The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 20, 1864.

on what
B ApritinToTiptLLOireruateenkaendt-thGeenUenradltrGSoeucgreht,ary for
c.O War
.:haa
been appointed to the 2d Dragoons ; and moved an address
lOC papers. The hon, gentleman laid great stress en the
circumstance that GaLlral Gough had never served in a
cavalry regiment, for, though he had been for some time in
the 3d Light Dragoons, he never did a single day's duty
with that gallant corps,
Col. DICKSON would not say ono word either for or
against the appointment of General Gough, but he consi-
dered that discussions in that house on military appoint-
ments were very much to be deprecated. (near, hear.)
Mr. B. OSBORNE said General Gough's services almost
comprised the history of the successful campaigns of this
country during the last 42 years. During 40 years of that
period, indeed, he had been engaged in active service abroad,
and his appointment to the 2d Dragoons did equal honour
to the Horse Guards and to the genert:lohpipmrosevlafi.
of(Cthhoeers.)
Mr. P. DAWSON expressed h
ap-
pointment.
The Marquis of lIARTINGTON observed that, after
what had fallen from the hon. member for Liskeard (Mr, B.
Osborne) it would be unnecessary for hint to trouble the
house by enumerating the eminent services which General
. Gough had rendered to the country. As for the rule sup-
posed to exist to the effect that infantry officers could not
be appointed colonels of cavalry regiments, ho could state

that no such rule existed either M the Horse Guards er the
War-office.

After a few words from Sir J. SHELLEY, the subject was
allowed to drop.
CAPTURE OF A SHIP UNDER THE CONFEDE-
RATE FLAG IN BRITISH WATERS.
Mr. HALIBt RTON asked the Under Secretary for
Foreign Affairs for information relative to the capture of
a ship under the Confederate flag by a Federal vessel of
war, within the harbour of Fankbar, in Nova Scotia, and
under the guns of the fort ; and whether complaint had been
made of the outrage to the Government of the United States,
and with what result. The hon. n'ember etatod that the
people in the North American colonies were alarmed for
their safety in consequence of the inroads which were con-
stantly made upon them by parties belonging to the United
States—parties who cared nothing for law and order, and
who thought they wore privileged to commit every sort of
outrage with entire impunity. He did not wish to inquire
whether this was a piratical act, or whether it was a lawful
capture, nor did he want to inquire into the subsequent pro-
ceedings of the Court of Admiralty at Halifax; but simply
to call the attention of her Majesty's Government to the
state of alarm which prevailed in the colonies, and to ascer-
tain if any proceedings were taken to prevent outrages of
this character.

DENMARK.—TREATY OF LONDON.
Mr. KINGLAKE called attention to the way in which
the operations of the treaty of London of the Bth May, 1852,
was effected by a note addressed on the same day by Baron
Brunnow to the Danish Minister at the Court of St. James's,
and asked whether the communication of the note to her
Majesty's Government had been received by them with ac-
quiescence, or had been the occasion of correspondence
which could be laid upon the table of the house. The hon.
