The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-11-13 00:00:00

s:sr STOURBRIDGE O.IE3SERRI

our material defences, We should be defenceless. lam not,
then, possessed by the fear that our Colonies will drag us
Into war. Wars generally spring out cf frontier quarrels,
and except in America we have no civilized nation on our
frontier, and our ship; while guarding our commerce, would
protect the shores of our Colonies, and, as I have already
stated, would greatly benefit by the use of their ports.. .
And this brings us to the practical question—are there any
means by which it is possible that these future Common-
wealths, when no longer dependent, can be united with us
and with one another? I may hasten at once to try to
answer this question; for if it can be answered, that
argument will be also met which I have already mentioned
—namely, that separation would stimulate the colonies to
greater progress and would increase that self-reliance.
Surely it cannot be denied that if it be possible to re-
place dependence by association, each member of the
federation would find in the common nationality at least
as much scope for its aspirations, as much demand for
the patriotism and the energy and the self-reliance of
its citizens, as it would if trying to obtain a dis-
tinct nationality for itself. But is this federation pos-
sible? There are many even of those who desire it who
think that it is not. This opinion chiefly depends upon the
difficulties of distance. If, however, these difficulties have
not prevented the government of a colony from
England, why must they prevent the association of
sele governing communities with England? A priori, it
might seem probable that the association would be
easier than the direct government. But distance is, in
itself, a very different matter from what it was
when this opinion was first entertained. The telegraph
has made communication of thought instantaneous with
Australia, and, doubtless, we shall soon send direct
•messages to New Zealand and the Cape; and as regards
the length of time required to travel to the end of the earth,
steam and the great circle sailing have diminished it
more than a half. Thirty years ago the average voyage to
Australia was four months; now we can get a reply to a
message in a day, and we can fetch a man back in six weeks.
But the geographical argument, I am well aware, cannot be
quite so easily dispoted of. It would not be stating it fairly
to make it depend solely upon the length of intervening
miles between the several regions. It is said that the
difference in local circumstances will produce such a dis-
agreement in institutions and social arrangements as would
make any political connexion undesirable. . To this remark
I can only reply that as yet this disagreement is not appa-
rent, that the enormous majority of colonists themselves
disclaim it, and that I can tee no ground for believing in
any irresistible tendency to its development. Judging
from what I have heard or read, and what little I have
myself seen, I should say that an Englishman or
a Scotchman or an Irishman and their children remain
English, Scotch, or Irish wherever they be; or, if there be
a change, it is that the distinct characteristics of the in-
habitants of the three kingdoms tend to be lost in their
common similarity. In the Province of Quebec we are con-
tinually reminded that Frenchmen can be loyal subjects to
the British Queen and strong supporters of the British con-
nexion; but in Toronto or Kingston, or other towns and vil-
lages of Upper Canada I had to look out for the St. Lawrence,
or the lakes, or the forest to feel that I was not at home.
Even in the States the difference is so completely on the
surface, and so quickly disappears, that it soon requires an
effort of the mind to remember that the farmers of the
West or the citizens of Boston are not as English as our-
selves. The fact is, English-speaking men and women look at
life and its problems, especially the problems of government,
with much the same eyes everywhere. Slavery distorted the
vision of many for a time, but now there is more difference
between the German and the British Monarchies and be-
tween the French and the American Republics than there
is between the British Monarchy and the American Republic.
Doubtless, society in the new communities is. and probably for
some time will be, more democratic than with us. Men start
more equally than in the old country, and it will take time
before it will be found out ;that one man rune faster than
another. But are not the tendencies at home also democratic
We c innot send over to Australia a ready-made aristocracy.
But we, too, have our democracy, and already we have found
it convenient that Australia tries democratic experiments
which help us to solve the problem with which we know we
must deal. If any one thinks that it is either probable or
desirable that Anglo-Saxon community should develope poli-
tical ideas opposed to these of our forefathers—for instance,
the Latin idea of an Emperor or elected despot—it would be
quite consistent for such a person to desire that our
Colonial Empire would be dissolved, in the hope that
emperors would be chosen by the new nations. But be-
lieving, as I do, that, on the whole, representative govern-
ment is the best form of government, that by which orderly
progress is best secured, I, for my part, rejoice in the con-
viction that a common preference for this form of govern-
ment is one of the strongest ties which bind together all
who speak our language. Yet many millions of our race
prefer a Republic to a Monarchy. Yes, but remember these
facts :—First, that we so treated their fathers that we
almost forced them to be Republicans ; secondly, that
many of them now acknowledge that at least it is a moot
question whether, as regards the real meaning of the word
and its true significance, our Limited Monarchy is not a
more complete Republic than their own ; and, lastly, that
the great majority of the colonists in America, Australia,and
Africa are as loyal to our Monarchy as we are ourselves, not
merely because they honour and respect our Queen. not
merely because of their personal feeling towards the Royal
Lady under whose rule they have grown from childhood
to lusty youth, but because they are as proud as we are of
the traditions of our history, and as convinced as we are of
the actual advantages of our hereditary Executive. In fact,
It seems to me to be not one of the least reasons for preserv-
ing our connexion with the colonies that what may be termed
the local tendencies, very generally the result of local selfish-
ness, will both with them and with us be, in a measure,
checked and counteracted and overbalanced by great Im-
perial interests—lmperial because they are great. .. .

