The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-26 00:00:00

GIBRALTAR.

Lord J. RUSSELL, in answer to an hon. member,
stated that a despatch had been received relative to the
Government of Gibraltar which would be laid on the
table in the course of a few days.
VICTORIA GOVERNMENT BILL.

The house then went into committee on this bill.
The preamble was postponed.
The first and second clauses were agreed to after a
short discussion.

On clause three being put, which proposed a distinc-
tion between local and imperial legislation,
Mr. ADDERLEY proposed to leave out the clause
altogether.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that he had stated on a former
occasion that there would be great difficulty in ,making a
distinction between Imperial and kcal legislation for the
colonies, and he owned that he could not, notwithstanding
the high authority of his right hon. friend at the head of
the Board of Works, see the force of the discrimintion
which he had at onetime attempted to draw. He thought,
too, that even if we were 0 make such a distinction it
would be more hurtful than beneficial to the colonies. The
hon. member for South Staffordshire (Mr. Adderley) had
said that there were many cases which appeared to be of an
Imperial nature, but upon which local legislation had acted
very beneficially. He instanced the case of the " Canada
rebellion claims;" but if the house were to adopt the sug-
gestion and mae the distinction which had been laid
down, it would still be necessary that the governor of the
colony should send home the bills in order to receive
the sanction from Government. But on the other
hand there might be cases which would trench so
much upon the prerogative of the Crown as to be incon-
sistent with our legislation, which would be a serious evil
if left in the hands of the colony without any supervision
from the Home Government. To avoid the difficulty of
discrimination, the plan proposed by the hon. member in-
volved even a ;till greater difficulty, as he proposed to take
away all distinctions whatever, and leave it entirely to-the
discretion of the governor to agree to any bill which he
might think fit. Now he (Lord J. Russell) was not disposed
to place such unlimited confidence in the governors of our
colonies as that which the hon. member proposed toylace
in them. It might often happen that, with-the best inten-
tiona and with the soundest judgment, the governor of a
colony might find popular opinion so strong, that he would
be unable to resist giving his' assent to any bill which
might be brought before him. Now, with respect to the
grievance alleged to be connected with the present plan,
he found that only four acts had been disallowed by the
Government at' home since 1850, none of which were
measures of any vital importance. As an instance of the
evil which might result' from the plan of the hon, member
for South Staffordshire, suppose it were proposed by the
colony to place her Majesty's forces in the colony under
some local authority, it would certainly be very inconve-
nient if the governor should be induced to give his consent
to such a measure, as by giving his consent it would imme-
diately become law. From all he had heard from persons
with whom he had had any communication, he did not
think any strong feeling existed in the colonies on the sub-
ject, and he hopedthe committee would agree to the clause,
and not take away from the Crown the exercise of that
prerogative which he considered to be exceedingly useful'
in the government of the colonies. (Hear.)
Mr. LOWE thought that the noble lord ought not to
allow himself to be influenced by any statements which had
been made to him on this subject, as from all he (Mr.
Lowe) knew of the parties who had made these representa-
tions, he did not consider 'their opinion such as, could be
acted upon beneficially by the Government at home. He
considered the clause as a relic of the old oppressive sys-
tem under which our colonies had been governed. He
firmly believed that till this clause was removed from the
bills affecting our colonies, peace and prosperity would not
long continue to exist in them. The main point to which
ho objected in the present clause was that it would have
the effect of giving the governor power to give his assent
to any bill passed by the colonial legislature, and after
so giving his assent he would send the bill home to the
Government of this country, where it might be disallowed
by the Colonial Secretary, and that which had been law
in the colony for one or two years might be repealed at
the end of that time by an act of the Imperial legislature'
at home. Great evil constantly resulted from the uncer-
tainty which prevailed as to what was and what was not
to be considered as to the law of the colonies. The noble
lord the Secretary for the Colonies had stated that only
four bills had been disallowed since 1850, but it was not
the number of the bills that was disallowed which made
the grievance, but the power to disallow that produced
constant uncertainty, which caused so much evil to the
colonies. He should most cordially support the amend-
ment for the omission of the clause. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON said that he considered that a
great deal of weight which would naturally attach to what
fell from the hon. member for Kidderminster, in conse-
quence of his great experience in the AuStralian colonies,
was a good deal lessened by the personal feelings and re-
collections which appeared constantly to influence the re-
marks which be addressed to the house on the subject of
colonial matters. The hon. member had thought it right
to tell the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) not to attach import-
ance to statements which had had been made to him by
gentlemen who were connected with the bill. He (Sir John
Pakington) thought it right that the house should under-
stand who those parties were to whom the hon.eentlem an bad
referred. He had referred to a body of gentlemen,
intimately connected with the Australian colonies,
and who in consequence of that connection had associated
themselves together to attend to Australian in-
terests, more particularly to • the progress of this
bill now before Parliament. These gentlemen were in
number between seventy and eighty ; they were intimately
connected with the colony ; they were members of the Co-
lonial Legislative Council ; they were proprietors to the
amount of several millions of property in the colony, gentle-
men of the highest respectability, and who had taken part
in passing the bill through the colonial legislature. They
were all aware that the hon. member for Kidderminster
had great experience in New Soqth Wales, but he very
much doubted if he could adduce the opinion of any other
gentleman in ;this country who had been interested in this
colony which would be entitled to so much weight as that of
the large body of gentlemen to whom he had referred. He
would suggest to the hon. member for South Staffordshire,
whether he would not consider it proper to decline to press
his motion to a division, when the motion was one which
was not concurred in in opinion by the advisers of the
Crown, upon a subject closely affecting the prerogative of
the Crown ; for his own part he felt unable to resist the
views which had been expressed by the noble lord the Se-
cretary for the Colonies. If hjs hon. friend insisted on
pressing his motion, he certainly would vote against him.
Mr. LOWS denied that he had -paid apytl2ing aglibut