gentleman said that, at a time when the Treaty of London
was a matter of complexity and confusion, he might be
pardoned for endeavouring to bring to:the knowledge of the
house a transaction which had occurred on the same day
the treaty was signed, but which, so far as ho knew, had
not yet been communicated. This was a treaty which could
have no application until the King of Denmark had taken
the necessary measures for changing the succession, not
only to Denmark Proper, but to the two Duchies which
were subject to all this dispute. He believed there was a
growing opinion among the people of this country that it
would be grievous indeed if there were any words in that
treaty which could lead Groat Britain to force by diplomatic
pressure upon a reluctant people a ruler chosen by diplo-
macy. His present object was to bring before the house
the true tenor of the arrangements which had been entered
into on the Bth of May, 1852. To make this clear, it was
necessary to give the house the report of the Warsaw pro-
tocol. The protocol of Warsaw, far from being a conces-
sion by.the Emperor of Russia, was rather a retractation of
the concession formerly made by the Emperor Paul. But
whether that was the true interpretation or not, it was quite
certain tnat the protocol of Warsaw did carefully seek to
keep alive the rights and claims of the Emperor of Russia,
in the event of the failure of issue on the part of the King
of Denmark. There were at the time as many as 17 lives
intervening between the succession to Denmark and the
Emperor of Russia ; but by the protocol of Warsaw 14 of
those intercepting persons were put aside. Ile had heard
the noble lord at the head of the Government had approved
of the Warsaw protocol, but that he had ceased to bo a sup-
porter of it. The treaty ot London dealt only with the suc-
cession, and in a general way indicated how Europe should
act in case of failure of issue on the part of the King of Den-
mark ; and it dealt with it in this manner, setting forth
that, in the event of the failure of issue on the part of the
King of Denmark, it would be competent for the King of
Denmark to propose new arrangements to Europe, and this
now arrangement was to be taken into consideration by the
parties to the treaty, by which the initiative was given to
the King of Denmark. Accordingly the second article of
the treaty had been relied upon as a safeguard, and Lord
Clarendon, when speaking on the subject, declared that the
second article of the treaty guarded against the dangers
arising from a failure of issue on the part of the King of
Denmark. But,ou the very day when the treaty was signed,
and while the ink of the treaty was not yet dry, another
paper was prepared, which was signed by Baron Brunnow,
and addressed by him to the Danish Minister at the Court
of London, which, if acquiesced in by the several parties of
the treaty, would positively annul the second article of it,
and would du more, for it would bring into force and make
obligatory on the King of Denmark the stipulations of the
Warsaw protocol. The hon. member read a translation of
the note, the purport of which was that the terms of the
protoc 1 of Warsaw held good between Russia and Den-
mark, and asked whether a similar note had been addressed
to her Majesty's Government and acquiesced in.
MINISTERIAL EXPLANATIONS.
Mr. LAYARD said the hen. member (Mr. lialiburton)
had with great propriety abstained from making any re-
marks upon that part of the subject which was still under
judicial inquiry. With regard to the seizure of the vessel,
ho had stated accurately what took place. It was well known
that some agents of the Confederate States took a passage
on board the Chesapeake, seized upon the captain and crew,
killed ono of the officers, and wounded two others, and car-
ried off the vessel. They then took refuge in a harbour of
Nova Scotia. Au American gunboat entered that harbour
and recaptured the vessel illegally and by force. As soon
as information was received in this country of what had
taken place the Government sent instructions to Lord Lyons
to ask for immediate explanation and redress. He might,
however, state that long before the instructions which were
sent to Lord Lyons were received, Mr. Seward, of his own
accord, having heard of the occurrence, made a communi-
cation to Lord Lyons, at first doubtful as to what the facts
really were; but when the facts were ascertained Mr. Se-
ward made a full apology, expressed his regret, and that
part of the question terminated. Some time would elapse
before the papers would be ready, and as the country would
be anxious to receive information on the subject, ho would
road to the house Mr. Seward's dispatch and the answer to
it from the noble earl at the head of the Foreign-office.
"Department of State, Washington, Jan. 9, 1861.
"The undersigned Secretary of State of the United States
has the honour to present his respects to Right Hon. Lord
Lyons, accredited to this Government as the minister ple-
nipotentiary of her Britannic Majesty, and to state that he
submitted to the President certain papers which were
placed in the hands of the undersigned by his lordship on
the 2d day of this mouth, and which aro described as
follows :-1. Memorial of Susan Henry ; 2. Affidavit of
John E. Holt ; 3. Memorial of John E. Holt ; 4.
affidavit of John E. Holt ; 5, Provincial Secretary to Mayor
of Halifax, Dec. 19,1863 ; 6, Mayor of Halifax to Provincial
Secretary, Doc. 19, 1863 ; 7, Same to same, Dec. 22, 1863 ;
8, City Marshal to Mayor of Halifax, Dec. 21, 1863 ; 9,
Police-constable Hutt to City Marshal, Dec. 21, 1863. The
undersigned is authorised, in the first place, to express to
his lordship his appreciation of the delicacy of the manner in
which his lordship has thus, without formal complaint,
brought to the notice of this Government the fact that the
commissioner and other officers of the United States steamer
Ella and Annie, in their recent visit at Halifax in pursuit
of pirates who had captured the American steamer Chesa-
peake and taken refuge within British jurisdiction directly
violated the sovereignty of her Majesty by the assumption
of power and authority in the name of the United States,
as well on hoard the said steamer Chesapeake as on board
the British schooner Investigator while within British
waters, without having obtained consent thereto of the
authorities of her Majesty's Government there or elsewhere.
