstances of the country, was necessarily nearly as wide as the adult male population; and yet to preserve completely intact the principles and the machinery of responsible government — the most marvellous system for accomplishing peaceably the wishes of a free people that mankind has framed. Under these conditions colonial statesmen had undeniably preserved public order, maintained public credit, and fostered national prosperity. They had so well preserved it that a man's -life, liberty, and property, were as effectually under the protection of the law in the city of Melbourne as in the city of London ; and, dazzling as the prosperity of England had been for the last ten years, it was less prosperous than Australia. In what respect then, had government failed ? Public men had committed mistakes, of course, for mistakes are committed in all experiments; but these were the results attained. Whenever any person prejudiced against Australia was pressed with this question, in invariably proved that political instability was what alarmed him ; that he considered a Ministerial crisis was the normal condition of Australia ; and that Governments were set up like nine-pins only for the pleasure of knocking them down again." In support of this view of English opinion, Mr Duffy quoted the recent speech of Mr Lowe in the Reform debate, in which he said responsible government must be withdrawn from the Australian colonies in consequence of the instability of Administrations, and a stable Executive substituted, and an article of the " National Review," of which the following is an extract : — '* It £b, however (says the 'Review'), only fair to observe that the American Constitution has one great excellence at this moment, not indeed as compared with the English Constitution, but as compared with that degraded imitation of it which exists, for example, in our Australian colonies. In those Governments the Parliament is wholly unfit to choose an Executive ; it has not patriotism enough to give a decent stabi-

lity to the Government ; there are ' ministerial crises' once a week, and actual changes of administration oixce a month. The suffrage has been lowered to such a point among the refuse population of the. gold colonies, that representative government is there a very dubious* blessing, if not a certain and absolute curse."

He then proceeded to say —

" Here arc not only general and sweeping imputations, but, fortunately, exact and specific statements. If an Australian', familiar with the facts, were to reply that the Government so savagely disparaged had work to do in founding and organising new states as serious as fell to the lot of any Administration in Eui'ope during the same period, and did that work in general effectually, and to the satisfaction of the people who confided power to them; and further, that to mistake for confusion and chaos the vigorous action of new communities, which appear regular and well ordered to eyes familiar with the forces at work, was like the dogmatism of the deaf spectator of a waltz, who insisted that the performers were lunatics because he could not hear the music which gave meaning and harmony to their movements ; and, moreover, that this sort of thing, and worse than this, had been written in England of the first memorable congress of the United colonies of North America, with no benefit to anyone concerned, but much evil ; if, I say, an Australian made this sort of defence, 'though strictly true, it would, perhaps, amount :o little, But, in the language of the courts, I not only demur to the indictment, but join issue on the facts. I deny that these charges are true ; and I propose to put them to the test. I am not going to enquire whether there are ' ministerial crises once a week and actual changes of administration once a month, but whether, when the truth is known, there is any just ground for wonder or complaint on this score. The territory of Australia is nearly as large as civilised Europe — that is, Europe shorn of the frozen swamps and penal settlements of Northern Russia. This territory is divided into five states possessing Parliamentary government, which are politically as independent of each other, and geographically as separate as the Governments of England, France, Italy, Prussia, and Austria. The neighboring islands of New Zealand fomi a sixth state under Parliamentary government, and the political news from these islands commonly reaches Europe under the heading of Melbourne or Sydney, the chief ports of departure for European ships, and is confounded by ordinary readers with Australian news. It is easier to reach Paris and even Turin from London, than to pass from the capital of any one of these states to the capital of its nearest neighbor. Berlin, or Vienna, is much nearer to London than the capitals of the colonies lying furthest apart are to each other. But whenever «i change is announced in any of those separate Governments, half the journals in England, and, it may be presumed, a proportionate number of "politicians in clubs and reading rooms, cry, ' What ! another Ministerial crisis in Australia ; will they never be quiet?' Perhaps they will add, with the ' National Review,' ' these people have a crisis once a week, and a change of Ministers once a month.' These criticisms in good time are carried across the ocean, ard the colonists feel natural wrath and shame that cultivated men among their own kinsmen persist in making blunders about Australia which a shepherd in the Australian ' bush' would scarcely make with respect to European states. This is the primary source of the common error on this subject. But it may naturally be asked, whether, after making due allowance on this score, there is not still an inordinate number of Ministerial changes in these new states ? Let us see whether there is or not. One of the states, Queensland, has only existed since December, 1859, but during that entire period of six years and a half there has been no change of Ministry. Two or three individual members have left the . Government upon personal grounds, and been replaced by others of the same opinions, but there has been no political or party change whatever. Another of the states, Tasmania, has been under Parliamentary government since 1855, but during these eleven years there have been only six Administrations. Six Administrations in eleven years, I may be told, are a great deal too many. I can only reply that England is the mother and model of representative government, the colonies have no pretensions to be better than she is in this respect, and in England during the same eleven years there have been exactly six Administrations. New South Wales, the senior state, as a distinct colony, and as the seat of Parliamentary institutions, has enjoyed responsible government for more than ten years, and it has had till quite recently for its Prime Minister a gentleman who, if prolonged tenure of office be a merit, may boast of having held that position in his colony for as many of these years as Lord Palmerston held it in England, with such occasional interruptions as even that fortunate statesman did not escape. And his most important competitor has held office durine; these years twice as long as Mr Disraeli. But Victoria remains the most populous, the most vivacious, and the most democratic of the Australian colonies, and that one commonly cited by English critics as the example of all Australian excesses. For her case it will be necessary to go a little into detail. The constitution by which Victoria obtained the power of changing its

