The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-11 00:00:00

APRIL 115 1851.

to plant on their frontier; and one of the most promi
vent in recommending that measure was the Honour-
able Member for Montrose, who urged them to in-
crease the number of their emigrants. That, then, was
their policy, and they had thus incurred an obligation
to protect these emigrants. When the Dutch had that
colony their system was to allow the Dutch settlers
to raise a military force themselves, to proclaim war
against the natives when they chose, and to carry it
on with all those blood-stained incidents with which
such a war was sure to be accompanied. That system
England indignantly rejected. They determined that
a regular military force should take the place of such
a volunteer force ; but they soon found that the
frontier chosen by Lord Charles Somerset in 1820 was
badly chosen as a defensive frontier. Part of the ar-
rangement then made was to extend the frontier from
the Fish River to Keisltamna. Sir B. D'Urban, Sir H.
Pottinger (a most valuable governor), and Sir H. Smith
all concurred in this policy, and its value was proved by
what had recently occurred, for the Kafirs, alarmed at
the idea of having forts behind them, had not in their
incursions caused anything like the mischief or loss of
life that had occurred on similar occasions hitherto. It
was said that Sir H. Smith had been taken by surprise,
but he referred to a paragraph in a letter of Sir Harry
Smith to which the Hon. Baronet had not alluded, and
in that letter, daeed 20th December, p. 64, and paragraph
6, showed that Sir H. Smith, though he conceived that
peace had been established, had yet resolved not upon
disbanding the troops until he was convinced that general
tranquillity had been established. In reference to Sir
H. Smith, he could not avoid saying, that as an absent
man, as an officer, and as a governor, he thought this
was not the fitting time to cast ridicule upon him.—
(Cheers.) He did assure the lion. Baronet that what
was said in that House had a considerable effect out of
it, and that lion. Members ought sometimes to feel
more responsibility than was generally evinced by them,
when they passed their censures upon absent individuals.
—(Cheers.) But the Hon. Baronet passed to Natal, and
said that there they came in contact with a naval force
that was bold and terrible. He admitted that they were
a very brave people, and he had to add that they
were now marching to the aid of Sir Harry Smith. In
that colony they had nearly 100,000 natives under
British dominion, and they were very civilised, for they
paid taxes very well—(Laughter)—and they preferred
direct taxes, for they paid a house tax.—(Laughter.)
That colony was managed very well, but then they were
told a great deal about the Boers. Now the first cause
of the alienation of the Boers was, that the British Go-
vernment would -not allow them to proclaim war against
the native tribes and a great cause of dissatisfaction
with there was the abolition of slavery, as they said
they could not carry on their agricultural labour with-
out slaves.—(Hear.) As to the convict question at the
Cape, it was sufficient to say of it, that those who agi-
tated against it well knew that it was never intended to
make the Cape a convict settlement, and those who
had taught others to despise authority, were now
reaping the bitter fruits of their own treachery.
The proposition of the Hon. Baronet amounted to this,
it was that they should save 1,200,000/. and part with
their colonial empire. The simple question then was
this—was their colonial empire worth 1,200,0001.? They
must not calculate the value of their colonial trade by
simple exports and imports from this country with the
colonies. In doing that the Hon. Baronet took no notice
of their shipping, and the amount of capital and interests
involved in their inter-colonial trade—in their trade be-
tween colony and colony. Of these things the Hon.
Baronet took no notice at all. It was as if he were to
take the total expenditure of the Great Western and
North-Western Railway, and then only look to
what goods were sent from Euston-square and
Paddington, without taking any notice of what
was sent from the other stations along their lines.
Such was the Honourable Baronet's mode of giving
them the value of their colonies by merely taking into
his account their colonial exports.—(Cries of " Hear,
hear.") He was quite sure, then, that the policy
of the Honourable Baronet was not one the House
was prepared to adopt.—(Hear, hear.) He found by
papers which were then before him, that the estimates
had been gradually reduced from a sum of about
226,0001. when the present Government came Into office,
to an annual vote of 180,0001. His Hon. Friend (Sir
W. Molesworth) had alluded to the subject of reducing
the number of troops in New South Wales. Might he
refer his Hon. Friend to the papers which had been cir-
culated that morning showing the intentions of his
Noble Friend (Earl Grey) as to the further reduction
of the military force in the colonies, and he could assure
the Hon. Baronet that if there were a reasonable or
practicable reduction to be made, no man would be
more anxious to effect it than his Noble Friend. He
trusted, then, that the House would not follow the Hon.