the character of the gentlemen who had formed the depu-
tation that had waited upon the noble lord (Lord J. Rus-
sell). He did not deny they were wealthy; on the con-
trary, it was because they were wealthy, and possessed of
such enormous property in land of a particular description,
that their opinions were not entitled to that weight which
the right hon. baronet appeared to attach to them.
Mr. WILLIAMS thought it had been incorrecty stated
that by this bill the prerogative of the Crown would be
affected. That, howeser, was not the object of the bill. It
was not the prerogative of the Crown which Was concerned,
but it was the power of her Majesty's Ministeis to do cer-
tain acts, upon many of which in all probability the
Crown was never consulted, and probably knew nothing
whatever about it. We had already gone too far in the
matter of interfering with the government of our colonies.
It was now high time to allow our colonial legislatures full
exercise of the rights which belonged to them. He should
support the amendinent of the hen. member. .
Mr. SCOTT said there was no doubt some difficulty ex-
isted in consequence of the present system of the governor
giving his assent to local bills, which were afterwards dis-
allowed at home; but these difficulties were rapidly dimi-
nishing in proportion to the increased celerity of communi-
cation which was now taking place between this country
and the colonies.
The committee divided on the amendment that the clause
be struck out of the bill.
For retaining the clause
Against it
Majority —72
Mr. MIALL then moved that all the words after " colony"
be left out of clause 4. The clause made it imperative to
provide for religious institutions, whereas he thought it
should be left.to future colonial legislatures to make such
provision or not, as they should deem fit.
Lord J. RUSSELL opposed the amendment. The clause
was framed in accordance with the determination of the co-
lonial legislature, and he did not think it would be right to
put an absolute restriction on the colonies in respect to the
provision they should make for their religious institutions.
Mr. LOWE objected to allow the present Legislative
Council to fetter all fritura Legislative Councils.
After a few words from several lion. members the com-
mittee divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority
The clause was agreed to, and also clauses 5 and 6, being
the remaining clauses of the bill.
The preamble having been postponed, the committee pro-
ceeded to consider the various clauses in the " scheduled
bill" appended thereto, being the measure sent home from
the colony.

The clauses to 43 inclusive were agreed to.
On clause 44, which has reference to the. regulation of
the boundaries of the colonies, being pioposed,
Mr. LOWE objected to the provisions contained in it, and
asked, how could the legislature of Port Phillip make re-
gulations respecting what the other colonies ought to do ?
Lord J. RUSSELL must own that the clause was very
defective, but was not prepared to strike it out.
The clause was agreed to, and also clauses 45 and 4G.
On clause 47, by which provision is proposed to be made
for the civil list,
Mr. MIALL proposed to omit from the amount the sum
intended to be appropi iated for religious purposes, and
with that view to reduce the sum named from 112,750&t0
57,750/.
Mr. BALL submitted that the sum could not be consi-
dered excessive when the value of money in tho colony was
taken into consideration. The colony had a revenue of
three millions, and had no debt ; and the sum proposed,
which amounted only to one-twenty-sixth part of the re-
venue, was not a subject for objection.
. _

The committee divided. The numbers were—
For the clause
Against it
Majority —42
Mr. LOWE objected to tb e forty-seventh paragraph of the
schedule, contending that the civil list had been obtained
from the colonial legislature under false pretences. He
should tiferefore move the omission of this paragraph.
Lord J. RUSSELL defended the paragraph, and the
principle on which it was founded, as providing equitable
compensation for public officers in cases where they wore
removed in consequence of the establishment of responsible
government.
Tho amendment was then negatived.
On paragraph 61,
Mr. ADDERLEY moved to omit the words, " or in the
said schedule hereunto annexed, D." His- object was to
leave the items referred to in the power of the colonial
legislature.
Sir J. PAKINGTON opposed the amendment.
The committee divided, when there were—
For the amendment 5B
Against it
Majority —26
The amendment was therefore negatived, and the words
referred to were inserted.
The paragraph was then ordered to stand part of the
bill, as were paragraphs 62 and 63.
The remaining provisions of the measure were agreed
to
without opposition, and the bill was reported to th house.