IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

Wellington Independent, Volume V, Issue 425, 7 November 1849, Page 3

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

, hodsk or commoks, joke 26, 1849

COLONiAL POLICY.

Sir William M6lesworth', on rising-to' .niovejm address to her Majesty to.'apJpoint' a commission to enquire into' the . of our colonial' .sions, presented a petition "from Wellington signed.by 741 male adults, out of a population of 810 male adults, praying for the immediate introduction of repre-i

sentativeanstitutioiis in- New Zealand. Sir based his -motion <on the ground that there were grave defects and errors in our system of Colonial Government,- which required revision, for the purpose of a searching inquiry, into the colonial policy of. the emprire. He first stated what in his opinion ha I produced the belief that suoh errors existed, their character and effects, and urged! that his motion should be agreed to" as the legitimate sequence, to various niojiious which had received the approbation Of a majority of that house—namely, those of Mr. Baillie, of Mr. Adderley, and as he contended, of Lord Lincoln. These, and other less successful propositions, showed the state of public opinion respecting our colonial- administration, and laid a valid parliamentary ground for his motion. He then explained the . nature of the enquiry he proposed, and the objects to which it should be directed, classing them under three heads—namely, colonial government, colonial expenditure, and emigration or colonization. -The system, he observed, worked ill, not because it was ill-administered, but because it was so essentially faulty that it could not be well administered. * He censured no individual; he censured the system, which must be thoroughly revised and reformed. Sir William sketched out the scheme of a commission which, he suggested, should be composed of a member from each of the four great divisions of that House, with the addition of a fifth member, selected from amongst the most eminent political and economical writers of the day.

• Mr. Hume seconded the motion, and inyeiged against the general system and spirit of the colonial administration, which was manage too much with the view to patronage, without regard to the capacity of Governors or to the interests of the country.

Mr. Hawes opposed the scheme as an impracticable one, and protested against delegating the inquiry iuto great Imperial questions, which ought to be. discussed in that House, to five gentlemen who, though of discordant political sentiments, were expected, when brought together, like a " happy family," to forego all their antipathies. He maintained that Lord Grey had laid down larger princfyfles of commercial policy than any other Colonial Secretary had done, and that Sir William Molesworth, whose speech was full of exaggerations, had laid no ground for his motion. He then proceeded to justify those parts of Lord Grey's policy which had been assailed by Sir William Molesworth, aud with respect even to the .West Indies, said to be ruined- by. the policy ofv.tho Colonial. Office, Mr. Hawes showed that the success of the free trade policy was already manifesting itself. There were, no doubt, subjects of great importance affecting the interests of the colonies, which deserved consideration ;'but where all these ingredients—the 'effects of the abolition of slavery, the forms and the cost of colonial Government, waste lands—to be thrown into one common cauldron ? Such a comprehensive inquiry, which must involve the consideration whether or not our colonial empire was worth retaining, would excite hopes and expectations which could not be realized, and paralize a great executive department of the State.

.. Mr. Gladstone excepted to the terms of the motion, which seemed to contemplate a minute inquiry into the governments of the different colonies, and all complaints and grievances there, against the Colonial Department. But Sir W. Molesworth did not propose to inquire into abuses of detail, or the conduct of individuals. Great as he admitted were the merits of Lord Grey, he had been led into serious errors, which called for measures of prevention : and, looking to the general scope and object of the motion, he thought the time had arrived when an attempt should be made to improve our colonial system, founding his opinion, not upon one single consideration, but upon the joint result of many considerations. He obviated some of the objections offered by Mr. Hawes to the appointment of a commission to inquire into these subjects,' which a Colonial Secretary, overburdened and distracted by so many duties, had not sufficient time to consider as he ought; and he believed that a commission appointed by the Executive Government, and acting in harmony with that Government, would afford it usuals" extraneous aid, and, so far from this being an extraordinary, it "was a usual course, and one followed in other cases by the present Government. ■'• Mr. Gladstone adverted to various questions connected with important branches of our colonial policy which called for inquiry, and might be fitly investigated by a wellchosen commission, and therefore supported'" the-motion. • - }/lv Labpuchere opposed the motion, whifeh' was grounded upon -a sweeping, indiscriminate censure of the whole colonial policy of the empire, alike impolitic and uujust'. Tlie three classes of subjects to which the inquiry of the commission waa'to be directed, comprised almost the whole oirole of duties' belonging to the and Legislature with reference to the colouies: jHo.wever-conven-

ientitoiigh't l)e to get,rid,of responsibility; of shifting; it upon, a commission, he objected, as unconstitutional, to delegat; to a body of this description functions which should be exercised upon their responsibility by ministers of the Crown. He showed the distinction between a standing commission,''contemplated by by S'r W. Molesworth, and com missions appointed* for special and defined purposes whose inquiries, were of practical utility, whereas nothing could result from the former but disappointment. The motion was supported by Mr. Scott and Mr. Adderlev.

Lord J. Russell was at loss to know what were the definite objects of the proposed commission, whose inquiries, in the terms of the motion, were so vast as to be beyond the power of any commission. It was an objection fatal to the whole scheme that, having such a multiplicity of subjects to inquire into, the commissioners could not possibly arrive at any rational conclusion as to any, and if they attempted to carry on the ordinary business of administration for the colonies, they would interfere with the functions of the Executive Government, and might.opejti/resb sources of complaint iff the.colonies. He showed that an attempt to define the limits of Imperial and local questions might lead to disputes, and that the adjustment of the forms of colonial government by abstract rules might cause dissatisfaction. All questions of administration were to be decided by certain fixed principles, but in applying them, the. circumstances of the country must be considered. In such a commis sion all the responsibility of the Government would he merged; instead of this, it would be better to leave this, like other questions, to be dealt with in the first instance by the responsible Ministers of the Crown, and afterwards by the control and supervision of Parliament, which was in accordance with the free constitution of this country.

After a short reply from Sir W. Molesworth, the House divided, when the motion was negatived by 163 against 89.