The Sun.
London, England, 1870-02-02 00:00:00

ROYAL STRAND THEATRE.
Sole Lessee and Manageress, Mrs. S wanberough.
THIS EVENING, at 7.30, AMONG THE BREAIERS: Mr
Clarke. With THE TOODLES. And INO. Concluding with
THT• CHOPS OF THE CHANNEL.

WOODIN'S CARPET - BAG AND SKETCH BOOK,
Egyptian Hall, Piccadilly, every Evening (except Saturday) at
S; Saturday 3.loininzs at 3. Admission, Is, 2s, 3s.

CHRISTY MINSTRELS, St. James's Hall, Every Night, at 8
Wednesdays and Saturdays, at 3 and 8 all the year round.

ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS, Regent's-park, OPEN daily (ex-
cept Sundays). Admission, le.; on Mondays' Gd. Children
under twelve, 6,1.

ROYAL ALHAMBRA PALACE. THREE BALLETS
Promenade Concert. Band of 60. Begin at 8. ls. Box-office
open fromll to 4.

t:l7. ikAtts
1170
, • UIT,

LONDON, WEDIV2SDAY, FEB. 2, 1870.

lIF the Conservative leaders understand their busi-
ness, there is one question which will give them
abundant opportunity for attacking the present
Government. It is not the Irish Land question, for
the Ministerial measure will, it is generally believed,
be so moderate that opposition to it would have a
similar result to that which followed the opposition
to the £7 borough franchise of 1866—a result from
which the Conservatives, remembering the humiliat-
ing history of the last four years, shrink with terror.
It is not the education question, for that offers little
of the elements of a party conflict ; and just
as Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE has deprecated oppo-
sition for the sake of opposition in the one matter, so
Sir JOHN PAKINGTON has denounced it in the
other. It is not the Ballot nor University Tests
for these subjects are by general consent already
settled, so far as a settlement is possible prior to
actual legislation. The real battle field is our
colonies. It is the colonial policy of the present
Ministry which is most open to question; it is that
branch of administration which has elicited the most
unfavourable criticism. This criticism comes not
merely from political opponents. It is to
be found not only in the Quarterly _Review
and the Standard, but also in the West-
minster _Review and the Spectator. Moreover,
whatever doubt there may be as to the existence
of that somewhat questionable phenomenon the Con-
servative working man, there can be none at all as
to the discontent which exists among the working
classes in the mother country at the refusal of the
Government to aid emigration. We suspect, too,
that there is little reason to doubt what kind of feel-
ing will be evoked in one of our colonies—New Zea-
land—so soon as the last despatch of the Secretary of
State is made known there. Nevertheless, it seems
as if Ministers, relying upon their numerical strength
and undoubted popularity, were resolved to carry out
their present colonial policy with a high hand. Lord
GRANVILLE'S despatch, just referred to, is not the only
proof of this resolve. The opposition which he has offered
to any project of a colonial congress, either perma-
nent or temporary, in the metropolis; the discourage-
ment which he has manifested towards the visit of
the proposed New Zealand Commission; and the
selection of Sir CHARLES DILKE, the most extreme
of the anti-colonialist party, to second the Address at
the opening of Parliament—all these circumstances
imply that Ministers feel convinced that their
policy is beyond all question, and that they
are strong enough to carry it out.

This confidence seems excessive. When organs
of opinion unquestionably Liberal condemn this
policy in :the clearest language, it is not wise for
even the strongest Ministry to shew itself indifferent.
And it must be remembered that it is not only such
questions as the Irish land tenure and primary edu-
cation whose importance places them above the
range of party topics. The colonial question is at
least as important as either of these, and if a Ministry
sets itselt in opposition to the public wishes on a sub-
ject of such weight as this, no success in other mat-
ters will prevent the Opposition from taking a per-
fectly fair advantage which may lead to the
fall of the Ministry. The truth is we have
to begin de 1101'0. There has been no definite
colonial policy hitherto. The colonial office has
ranked no higher than the office of the Privy Seal.
The first post, no less than the second, has been
bestowed with regard to Ministerial emergencies
rather than personal fitness. As the Quarterly
Review well points out, "In the seventeen years since
the old Whigs went out and Lord GREY resigned the
seals of the Colonial Office, they have been held by
no less than thirteen different Ministers. During
the same period there have been only four Secretaries
of State for Foreign Affairs, all unquestionably
selected for real or supposed special knowledge of their
department. The difference in the manner in which
these two offices have been filled up is a fair mea-
sure of the carelessness and indifference with which
the English Parliament, reflecting too truly the
apathy of the public, has treated the magnificent
inheritance of our Colonial Empire." The consequence
has been that for the most part our colonial policy has
been an abnegation of all policy. The Duke of
NEWCASTLE, Lord LYTTON, Lord CARNARVON, and
Mr. CARDWELL understood their work far better than
the other holders of the Colonial Seals. Yet even
these four statesmen could not do all that ought to
have been done, because the machinery was in great
part wanting. The chief defect is that
there is no real responsibility on the par
of the Colonial Secretary. Theoretically and
technically he is responsible to Parliament ; but
there are not fifty members in either house who
understand colonial questions. The same thing may

be said, perhaps, with regard to Indian questions.

But in the latter case the difficulty is met by the
establishment of an Indian Council. This body is
comprised of men intimately acquainted with Indian
affairs, and most of them have held important posts
in India. It is an advilng body, and although the
SECRETARY of STATE has superior authority and may
reject its advice, he must be a very self-willed man if he
ventures to do so, for then his post would not be worth

three months' purchase. There is no such body to
represent the colonies. It has been suggested that

these should elect representatives to the House of
Commons; but the great distance between them and

the mother country renders this proposal imprac-
ticable. The representatives of the colonies must not
be dependent for their position upon a sudden disso-
lution of Parliament. They must be elected for a
comparatively long period, and for a definite period,
so that those who choose them may have
ample time to elect. With such a body as this
the colonies would be guarded against those sudden
and capricious changes of treatment which they incur
whenever one Ministry goes out and another, comes

in. This Colonial Council would advise the Home
Government upon all such matters as taxation, mili-
tary defence, public works and loans, and crown
lands. Had it existed before, our Government would
not now be in the humiliating position described by
Lord GRANVILLE in a recent letter—would not be
unable to make grants of crown lands in Australia to
emigrants because they were surrendered a few years
ago without any sufficient security for their just use
and distribution, or for their application to the en-
couragement of immigration. Had surer Council
existed English manufactures would riot now be
subject to protective Australian tariffs.

It is not too late to accomplish muck although
vce have allowed several opportunities e( usefulness