government was proclaimed law in the colony in November, 1855. In the ten years and five months ensuing there have been eight Administrations. (Ho stated the title and duration of each Administration.) Omitting the purely exceptional case of the first O'Shanassy Administration, this gives an average of a year and a half for each Government ; or, including that Administration, we have an average of a year and a quarter, not of a month, as the 'National Review' undertakes to affirm.

. . . But a year and a quarter is a miserably short average duration for a

Ministry, it may be said, and argues, after all, that the colonial Parliament has, in the words of the reviewer, ' not patriotism enough to give a decent stability to Government.' The colonial Parliament has given precisely such a decent stability to Government as the English Parliament has been in the habit of giving when it was not mastered by a great popular favourite, or managed. by a skilful intriguer. The succession of long-lived English Administration in the Georgian era, commanding undeviating majorities in Parliament, belonged to a period when Parliamentary corruption constituted one of the chief agencies of Government. As soon as the contest of opinion began to be fairly fought in the House of Commons, Ministries changed repeatedly, or endured only when backed by great popular enthusiasm. The exceptional good fortune of Pitt or. Palmerston can scarcely be considered a fair standard to apply to colonial Ministers ; and the successful devices of Walpole or the Pelhams for tranquil ising Parliament are not a desirable model to propose for colonial adoption. But, under the ordinary laws of political action, English Administrations, since responsible government has existed, were about as long-lived as colonial Administrations. Instead of taking up the ' Annual Register' for specific dates, I will borrow illustrations from two or three popular sources running through the last century. The famous 'Public Advertiser,' in July, 1766, a hundred years ago, contained a letter bewailing the short life and sudden death of Governments in England. This letter is now known to have been written by Edmund Burke. Prior, in his memoirs of Burke, reprints it as his, and it bears evident mai'ks of his strong hand. ' Since the happy accession of his present Majesty, to this day,' says the letter, 'we have worn out* no less than five complete sets of honest, able, upright Ministers, not to speak of the present, whom God long preserve. First, we had Mr Pitt's Administration, next the Duke of Newcastle's, then Lord Bute's, then Mr Grenville's, and, lastly, my Lord Rockingham's. Now, sir, if you will take a bit of chalk, and reckon from the 7th October, 1760, to the 30th of July, 1796, you will find five years, nine months, and thirty days, which, divided by five, the total of Administrations, gives exactly one year and sixty days each, on an average, as we say in the city, and one day more if they have the good fortune to serve in Leap year.' This was the era of the giants ; the great age of Fox and Pitt, when, for public spirit and political ability, Parliament was at its zenith. Yet, some rash and censorious critic in the colonies, if he looked with the eye of the scorner at the mother country, might discern no other moral in its eager contest for political principles than that it had not 'patriotism enough to give a decent stability to Government.' If -we leap over the era of the Anti- Jacobins, when opinion was suppressed, and come to the period of real Parliamentary struggles which immediately preceded and followed the passing of the Reform Bill, we have the same state of things recurring. Mr Albany Fonblanque many years ago re-issued a collection of his political writings in the ' Examiner,' under the title of 'England under Seven Administrations.' The selection ranged from 1827 to 1835, during which period, in little over eight years, the interests of England had been intrusted in succession to the Canning, Goderich, Wellington, Grey, Melbourne, Peel, and second Melbourne Administrations. The average duration of a Ministry was shorter in England during that period of political activity than it has been in Victoria ; but it would scarcely be considered a liberal interpretation of this circumstance if a colonial critic declared that the Imperial Parliament had not patriotism enough to give a decent stability to Government. It may be said, and it must be admitted, that these short-lived Ministries in England belong to periods in some sense exceptional. But do not the short-lived Ministries in Australia^ also belong to an exceptional period? They belong to the period when self-government is first established, and the people are still unfamiliar with its machinery ; when the mutual courtesy and forbearance which result from organised parties have only begun to exist ; and when great fundamental questions which move vehemently the passions of men are still in course of settlement. It will be observed that the duration of Governments has gradually increased in the colonies, as it gradually incre.isod in England ; and I submit that, unless men start with the idea that colonies sire, bound to be in the exact frame of mind and train of circuinstan vs which prevailed in England at son it- thing like a corresponding period, there is no just ground for wonder, or complaint in the duration of Australian Ministries. It is a curious fact, that if the colonies desired to retort the charge of political instability upon England, they could make a much more effective case. In 1838, a select committee of the House of Commons'

