MILITARY DEFENCE OF THE COLONIES.

Wellington Independent, Volume XIV, Issue 1442, 27 July 1860, Page 5

MILITARY DEFENCE OF THE COLONIES.

[From the ' Home News' May 18.]

The report of the commission appointed to inquire into the principles which should regulate the defences of the colonies has been published. The commission consisted of Mr. George A Hamilton, Mr. John Robert Godley, aud Mr. T. Frederick Elliot. Thq first two gentlemen sign the report, and the third does not agree with it entirely, and appends a memorandum. The commissioners who sign the report say that the colonies of Great Britain m;iy be said, speaking generally, to have been free from the obligation of contributing, cither by personal service or money payment, towards their own defences, a state of things which they believe to have no parallel or precedeot in the case of any other organised community of which the history is known. Thej enlarge a good deal on this, and then state the general principles on which they think alterations in the existing system should be based. These are to the effect that colonies should contribute to the expenses of their own defence. The commissioners propose to divide the colonies (so culled) into two classes. The first class would consist of military posts, in which, for objects altogether independent of and distinct from the defence of the particular countries in which they are situated, the Imperial Government thinks it necessary to maintain garrisons. The second class would comprise all the rest of the colonies, that is, all those where troops are stationed primarily, if not exclusively, for the defence of the lires, liberties, and properties of their inhabitants. They propose that, as regards these colonies, the system of defence should be founded on iwo simple principles — colonial management aud joint contribution at an uniform rate. The Imperial Government should call upon each colony to decide on the nature of its own defences, and the amount of its ganison, and should offer to assist it by bearing a share of the entire cost. It seems to the commissioners essential that this arrangement, if adopted at all, should be uniformly applied. If it were adopted some colonies •light choose to form a militia, or to have a corps enlisted for local service, like, e.y , the " Canadian Rifles." In these cases they would organise and pay their forces as they might think fit, aud the Imperial contributions would be paid into the colonial exchequer without further reference than would be necessary to satisfy ourselves that they were expended in accordance with the agreement. Other colonies might prefer being garrisoned by troops of the line, aud paying their fixed share of the entire expense of such troops. In these cases the Imperial Government would first consider whether it could spare the.ii ; and would assure itself that the number asked for was sufficient for its purpose, and not open to the objectioßS which exist to small and scattered garrisons, and also that the force would be adequately provided for as regards pay, allowances, and barracks : and it would only send the troops in case of there being no objection on any of these grounds. It would also be necessary to have a clear understanding that all troops so sent would be at the disposal of the j Imperial Government, in case any emergency should require them to be withdrawn. From this outline the reader will gather the geueral bearing of the report ; and in a few passages will place him in possession of some of its most important details. The maiu object of the committee, it will be remembered, was 10 consider a plan by which the respective liabilities of the War Department and the various colonial Governments iv respect to military expenditure should be defined, with a view to the convenience aud interests of both, such plan to be modified in its application accordiug to the circumstances of each colony. The hist points that appear to have struck the committee (we must be understood as quoting the report signed by Mr. Hamilton aud Mr. Godlej) is the inadequacy of the contributions of our colonies towards their own defences, and the inequalities of the system as amongst the colonies themselves: —

For example, tbe colony of Vicloria paid in 1857-58 about two-thirds of its ordinary military expenditure, and has this year voted large sums for fortifications. Iv the same year Ceylon paid about two-tifths, and Canada one-iiflh part, respectively, of their whole military expenditure ; while Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Tasmania, New Zealand, aud many other colonies, paid nothing at all. Above all, tbeie is the gigantic anomaly of the expenditure on the Cape. We canuot avoid calling the especial attention of Her Majesty's Government to tbe drain on Biitish resources which haa iestal-

ted from oar undertaking the defence of this colony, and to the inadequacy of the benefits resulting to British interests.

Another anomaly exists in the issue of" colonial allowances" to her Majesty's troops: — In some colonies, viz.. Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, Ceylon, and Mauritius, rery liberal allowances are given by the Colonial Governments to tke officers, and, in the three first cases, to the men, over and above what they are entitled to by regulation. The results of this exceptional liberality are : — 1. That the Imperial Government is in a manner forced to gire corresponding, allowances in neighbouring colonies although it may nut consider them to be called for. This is actually the case as regards Tasmania and New Zealand, where the Secretary of State decided that the time was come for such allowances to be discontinued ; but where it was found practically impossible to carry that decision into effect so long as the neighbouring colonies continued to give them. 2. That troops serving in the colonies of which the Governments are not so liberal are placed at an invidous and unjust disadvantage; there is as much reason for given extra allowances at Jamaica and Demarara as there is at Ceylon or Mauritius, although the former do not choose to give them, and the latter do. 3. That the remuneration given to the Queen's troops, enlisted for general service, is made to fluctuate at the pleasure of colonial Governments, and according to the state of their finances ; which appears to us objectionable aud improper.

