17

A.—l

observation of the Chief Secretary of Victoria, in his Memorandum of October 7th, 1871, that "No " attempt can be more hopeless than to induce free self-governed States to adopt exactly the same " opinions on such questions as free-trade and protection which the people of England happen to " entertain at that precise moment." Great Britain has, at various times, adopted different fiscal policies, in accordance with what seemed to her rulers suitable to the circumstances of the country; and there are not wanting persons who fail to see that there is any greater guarantee against modifications of the present free trade policy, than there was against the reversal of the policy of protection which at one time had an equal hold upon the minds of the people of the United Kingdom. When it is asserted, on behalf of Great Britain, that free trade is the only wise policy, it can hardly fail to be remembered that free-trade doctrines have made very little progress in other countries. And when Lord Kimberley urges as an argument against granting to the Colonies the powers they require, that a suspicion that they mean to resort, under those powers, to a protective policy, is likely to foster an unfriendly feeling between them and Great Britain, the thought naturally suggests itself, that if agreement with Great Britain's fiscal policy is necessary to the maintenance of friendly relations with her, there is scarcely a colony or country in the world with which she can be said to be on friendly .terms. The Colonial Treasurer shares with Lord Kimberley the desire that the Colonies should avoid doing anything calculated to alienate from them the cordial feelings of friendship entertained by the people of the United Kingdom; but he cannot understand how any such result is likely to follow from reciprocal arrangements between the Colonies. Possibly, a few persons interested in manufactures might feel aggrieved by one or two items of the Tariffs which would result from such arrangements ; but the great bulk of the people of the United Kingdom would surely not judge the Colonies by any such standard. It is within the knowledge of the great- mass of tho people of the United Kingdom, that it is the desire of the Colonial Governments to promote the prosperity of the Colonists ; and that they are anxious to secure as Colonists an unlimited number of the inhabitants of the United Kingdom. AVhatever direction the legislation of the Colonies may take, that legislation is not intended more for the benefit of the present Colonists than for the benefit of those who may come to the Colony from the United Kingdom, and who, as Colonists, would be eagerly welcomed. It would be an injustice to the good feeling of the great mass of the people of the United Kingdom, to suppose that they would resent as unfriendly the honest desire of the Colonists to guide their legislation in the direction which they believe best calculated to promote the welfare of the Colonies, and—through the interests which the Imperial country has in tho Colonies —the welfare of the Empire. It, is indeed, difficult to realise why the people of the United Kingdom should be alienated by the Australasian Colonies asking for only that which the British American Provinces already possess ; or because of the Australasian Colonists holding opinions which are held by those of British North America, and which have been held by the people of the United Kingdom. The question really seems to narrow itself to this —Should the theories of a comparatively modern school of economy outweigh the teachings of actual experience in the Colonies, backed by the recommendations of able practical men, including amongst their number officers in the Imperial service ? A brief resume of the case, so far as it relates to New Zealand and the Australian Colonies, will, the Colonial Treasurer believes, convince the Secretary of State that whilst the Colonies have been patient and respectful in their demands, they are not likely to recall them. It is some years since it was first felt by the Colonies that it was desirable there should be an interchange of Colonial productions. That feeling did not arise in connection with any commodity which Great Britain could, or can, supply. It arose principally in respect to the excellent wines which Australia produces; and as to which the people of New Zealand and Tasmania felt it a great hardship that a supply should be denied them, except upon payment of the same rate of import duty as was demanded upon wines the produce of far-distant and foreign countries. AVhen the question was looked into, it was found that the Consti-ututioii Acts of the several Australian Colonies expressly prohibited the imposition of differential duties, whilst the Constitution Act of New Zealand merely prohibited the imposition of any duties inconsistent with Her Majesty's treaty obligations. It seems probable that the different scope of the enactments in question was tho result of accident; and that, iv each case, what was meant was merely to prohibit Colonial legislation inconsistent with Her Majesty's treaty engagements. This supposition is borne out by the fact that the first opposition to the Colonies making reciprocal arrangements was based upon the ground that such arrangements would be opposed to some of the conditions of Treaties between Great Britain and foreign countries. The Legislature of New Zealand, holding strongly that there would not be such opposition, passed a Reciprocity Bill, which was reserved by the Governor for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure. Upon careful inquiry, it was found that tho view taken by New Zealand was correct; that the reserved Bill did not contain anything in conflict with tho foreign Treaties of Great Britain ; and, therefore, that legally, so far as New Zealand was concerned, there was no obstacle in the way of the desired legislation. But, inasmuch as a Colony cannot reciprocate with itself, New Zealand's legislation was necessarily fruitless, unless other Colonies were relieved of their disabilities. The question therefore is—Whether the Australian Colonies shall bo shut out from powers which New Zealand possesses, which the British American Provinces have for a long time exercised, and which, it is to be assumed, the Australian Colonies did not receive through their Constitution Acts, only because somebody supposed that such legislation would conflict with Imperial Treaty obligations, which supposition, after careful investigation, has been found not to be warranted ? Iv another form, the question is—Whether, on account of a new Imperial! policy, an accidental disability affecting only some of the Colonies, shall be continued and confirmed, to the injury of them .all? A new policy has not grown up in the Colonies. They are as loyal and true to the Empire as when their Constitution Acts were granted ; and the powers they all seek are asked for in a spirit which is in no sense hostile to the Empire, and which has not grown out of any feeling which can be construed into evidence of a desire to weaken the connection, or render less friendly the relations, between the Colonies and the Mother Country. Wellington, 15th November, 1872. Julius Arogel. 3—A. 1.