ANNEXATION OF THE FIJI ISLANDS.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume II, Issue 78, 24 October 1874, Page 9

ANNEXATION OF THE FIJI ISLANDS.

Mb W. M'Abthub then moved — " That this House is gratified to learn that .Her Majesty's Government have yielded to the unanimous requests of the chiefs, native population, and white residents ut Fiji for annexation to this country, so far as to direct Sir Hercules Robinson, to proceed to those islands with a view to the accomplishment of that object." The motion was seconded by Mr Bail • Oochrane, but opposed by Sir C. Dilke, who moved, as an aineii. icnt — "That this House consider that, having regard to the existence in the case of Fiji of difficulties caused by the necessity of ' subjugating' and removing 20,000 ferocious mountaineers, and by the fact that domestic slavery is pronounced by Commodore G-oodenough and Consul Layard, in their report, to be ' the foundation of social order ' in Fiji, it is necessary that great caution should be used in approaching the subject of annexation." Sir F. Goldsmid seconded the amendment, contending that no proof had been adduced that there was anything approaching to a unanimous desire on the part of the chiefs, native population and white residents for annexation. Mr Gladstone having expressed his regret that the Government had not at once stated their views on the subject, observed that the motion, if carried, would commit the House to annexation — not at the instance of the responsible Ministers of the Crown, but by the voluntary and gratuitous act of a private member. He objected to this, and he also demurred to being called upon to express his gratification when, on the contrary, the animating sentiment of his mind was oue of vexation at what he regarded as an unwise proceeding. The question was in many of its aspects surrounded with difficulty, and possibly might lead to financial and other complications similar to those which we had already encountered in New Zealand. Mr J. Lowther stated that the Government could give no sanction to the motion, and consequently recomended that it should be withdrawn. The question was one which properly belonged to the responsible Ministers of the crown, and he assured the House that under no circumstances would the Government undertake the administration of the affairs of any country in which slavery was allowed to prevail. If the cession of Eiji should ever take place it must be on virtually unconditional terms. If, however, the session of the Fiji Islands ever took place, it would be determined by the Government on their own responsibility, and without any attempt to make Parliament responsible for their acts. At the same time the House might rest satisfied that the utmost caution would be exercised. Mr Knatchbull-Hugessen was satisfied with the assurance of the Under Secretary that the Government would proceed with caution, and recommended that the question should be left in their hands. Sir W. Lawson, in an amusing speech, protested against the House of Commons being called upou at such a moment to consider such a question. The House was worn out with a session the first portion of which was devoted to the discussion of a bill to regulate public-houses, and the second portion to a bill to regulate public worship Uuder these circumstances they were asked to annex a country in which there were 20,000 ferocious hill cannibals and 150,000 converted cannibal Methodists, between whom an issue would be raised as to whether the 20,000 hill cannibals were to cab the 150,000 converted Methodists, or the latter were to destcoy the former. After a lew words from Mr Mundella in favor of the motion, Mr M' Arthur expressed his willingness to withdraw it, but to this Sir C. Dilke objected. Eventually the House divided, and the amendment of the lion, baronet having been rejected by 81 to 28 the original motion was negatived without a division*