I am not now making a speech on present colonial ques-
tions but I may venture to allude very briefly to a few
principles which I think ought to actuate our policy if we
look forward to a permanent union. We must continue, by
every means, to strengthen the colonies; therefore we must
try to give them the strength of union with one another
wherever possible—as already in the Dominion, as we trust
may soon be the case at the Cape, and as here-
after may be accomplished in Australia. We ought
also to do our utmost to increase their moral strength by en-
couraging them in self reliance and in the fulfilment of all
the duties of citizenship. Nor must we suppose that we can
give this right to self-government by. halves. We must
allow them to manage, or even, in our opinion, to mismanage
their own affairs But, while fully admitting this right of
self-government, I think we may, in honest friendliness, ask
them to carefully consider any internal measure which
might appear to be contrary to Imperial interests. . . .

Referring to the possible advantages of an Anglo-American
alliance, the hon. gentleman continued :—I gladly repeat
in Edinburgh what I ventured last year to say in
New York, that my belief in the good that would
follow from such an alliance to Americans, to Eng-
lish, and to the world is not the least powerful of
those beliefs which make me think politics worth pur-
suing. I repeat, also, my conviction that the time will
come when this alliance will be marked by some acknow-
ledged relation between our empire and the Republic closer
than between us or them and other nations. But I do
not believe that the way to arrive at this alliance or
this confederation is by encouraging our colonies to disregard
the advantages of our limited Monarchy, or by tempting them
to a policy of disintegration, or by yielding to the demands
of local selfishness, or by so isolating them that they would
be exposed to foreign solicitation, if not placed under the
influence of foreign intrigue. And now, one more remark and
I have done. Supposing your hope fulfilled, I may be asked
would the world be the gainer? You bout of the long
British coast line ; you remind us of the British lion's
share of the temperate zone. You do not forget the
vast regions and many millions of subject races under
our rule. Do you, then, desire to intoxicate us with that
vainglorious love of empire which has filled the pages
of hastory with crimes and their punishments What
is there in our race that will make humanity safe
under its guidance? Is it well that we should have this
power at which you appear to aim? Rave we proved our-
selves so humane, so forbearing, so unselfish, so
Christian-minded that ewe, any more than any other
nation, can be trusted to use this power to ad-
vance that which is true or just or right? Well,
to this remark I can make but one reply. Our success
in the future—nay, not merely our sucoesa, our safety—
so great are our responsibilities—our existence depends
upon the fulfilment of our duty—not its perfect fulfil-
ment, that is beyond our reach, but on such fulfilment as
is possible. And we shall not fulfil our duty if we
attempt to avoid or escape or disown the responsi-
bilities of oar position. There are two conditions of this
position which I must ask you to bear in mind. If I leave
you any more impressed with them than I found you my
object will have been gained, One of these conditions we
share with other civilized nations, The other applies
especially to ourselves. If there be one fact more evident
than another in that page of the story of humanity that is
now being written it is the strength of what we may call the
national force—the tendency, the longing of men speaking ene
tongue and having a common ancestry to bind themselves
together in a common nationality. But remember that, with
the exception of ourselves, this tendency is making itself
felt in the creation and maintenance of enormous standing
armies. Ti would appear as though the nations of Europe