The undersigned observes that in some of these papers it is
represented that the acts of power and authority referred to
were attended with circumstances of severity, rigour, and
insult to British subjects. The undersigned, however,
thinks that it sufficiently appears from the papers that the
rigour and severity alleged were not greater than were
necessary to secure the persons of the pirates in pursuit of
whom the officers complained of were engaged, and to deliver
them up to the British authorities of that place. He hopes that
this view of the case may be taken by her Majesty's Govern-
ment. The undersigned would observe, in the next place,that
the Chesapeake and the prisoners were promptly delivered to
those authorities, in compliance with the instructions of this
department. The undersigned is further authorised to assure
her Majesty's Government, in the spirit of a former commu-
nication made by the undersigned to his lordship, relating to
the capture of the Chesapeake in British waters, that the
President disapproves and regrets the act of force, power,
and authority which was exorcised by the officers of the
Ella and Annie, within British waters, on the occasion
mentioned, as a violation of the law of nations and of the
friendly relations existing between the two countries, so
greatly to the satisfaction of the United States and to the
advantage of both nations.
"The President has reason to believe that the proceed-
ings thus disapproved wore taken by the officers concerned
under the influence of a patriotic and commendable zeal to
bring to deserved punishment outlaws who had offended
against the peace and dignity of both countries. The Presi-
dent, while ho recognises this circumstance as modifying
the character of tho transaction, and mitigating the censure
to bo bestowed upon it, nevertheless freely concedes that it
does not constitute a justification for the violation of the
sovereignty of Great Britain, which those officers have com-
mitted. Ho has, therof ore, directed that they shall be cen-
sured for this violation, and he will take such other moans
as may bo necessary to prevent a recurrence of the griov-
ances complained of. Fully determined to make all the
amends that aro due to Great Britain in the premises, the
undersigned will await the consideration of her Majesty's
Government upon the case as it has now bean submitted.
" The undersigned avails himself, &ea Sec.,
(Signed) " IVAt. 11. SEIVAII.D."
" Foreign-office, Feb. 3, 1861.
"My Lord,—Your several dispatches of the numbers and
dates specified in the margin, respecting the case of the
Chesapeake, together with the papers which have been re-
ceived by the Secretary of State for the Colonies from the
Colonial authorities in North America, have boon submitted
to the law officers of the Crown for their opinion on the dif-
ferent questions raised in them.
" The greater part of those questions have reference to
the administration of the law in the colonies ; and I need
not trouble your lordship with the view taken of them by
the law officers of the Crown.
" T he Secretary of State for the Colonies, to whom I have
communicated the opinion of the law officers, will doubtless
give full instructions to the several colonial authorities.
"The readiness which Mr. Seward, in his first communi-
cation with your lordship, manifested to make all proper
and suitable reparation for the acts of the United States

officers has rendered it unnecessary for me to insist upon
the questions which, under other circumstances, it would
have been my duty at once to instruct your lordship to dis-
cuss with the Government of the United States, namely,
the wilful and flagrant violation of her Majesty's territory
by the officers of the tnited States cruiser Ella and Annie.
"The Government of the United States having subse-
quently made, as reported in your lordship's dispatch of
the 12th of January a full apology for the violation of
her Majesty's territory, committed by its officers in the case
of the Chesapeake, it is only necessary for me to authorise
your lordship to state to Mr. Seward, that her Majesty's
Government accept the apology in the same spirit in which
it has been offered, and are truly glad that the matter has
been settled in a manner honourable to both parties, and
calculated to improve the friendly relations which her,Ma-
jesty's Government are always anxious to maintain with the
Government of the United States.--i am, &c.,
(Signed) "RUSSELL.