reported that one main cause of the misunderstanding between Canada and the home Government was the constant fluctuation of men and opinions in the Colonial Office ; there were eight new Secretaries of State for the Colonies appointed in little over ten years, each with a new policy, more or less dihvring from that of his predecessors. But so little change for the better did this remonstrance produce, that a dozen years ago when the Australian colonies were negotiating the bases of their new Constitutions they had actually to deal with five separate Ministers holding the seals of the Colonial Office within three years."

Mr Duffy then described in detail the sort of "stable Executive" -which existed in colonies before responsible Government, a sort of thing which it was folly to suppose they would endure again; and went on to notice other misconceptions : —

"A gain, l have been asked — Have not the Legislatures fallen into the hands of inferior men, and the best men been excluded ? Speaking of the entire period over which parliamentary government has existed, I believe that the men most unequivocally competent for the management of public affairs have habitually been in Parliament. Good men, it is true, are sometimes excluded for a time by the gust of popular passion — just as some of the most eminent men in England lost their seats for opposing Lord Palmerston. A few years ago in New South Wales several able men were excluded on a popular question at a general election ; but these i identical men constitute the leading members of the present Government of that colony. In Victoria at the close of last year several able men were excluded on a question which moved the passions of the people ; but they will no doubt re-appear, in the same way as happened in New South Wales and in England. Again, it is said the Parliaments and people of Australia commit mistakes and run afer delusions. Let us say they do. What people of whom we have any knowledge are free from the same charge ? Eleven years ago, when I was leaving for Australia, the whole people of England seemed to be in a frenzy of enthuiasni in favor of war on behalf of the Grand Turk. How many of them retain their enthusiasm on that subject at present ? In truth, the people of Australia are no worse in this respect than any other people ; and the mistake consists in setting up an ideal standard of wisdom and moderation for them to which no community can reach. No sensible man, will expect absolute identity* of views or practice between the young communities and the old community ; he will remember that the colonies are riot mere branches of the imperial tree, but saplings from .the same root, flourishing in a soil and under conditions of their own which render some modifications of structure inevitable. They are in process of growing, and have grown with singular rapidity; but he will not expect to find in the first stage of their growth the gifts and accomplishments which belong only to maturity. A settled public opinion, the reserve of conscious strength, and fixed rules of practice in public transactions, are attained by communities only after struggle and discipline. A colonial Parliament — the organ of a young vigorous people — has pressing work to do, and is at that stage of its progress when impatience of delay is natural and healthy, as implying sincerity and ear«> nestness. But there is a higher consideration which ought to guide English criticism. The Australian colonists possess, and fortunately know that they possess, one of the freest and most serviceable constitutions in existence ; but the more universally they recognise the fact the better and more stable government will necessarily become ; for order rests upon public success as its basis. It follows that any criticism calculated to disturb this content ought to be made only upon sure grounds, and that not only wilful, but even ignorant, disparagement of the institutions upon which it depends, by writers or speakers of authority, amounts to a grave offence. The colonial statesman has difficulties to face from which the English statesman is nearly altogether free. In England the bones and sinews which sustain and move the body-politic, and constitute the vital machinery of the state, are covered with flowing robes of ceremony, and custom forbids too close an inspection of the august and mystic organism beneath. In Australia you have only the naked ribs and vertebrae, possessed with a vigorous principle of life indeed, but with scarce a rag of traditional veneration to shelter them from inquisitive eyes. Reverence and custom, agents so powerful in the government of states, can scarcely be said to come at all in aid of authority, which has to depend in a large degree upon its intrinsic strength for acceptance and support. It is not surely the part of an English constitutionalist, whether in Parliament or the Press, to increase the natural difficulties of government under such circumstances. In truth, the maintenance of friendly relations between England and her great colonies has passed from the care of the Colonial Office to the care of public opinion aud its interpreters. The chief peril lies, I think, in the offensive superiority which Englishmen who remain in England are sometimes inclined to assume over Englishmen who have left England. The Irish and the Scotch, who are an emigrating people, only share this feeling in a small degree. But the questftn<*s not one of feeling and sentiment exclusively, but is becoming one of national* interests. England interprets between these w new countries and all

Europe and America, and she is ushering them into the world with the serious impediment of a blemished character. The colony of Victoria, in which I resided, has never cost the mother country a guinea — has never done or wished her anything but good — has exhibited her sympathy in a practical way on trying occasions — has poured upwards of a hundred millions sterling into the coffers of her trade, and may surely expect not to be wantonly injured; and one of her citizens will not be accounted unreasonable, I trust, if he moves for a rehearing of her case upon grounds so sufficient as that the verdict found against her is contrary to the weight of evidence."