suppose that they can onlyihold themselves from disruption by
being armed camps. Now, turn to the other fact peculiar to
ourselves. Our islands are so well situated for colonizing,
their inhabitants are so industrious, so persevering, so pos-
sessed with energy, so imbued with freedom, so gifted, in a
word, with the colonising faculty, that we have encircled the
earth by the free and orderly communities we have founded.
Remember also that, if these communities remain united,
they are so strong in their inherited courage, and are so
quickly increasing in strength that it will matter not
to any of them how quickly soever thsse armed and
drilled nations also may grow. Remember also
that science has brought together the ends of the
earth, and made it possible of a nation to have oceans roll
between its provinces. Why, then, should we alone among
the nations set ourselves against that desire for nationality
which is one of the most powerful ideas of the age? What
right have we to entairUpon the men of our race the dangers
and disadvantages of disunion? Why should we reject the
gifts of science and neglect those possibilities of union
which steam 'rind electricity afford? The time is come
that all Governments, even military and despotic Govern-
ments, muss, without much delay, do what their subjects
wish. Can we not, by the example of our peaceful union
tempt those subjects to induce their Governments to dis-
arm? May not we and our colonists together, by the exercise
of some mutual forbearance, by willingness to incur some
mutual sacrifice, hope to transform our Colonial Empire into
a federation of peaceful, industrious, law-abiding common-
wealths, so that in due timo our British brotherhood may
prove to the world, as no nation has ever proved before,
"how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell to-
gether in unity,"
The address, which lasted an hour and twenty
minutes, was listened to throughout with marked at-
tention and frequently applauded.

terminated the better. (Cheers.) I make that obser-
vation quite irrespective of any Act of Parliament.
The whole scope and object of the Act is to encourage
the investment of capital by tenants, by giving them
such security as the law can afford for the return of
that capital. I can scarcely conceive any landlord
being so shortsighted as to object to that investment of
capital, if judiciously applied. Let us hope, therefore,
we shall not hear of landlords generally contracting
themselves out of the Act, provided they have the
good fortune to be associated with an enterprising and
skilful tenantry. (Cheers.) From the best and
fullest consideration that I could give to the Act,
I am persuaded that it would have that
effect indirectly, though perhaps not directly—
that it will induce landlords and tenants to
come together to frame agreements on a very liberal
basis. (Cheers.) According to my own judgment, the
best agreement both for landlord and tenant is long
leases with liberal covenants, and that is far better
than any scheme Parliament can devise. If, through
the operation of the measure of last Session, long
leases with liberal covenants shall become the rule and
not the exception, Parliament will have conferred a
lasting benefit on the agricultural interest. When I
speak of the agricultural interest. I desire to include in
that term not only landlords and tenants, but also the
not least important branch of it, the agricultural
labourers. (Cheers.)
Mr. Hunter Rodwell, M.P., concurred generally in
Mr. Brand's remarks, adding that legislation on agri-
tural subjects was far from complete. He discounten-
anced the theory that the produce of the country
could be doubled.
Mr. Marten, M.P. for the borough, said it was a
great achievement to have the presumption of law in
favour of the tenant, and said the Speaker deserved the
thanks of the country for having called attention to the
true meaning of the Act.

SUGGESTED EPITAPH
(For those who fell at Balaklaea).

Death was our end, that end was great,
And saved us from a sadderfete.—Prsal.