" The Lord Lyons, G.C.8.,
Ho (Mr. Layard) trusted that the apology and the answer
would prove satisfactory to the hon. member and to the
country. (Hoar. hear.) His hon. friend behind him (Mr.
Kinglake) had made an extraordinary discovery in a mys-
terious manner, (A. laugh.) He was at a loss to know what
mysterious sources of information his hon. friend possessed ;
but he had taken the trouble to make a translation of a
document which, with that readiness to assist which was
never wanting in the librarian of the house, ho could have
immediately obtained in the library. That document, and
the translation of it, had been laid on the table of the house
in 1856 on the motion of Mr. Hutt. The hon member would
find the protocol •f Warsaw and the note from Baron
Brunnow addressed to the Danish minister. That note and
the enclosure were communicated to the Earl of Malmes-
bury when at the Foreign Office, and acknowledged by him.
No correspondence has taken place except by way of simple
acknowledgment by the Earl of Malmesbury. It would not
bo proper for him to follow the honourable gentleman in
his view of the nature and value of the Warsaw proctocol.
That was a question of great importance, which it would
not become him at the present moment to enter upon.
Mr. ROEBUCK said that the discovery made by the
hon. member opposite belonged to the family of mare's-
nests. It was indeed a very large one, but it was large
only on account of the inflation which it had received on
this occasion. Suppose a contract were entered into be-
tween A and B ; and A, behind B's back, wrote a note to
C ; could any ono suppose that that note would alter the
contract between A and B ? That was really the nature of
the transaction as stated by the hon. member. A treaty
was made between five Powers. Tho Minister of ono of
them chose to write a note to the Minister of the King of
Denmark about it. But the treaty remained just as it was ;
and the note remained waste paper, which the hon. gentle-
man had amused himself by translating. (Laughter.)
The house then went into committee of supply.
BANK ACTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
INSANE PRISONERS' ACT AMENDMENT ACT.
The house then wont into committee on this bill.
Clause 1 was agreed to.
On clause 2,
Mr. G. HARDY moved an amendment to the second
clause to the effect that in the case of prisoners under sen-
tence of death, and certified by two or more visiting justices
to have become insane after conviction, tho truth of such
certificate should bo inquired into by three commissioners
to be appointed for that. purpose. The amendment led to
considerable discussion, and upon a division it was nega-
tived by 32 to 26. The several clauses of the bill were then
agreed to, and the bill was ordered to be reported to the
house.
The Warehousing of British Spirits Bill was read a
second time.
Mr. H. BRUCE obtained leave to bring in a bill to con-
firm certain provisional orders under the Land Drainage
Act, 1861; also a bill to authorise the inclosure of certain
lands in pursuance of a report of the Enclosure Commis-
sioners of England and Wales; and a bill relating to the
reportat ion of diseased cattle.
The other business on the paper having been disposed
,he house adjourned.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

POsT.—Speaking a few days ago of the Army
and Navy Estimates, we said that we felt no alarm
at the amount of expenditure which they involved.
What we said of that portion of expendi'aire we
say still more emphatically of the general and
entire expenditure of the empire. Of the many
Fears which create nights of puzzled worry, and
days that produce consequential publications of
prophecies, essays, and petitions amongst a parti
cular class of political economists and the statesmen
of parochial vestries, there is none more illogical
nor built on narrower basis than the Fear of Ex-
penditure. There are not a few of these people :
of whom some are under a persuasion that a coun-
' try, ancient, and complicated in its systems of long
growth, can be administered to in accordance with
the principles of abstract dogmas, and of whom
others believe that all knowledge of finance is to he
gathered in the counting-houses of traders, and all
capacity for maeuging the resources of a great em-
pire is to be obtained by practice in the menipula-
tion of a perish rate. The one class generally emits
pamphlets or papers at social ecieoce gatherings,
arid the other takes pleasure in giving voice to the
political ideas of financial reform associations. Both
are rather active just now ; the latter the more so of
the two, for its task is the easier. To acquire suffi-
ei .nt to take sdegreein the art of loose agitation is not
a hard matter, and requires nothing like the applica-
tion and labour undergone by a graduate who pants
to become an acrobat of the Alhambra, or a conjuror
who occupies St. James's Hall and the wondering
attention of Christmas and New Year holiday-
makers. The process of graduation is very simple.