Baronet's advice, but support him (Mr. Hawes) in the
course he felt bound to pursue, by moving the " pre-
vious question," as the only way in which he could show
that the motion was met in a kindly spirit, and that
the Government were prepared to reduce the Colonial
expenditure to the lowest point that it could be reduced
consistently with the honour of the country.—(Hear.)
Mr. ADDERLEY complained that the Under-Secre-
tary for the Colonies had gone out of his way to allude
to the convict question, and to throw the blame of the
irritation at the Cape, not on those who attempted to
make the Cape a convict station, but on those who re-
sisted the attempt. As the subject of the Kafir war
should be fully gone into by the Noble Lord at the head
of the Government, he thought the most advisable course
to adont would be to divide at once on the question be-
fore the House, and discuss the subject of the Kafir war
separately. Tho motion of the Hon. Baronet was, is
point of fact, to reduce the military expenditure of the
colonies, and to give them the powers and advantages
of local self-government. This proposition was charac-
terised by the Under-Secretary for the Colonies as
neither more nor less than abandonment of the colonies.
In a recent dispatch from the Noble Lord et the head of
the Colonial Department to Lord Elgin—a dispatch
bearing date March 11—the withdrawal of a large
number of troops from Canada was directed, and the
banding over of the civil estimates to the considera-
tied of the local Legislature suggested. Why
should the principle be carried out with regard to the
largest and most powerful colonies, and yet be denied in
the case of smaller colonies? The policy proposed by
the Hon. Baronet the Member for Southwark was one in
its very nature calculated to avoid an abandonment of
the colonies. That policy was based on broad, sound
principles. The entire subject presented itself under a
double aspect; first, as a qestion of retrenchment, and,
secondly, as a general colonial question. When the
question of protection occurred to him, he felt he con-
fessed mortified that so few of its professors had mani-
fested any sympathy in the cause of retrenchment, which
they had undertaken to support. Protectionist Members,
though they had told the farmers that protection was a
lost battle, and had taught them not to look forward to a
return to it, still they had promised to do their utmost in
procuring a retrenchment. There was a noble oppor-
tunity for them. But whether this expenditure was
to be discountenanced or not, by the effect of the divi-
sion on this motion, the country had long since decided
against, and would not much longer tolerate it. Though
it bad borne it long and patiently, the time had come
when, in a moment of irritation, it would throw it off,
and repudiate along with it the whole of their colonial
system. The only way in which such a calamity was to
be avoided was, by at once establishing a colonial sys-
tem of government on sound principles, while it was
still in their power to deal with the subject calmly, and
upon a full knowledge of facts. They must, before long,
come to an understanding with the colonies, and lay down
a definite policy respecting them. He (Mr. Adderley)
maintained that they could not deal with this important
subject by agreeing to the previous question. At the
very moment when the surplus was to be handed over to
the commissaries to defray the expenses of the war
had they not constituencies at home that might be glad
to share it? But the fact was, that there would always
be a Kafir war to swallow up any surplus that might
occur. It was, in fact, a mere mockery of the coun-
try to be talking of the surplus at its disposal, when,
in fact, its application was anticipated. Far better
would be to have ship-money, or benevolences, or
any the contrivances of former times, than to
be thus deluded with the pretence of a consti-
tutional taxation and expenditure. We had all the
practical tyranny of a despotism, and all the trouble of a
democracy, united at present in our existing system of
Government. lie did not hesitate to say that they might
use the words which were used in that House in the
reign of Henry the Eighth, when he sent Cardinal Wol-
soy to demand a benevolence. The words which were
used on that occasion by a Member were worthy of be-
ing remembered. They were these—" If our money is
to be taken by a commission, we shall be taxed like
France, our taxes will be farmed, and this country will
be hound, and no longer free."—(Hear, hear.) He had
no sympathy with those who looked on the colonies
merely as a pecuniary question. He might refer in sup-
port of his own view of the subject, to some remarkable
words which occurred in a letter, written by Mr.
Godley to Mr. Bagster, while expressing his opinion
that we should feel the loss of a colony less than
that constant loss which a colony was made
to produce by extravagance and migovernment.