The lecture was warmly applauded, after which the usual discussion took place.

Mr Marsh, M.P., said that the finances of New South Wales were in a hopeless state ; and in Victoria they were going back in political civilisation, quarrelling about free trade and protection. Property was not secure in the former colony — stock, horses, aud cows being constantly stolen; and he had the best authority for stating that the members of the Victoria Parliament had received bribes, ranging from LlO to L7OO. These were the results of democracy. Mr Duffy asked the hon. gentleman to specify a single case in which a member of the Victoria Parliament received a bribe. If democracy was to be answerable .for the financial troubles of New South Wales, was it to be answerable for those of Austria, Italy, and Spain ?

Mr B. Ha wes, vice-preside' of the society, thought it a great mistake for Englishmen to be finding fault with the colonies which grew from them. (Hear) Captain Harte, lately Chief Secretary of South Australia, said he did not believe the picture which Mr Marsh drew applied to South Australia. There, where the people owned the land, universal suffrage and the ballot worked well.

Sir John Gray, M.P., said he had heard of cows and horses being stolen in England ; and as to bushranging, he had heard of such a thing as garotting in the city of London. And yet he had not heard any gentleman, in the House of Commons or elsewhere, attribute garotting to the evils of government, or to the corruption of the representatives of the people.

Mr Gilpin, M.P., with reference to the charge of corruption brought against the Australian representatives by MiMarsh, said every one knew what England was in the time of the Walpoles, and yet nothing was ever known to occur in Australia so bad as in this country.

Mr Duffy, in reply to Mr Brady, M.P., said that, with respect to the connection between the colony and the Colonial office, the power of vetoing colonial bills was the only prerogative now abused, and that, no doubt, would soon be abandoned.

A cordial vote of thanks, carried by acclamation, was accorded to Mr Duffy, and the proceedings terminated.

On a recent evening about 140 gentlemen assembled at a banquet at Willis's Rooms, London, for tho purpose of presenting a testimonial, consisting of a purse containing upwards of 3000 guineas, to Captain Maury, late of the United States navy. The chair was occupied by Sir John Pakington, M.P., and among the company were several distinguished gentlemen. In proposing " The Guest of the Evening," the chairman gave a sketch of the career of Captain Maury, and pointed out the beneficial results which had been produced by his wonderful charts of the winds and of the currents of the ocean. It was owing to Captain Maury, he remarked, that the nautical conference was convened at Brussels in 1853, which led to the establishment of the Meteorological Department of the Board of Trade ; and as an illustration of the benefits conferred upon commerce by the discoveries of the gallant officer, he mentioned that the practical result of these discoveries had been to lessen the expense of the voyage of a vessel of 1000 tons, from this country to llio, India, or China, by no less a sum than L 250, while in the voyage of a ship of that tonnage to California or Australia and back the saving effected was LI2OO or LI3OO. The great philosopher Humboldt had said that Captain Maury had discovered a mew department of human knowledge, viz., the physical geography of the sea, and indeed the eminent services rendered by him to science had been fraukly and cordially acknowledged in all parts of the world. Commodore Jansen and Mr Van Hoboken had sent a contribution of LI 100 from Holland, and the Grand Duke Constantine had forwarded to the fund, in the name of the Russian navy, the sum of LIOOO. Altogether the subscriptions amounted to upwards of 3000 guineas, which, on behalf of the subscribers, he now had the great honor of requesting Captain Maury to accept as a recognition of his services and as a proof of their esteem, admiration, and gratitude. The right hon, chairman then, amid great cheering, presented the testimonial to Captain Maury, who suitably expressed his acknowledgments. A terrible fire occurred the other afternoon at Ottery St. Mary, a village about twelve miles from Exeter. Some children playing with burning paper set fire to a foul chimney. The sparks from this fell on to the roofs of the adjoining houses, which were mostly thatched, and set fire to them. Three streets, with 116 houses, including the national school*, were destroyed, together with a, good deal of furniture, &c. The damage is estimated at fully L 30,000, and nearly 500 persons, chiefly of the poorer classes, are homeless. A subscription for the sufferers has been opened. The house of Mr Davey, solicitor, was burnt, and the whole of his furniture consumed, the only articles rescued being business documents. The heat at this point was intense, forbehind Mr Dayey's house trees and shrubs, fifty yards removed from the fire, are charred and burnt. The engines had several miles to come, and there wfis but ]& supply of water. -