Nothing more is necessary than to fix, after the
manner of some great prototype, as Mr. Cobden,
upon two particular periods, one of small expendi-
ture and another of larger ; buy, for three half-
pence a piece, the abstracts of revenue and expen-
diture of each intervening year at Hansards ;
put the figures at the bottom of the columns in a
'
string like the blown birds'
eggs of a schoolboy, or
the names and titles of a petty German prince ;
commit the figures to memory, and give them forth
dressed up in phrases which may be obtained in
abundance from among the properties of any plat-
form, and the master of which demands no greater
mental effort than is made by an average preacher
of sermons every Sunday; add to these acquisitions
a strong voice, and the thoughtless iteration of a
parrot, and you have a model speaker on financial
reform of perfect efficiency, and as invulnerable to
the lance of truth or the sword of reason as our
friend the parrot. Indeed, nothing
would stop such'
a man but treating him as the overwearied do the
persistent bird, namely, throwing a cloth over lone,
and enveloping him in the darkness of night.
With political economists of this description we
will not attempt to deal. But it may not be useless
at this moment to say a few words about this bug-
bear expenditure to those who,
from dislike to
troublesome examinations, or from facile belief in
the pedlar, might not distinguish paste from dia-
monds, or aluminium bronze from gold, and be
cheated into faith by their Autolycns as easily as
the Corydons and Phillises of ,4 Winter's Night
Tale." It is perfectly true that the expenditure of
the country has, in the last 20 years, increased with
a steady rapidity, and in a large ratio. It amounts,
no doubt, to what, in the unmeaning economical
jargon of the day, is called war expenditure ; a mode
of phrasing which really expresses nothing but a
barren fact—a fact from which, presented raked,
there can be evolved neither truth for the present
nor warning or guidance for the future. The ten-
dency of expenditure depends not upon is amount
merely. It is beneficial or detrimental, it aids pro-
gress or leads to ruin, just as it is the result of bold
and thrifty foresight, or of impulsive or timid ex-
travagance. Parsimony deserves the epithet of reck-
less as often as expenditure. We were, for instance,
parsimonious in a high degree in Mr. Cobden's mo-
parsimony so extravagant, and never were its ulti-
mate results more costly. In that year, 1835L6, the
del financial year, the year 1835; and never was
thee Chancellor of the Exchequer, in deference to
a cry for what was deemed to be economy, cut down
Of om
position of a loud, if not strong, party.
expenditure largely, and in so doing silenced e
little thought was taken. The desirable was con-
sidered to be effected when expenditure was by
the
inc op-
any means brought below it. We had a surplus,
and the country gave itself credit for thrift and
foresight. But what was the ultimate result of the
fear of expenditure that was operative in 1835?
From 1837 to 1842 what ought ever to be the rela-
tive positions of income and expenditure were
inverted ? Expenditure went first, and for five
dreary years Income panted and laboured atter it,
like a dismounted sportsman after a runaway horse
the further was Income behind, till in 1842 they
in a ploughed field
were so far apart that we had an annual deficit of
nearly £4,000,000. Nor was the fact of that deficit
the least remarkable nor the least alarming feature
; and the further the two went
of that period of financial desolation. Concurrently
with the deficits taxes were augmented, while, not
withstanding their augmentation, their produce
because less. The resources of the country
strained, yet income dwindled The wealth of the
country diminished. The years, as they rolled on,
gathered nothing. The expenditure of the country
in that epoch which the Cobden school pine after
was less by twenty millions then it is now, and yet
thn nation was paralysed, and had planted it foot
helplessly on the path that leads to insolvency.
We had been recklessly extravagant in economy.
Let the admirer of the then systemof finance
turn his attention from that period to the year
that we have now entered upon. What does he
seep An expenditure large in the abstract, no
doubt—larger by twenty millions than it was twelve

or fifteen years ego j and, he is alarmed—alarmed
because he sees only one faCt, instead of perceiving
a whole truth. Had he true perception IA Would
see that, in advance of Expenditure, is marching
Income, with a certain and still larger stride. And
such is the increase in the wealth of this country,
and such, by the judicious manipulation of the
Finance Minister, the availability and elasticity
of its resources, that, concurrently with this state of
things, taxation is subjected to yearly remission,
instead of being strained, as in the years to which
we have referred, to the point of naproductiveness.