Mr. Elliot, as above stated, differs from bis colleagues, and in the subjoined passages will be found the substance of his objections : —

Three main principles appear to me to be laid down in the report ; first, that we cannot expect our colonial possessions to be made defensible at all points, and atall times ; secondly, that some few posts, especially valuable for Imperial purpuses, should be dealt with exceptionally, and not included in any general scheme of colonial contribution ; but, thirdly, that the whole remainder of our colonies, without distinction or exception ought to pay one uniform proportion of their military expenditure.

In the first of these propositions I cordially concur. No success in war, but rather disaster, would be likely to ensue from scattering the land forces of the empire over the numerous outlying possessions of a great mava time and colonising State, such as Great Britain. Her colonial dominion rests on' her naval supremacy. The mistress of the seas is mistress of whatever colonies she pleases to hold or to take, and if ever she ceases to be mistress of the seas, it is not forts or garrisons which will save her colonies-

The second proposition states that the military posts are exceptional, but does not state whether it is meant they ought to be exempt from contribution. Qn this point, however, an expression of opinion seems to be desirable, and I will venture to offer one. All of the following appear to me places which, irrespectively of any intrinsic value as colonies, may be deemed stations important to the general strength of the empire — The Mediterranean Possessions, Mauritiits.Ceylon, Hongkong, Cape of Good Hope, Bermuda, and St. Helena. lii the year 1857, these places contributed a sum total of £152,419 towards their military expenses. My opinion is, that we are not called upon to strike off this class of receipts from the British Exchequer; .

Frora the third proposition I am compelled to differ. I cannot think that the same fixed proportion ought to be contributed by all colonies whatsoever, regardless of their inherent differences.

Suppose that some of the richer colonies, such as those in Australia, paricularly require troops, and are willing to contribute two-thirds of the expense, must we reject the offer if others contribute only one-half ? Or, again, suppos. ing that some of the minor colonies urgently need troops, but are unable to contribute inoie than a quarter of their expense, must we either refuse the troops, or reject the contribution, merely because other colonies pay more ? Uniformity is good, where circumstances are uniform ; but where they differ it seems to me reasonable that practice should differ also ; and as to the equity of the matter, surely it is quite as unjust to apply a uniform rule to different cases, as to apply a varying rule to cases which

are alike

Now, nothing can' be more diversified, and, especially m<>re unequal, than the condition of the British colonies ; they are exposed, some more, some less, to foreign invasion : some more aud others less, to perils from natives ; the population in one kind of colonies is dense, in another scattered ; in some it is peaceful, iv others troublesome, and in a few it sprang from convicts sent out for the convenience of this country ; again, in certain colonies this popalation is British, in others foreign ; in part of them it is wholly white, in part almost wholly coloured, and in many it consists of a large proportion of both ; above all, some are rich and some are poor ; is it surprising, with colonies of such an infinite variety of condition, that both their demands for military assistance should be different, aud their power of contribution unequal P

With respect to the Australian colonies, Mr Elliott enters into somo particulars : —

In this group, and although dwelling iv different colonies, yet the majority of them in close neighbourhood, there are no less than 1,000,000 of settles. It is needless to say that they can bo in no danger of subjugation. The European Power would be very stioug which undertook to conquer 1,000,1 it K) of Englishmen living at the antipodes. But they very properly desire to protect themselves against partial descents, and injury to their homes and property, and since the rumours of European wars they have shown gieat ardour and resolution on the subject. It would be the greatest mistake, in my opiuion, to doubt the spirit and self-reliance of any of our large European settlements.

In the Australi in colonies the principle has been laid down that alter fixing a number of troops to be assumed as the quota required for Imperial purposes, all additional force sought for by. the local governments should be paid for (provided that this country can spare them) by the colonies themselves. Accordingly, four companies have been assigned to New South Wales and four to Victoria, and those colonies are to pay for the whole of the expense beyond that strength. South Australia has just asked for troops, and has been apprised that it must submit to the sane rule, which there seems no reason to expect that it will dispute. Tasmania does not pay, because it still comprises a large, population of convict origin, and it has been thought fair that its security should be provided for at the Impeiiul charge. For how loug a time and to what extent this ground should continue to be admitted will be practi. cal questions, on the recurrence of each successive year, for ihe discretion of her Majesty's advisers. In Western Australia there are only a company of the line, part of a company of

Sappers, and a few enrolled pensioners, em* ployed to guard English convicts. 0/ New Zealand he does not speak so conclusively : —

Setting aside convict settlements, this is the only colony connected with the Australian group to which the principle has not been applied that an English quota being fixed, all additional troops are to be defrayed from local sources. New Zealand has hitherto been lesv wealthy than the others, and }s in peculiar circumstances on account of its aboriginal inhabitants. The proportion of Europeans to Maoiies, is, however, continually increasing, and the longer that our rule is maintained in tranquillity, the more must the natives be supposed to become confirmed in habits of peace and order. This would be a reason fur reducing the Imperial garrison, and for entrusting the security of the European inhabitants chiefly to their own prudence and justice in dealing with the uatives in time of quiet, and to their spirit in case of disturbance. On tbe other hand, if a piemature or excessive diminution of troops should be followed by disaster to our countrymen in New Zealand, public opinion would probably condemn the measure. Between these conflicting considerations, it appears to me to be the task of statesmen to divine the course which may be best suited to the circumstances at the time at which they have to form their decision.