Under such circumstances our expenditure now can-
not be justly described as either dangerous in ten-
dency or extravagant in fact. A man who spends
three hundred a year may be more truly extrava-
gant than another who spends fifty thousand. And
as it is with an individual so is it with a nation. A
' truth which we the more earnestly desire to impress
upon the public, because altholgh some reductions
may bo effected by care and skill in administration,
we do not anticipate that there ever can be, at
least so long as the country continues to advance
in wealth at its present ratio, such a retrenchment
of expenditure as would satisfy the so called Fi-
nancial Reform School. Every year the commu-
nity adds to its functions, and every year, as the
wealth of the country becomes greater and the
profits of professions and trades are augmented,
the discharge of these functions becomes neces-

eerily more costly.
TIMES.—The Australian colonies are finally re
lieved from the doubts and uncertainties by which
they have been tormented during last six months.
They have received an explicit assurance from the
highest authority, and in the most public manner,
that it is not the intention of the Government to
give effect to that recommendation of the Commis-
sioners which contemplated an increase of the num-
ber of convicts annually transported to Western
Australia. The controversy has ended as it. was
sure to end, and as persona of much less experience
than the Royal Commissioners ought to have anti
cipated that it must end. When people are so fond
of pointing to the great and free colonies of Great
Britedo, established by the potent agency of liberty
—that pearl of great price, as Mr. Burke said, of
which we only have the monopoly—they ought to
remember the means by which they have created
and the tenure by which they hold this mighty em-
pire. It is not our fleets and armies, it is not our
parental care, it is not the bonds of commerce, it
is not the community of language, literature, and
tradition that mainly attach our colonies to us;
it is because they can enjoy under the sceptre of
Queen Victoria a liberty equal to our own and
superior to that which can be obtained elsewhere.
It is of the very essence of this liberty that it re-
fuses to be constrained within narrow bounds or
cramped within technical fetters. It is apt to de-
mand not only all that is strictly granted, but all
that is necessary in order to give that grant full
enjoyment. It is of course strictly true that no
colony has a right to interfere in any portion of the
Queen's dominions beyond its own limits, and it is
equally true that the British Parliament has a right
to transport convicted offenders to any part of the
Empire. But these two rights together make one
grievous, wrong, if the result is that the criminals so
transported really find their way to the colonies
which are unwilling to receive them. In such a case
the technical law is on one side, and the substantial
merits entirely on the other. The price of labour
is much higher in the eastern colonies of Australia
than in Western Australia. The climate is suitable
to a European population, and under these circum•
stances it is impossible to doubt that as fast as sen-
tences expire the prisoners will find their way from
the barren end stationary West to the wealthy and
prosperous East. It was not likely that communi-
ties founded on the principles of liberty should ac-
quiesce in this, and it was equally improbable that
England should be willing, even if she were able, to
coerce them. In the present state of opinion with
reference to our colonies, we have but one alterna-
tive in case of a serious difference between them and
the mother country. If a question arises with a
foreign country, there is always the last and worst
resource of war ; if any part of the United Kingdom
were to refuse obedience to authority, the civil
power, supported by the military if necessary, is
ready to enforce it. But with a Colony practically
neither of these resources is available. In case of
resistance to the decisions of the Home Government
we could not rely on the colonial authorities to sup-
port us, for they are responsible to the Colonial
Parliament, the emanation of popular will ; and as
for the exertion of military force, opinion in this
country has long pointed to a peaceful separation
as an alternative far preferable to a repetition in any
shape of the blunder and crime of the American war,
the darkest episode in English history. It follows
that within limits defined by the alternative of
separation from the Mother Country the more im-
portant colonies enjoy a freedom from our control
greater than is possessed by any other country in
the world. We ought not to repine at this, for it
is the very tenure by which we bold them, the
glorious tenure of a common liberty, a liberty capa-
ble of being exercised to some extent even against
ourselves. As, therefore, the success of the Colonies
in this country was inevitable from the first, we
wish that the concession which we have had to
make had been made lees grudgingly, and with less
effort to prove that the apprehensions of the Colo-
nies were unfounded, or even exaggerated. If" he
who gives quickly gives twice," it is no less true
that he who gives avowedly under compulsion can
scarcely be said to give at all. Why insist that
the Commissioners were clearly justified in mak-
ing their recommendation upon the evidence be-
fore them, although the Government is equally jus-
tified in refusing to act upon that'evidence P This
might have been true if the attention of the Com-
missioners had been exclusively confined to the
wants of Western Australia, and if the case of the
other Colonies had never been brought before them.
The contrary is, however, notorious. Among the
witnesses examined we find the name of Mr.
Newlan-2, a magistrate of South- Australia, who
fully stated to the Commission the very facts upon
which the Colonies have since relied, showing the
great immigration into South Australia from
Western Australia, about, half of whim consisted of
" expieees ;" the increase of crime, the excitement
in consequence, and the facilities for accomplishing
the voyage. Mr. Childers, once a re:.'.ident in Vic-
toria, himself served on the Commission, And sub-
mitted to it an amendment, pointing out, atte2ng
other things, the discontent which was sure to ensue
in the Colonies, which amendment the Commission
unanimously rejected. This plan of making every-
thing pleasant to everybody by showing that the
holders of two contradictory propositions are teeth
in the right has, no doubt, the advantage of pre-
serving good humour for the moment, but to us it
seems much better that an error should be con-
fessed when it really has been cotrmitted rather
than that such strained inferences should be adopted
in order to conceal it. Nor do we think it
should be said that " the alarm and apprehension
of the colonists are no doubt to a great extent
" unfounded." Oar whole colonial system is
founded on the assumption, which facts have
abundantly verified, that the colonists understand
their own local affairs much better than we do, and
that we are just as unfit to govern them as they
are to govern us. Whether it ie for our interest to
send our convicts to Australia is a question of which
we are much better judges than the Australian
colonists. Whether it is their interest to receive
them is a qpestion of which they are much better
judges than we. So far from their apprehensions
being unfounded, it is quite certain that they would
be fully verified as to the ultimate destination of
convicts whose sentences have expired. Western
Australia must be, from the very nature of the case,
a sponge to be periodically emptied into the Eastern
Colonies, for the same reasons which draw the people
of Ireland to America. All that can be said is that
the convicts who will go there will be so reformed
that they will be a valuable acquisition. On this
point also the Australians are the best judges.
Their great want is labour and population ; and, if
they refuse to receive able-bodied meo, we may
be very sure that they do so for sufficient reason.
There is one part of this subject to which we
earnestly beg to draw the attention of our fellow-
countrymen in Eastern Australia. We have a
right to ne heard, for we did not even wait for the
announcement of their opinion, but painted out
immediately the grave error the Commissioners had
committed in menacing them with a renewal of
transportation. They have gained a complete and, we
should think, to them most gratifying triumph.
The debate on which we have been commenting
will show them how reluctantly the scheme of in-
creased transportation has been abandoned. Let
them use their success with moderation. They may
contend logically, no doubt, that they are aggrieved
in like kind, though in less degree, while a single
prisoner is transported to Western Australia ; but
we hope they will not insist on this extreme view,
and we are quite sure that it is not for their interest
to do so. A very strong feeling would certainly be
excited in this country at anything which could
fairly receive the name of an attempt at dictation
on the part of the Colonies as to he manner in
Boma the omA Government ought to dispose
of
its prisoners. Even between the Mother Country
and the Colonies it is not reasonable to suppose that
the concessions are all to be on one
bear none
e side. They
participate in all the advantages
of the burdens of the Empire to
adhich they belong.
In New Zealand our blood has just been poured oat
like water for their service in a quarrel in which we
have no manner of interestoafor own. Let them
iciv
be content with what theyachieved, and re-
member that to the continued e
union of the Mother
Country end her Colonies the goodwill of the
former is just as necessary as the goodwill of the
latter.