His words were—" When the Roman legions drew
within the line of the Danube, it was not the loss
of the province of Dacia, but the satisfaction of the
Roman people at the loss, which was so ominouste loss of of the
spirit of the times." And in speaking of the
suffered less loss of prestige and of strength,
truyhreerno.s 3 000 000/
our American colonies, he said disastrous as ilttihewaannsevwweeer
should have done had we retained t
question;,: but
.
thebj
a
ys
oroemprmoaecrhootoofo
ourur -
clo(o)rou4kl
,deodoncluo,ptoooanov it dhaisse esi tin
that hs epse pc eulnn
enterprise of our colonists.
colonies, and paralysed the
that spoke here, but
selves, but that ityaecatrualaysernioptpleodn
Baronet grounded his
observations on, the principal topic
Itthatof colonial military
waso of
not thetrio
tvi os
mi c e. o
Tf
ec o
Infoenin y.
destlndies, the Cape,
pointed out to
military
expenditureatid he provedapp thatt
o fihr los casegrou opts. reduction
colonies,
applied
ethe IV
'orZieeoatatth' Oselitehe military ex-
penditure the
e.,
house North
tl
aan inAa revery
American,
we
of England alone was equal in those eases
to the whole revenue of the colony—except in ono case,
where, in the north part of New Zealand, it was six
times the amount, and the military forces exceeded
the adult male population. Th 6 Uuder Secretary for
the Colonies made, for an only answer to this,
that the expenditure was necessary, and that
we must Dbandou the colonies, or maintain it. The co-
' lorries, ho said, were taken possession of by us on that
faith, and in good faith We should adhere to it. In
contradiction to this statement he had this to urge, that
this expenditure, buroensome as it was to this country,
and hateful as it was to us, was even more deeply hated
by and injurious to our colonists. In New Zealand thero
was a new association formed of all the householders,
which called itself the Constitutional Assembly, and
which sat side by side with that of the local Government.
That body seemed to have a greater command of infer-
' motion, and had certainly more of the sympathy of the

t people than the recognized body. That expenditure,
moreover, had the effect of demoralizing the population
politically and morally. Why could not the colonies
produce sufficient statesmen to govern them? It was
owing to our corrupt and debasing system. The gover-
nor governed by corruption, and as his power proceeded
from an alien source, he was unchecked by the people
about him. This expenditure injured the colonies by
creating 2. fictitious system of expenditure. There re-
venues were nothing more than an item of British
expenditure.— (Hear.) This was the normal state of
our colonies. How could countries that had no com-
merce whatever have a revenue? The main and the
last observation he would make was that this very mi-
litary
expenditure created wars. A large military force
led to its own use, and to the occasion of its own em-
pleyeeente—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord was wrong
when he interrupted the Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Moles-
worth) end said that the policy of Sir Harry Smith was
not to destroy the chiefs.—(lnterruption.) The House
was not interested in this question.—(Renewed cries of
" Hear.") He would not enter further upon the question,
but would wind up the observations he had to make, as
he saw the House impatient, by pressing upon them to
take immediate steps for the reduction of colonial ex-
penditure.
Mr. STANLEY said he should not follow the Hon.
Baronet thrcugh the vast variety of subjects he bad at-
tempted to handle. He would confine himsolis to the
question of colonial economy. The Hon. Baronet con-
tended that at the earliest possible period this country
ought to bo relieved from military and other kinds of
expenditure on behalf of the colonies. The Honourable
Baronet said that there were some colonies which could
not have any value as military stations. He had in-
stanced Jamaica, but from the testimony of
a foreign power, the American Government, it
was asserted that that would soon become one
of the highways of the world. Its contiguity to the
Isthmus of Panama gave it some value as a military sta-
tion.--(Hear.) The second part of his resolution was to
give the colonies sufficient powers of internal self-go-
vernment, and to free them from Imperial interference.
(Hear, hear.) If the Hon. Baronet characterised our
military establishments as created for the purpose of
putting down public opinion and establisning despotism,
he could only say that he knew more of the theory than
the practice of government.—(Hear.) Over the vast ex-
tent of our colonies there was only about 9,000 men.
When that was considered, our colonial system could
not be so despotic as represented. It was a common
thing to charge the Imperial Parliament with indifference
to colonial affairs, bat he could appeal to the records of
their debates, and to the personal experience of Members
for incontestible evidence of the interest taken in colonial
affairs.—(Hear, and cheers.) In the case of colonial af-
fairs the only power which that House exercised was
that of a court of the last resource. It was a kind of
court of appellate jurisdiction for the colonies. Do
what they would, Colonial Assemblies must be more or
less democratic assemblies. In speaking of a con-
stitution for the colonies, they were to take into
account, first, the fluctuating character of that
population—not being of one colour, but of a hetero-
genous kind. On that point, he would remind the
House, of the report made by Lord Durham, in 1834,
and in which he said, that he expected to find in Canada
a party struggle, but he found instead a war of races.—
(Hear.) He thought it was quite clear that Parliament
should keep the power of interfering in extraordinary
cases. He would have been glad to have had an oppor-
tunity of laying before the House the degree of pros-
perity enjoyed by those colonies which the Honourable
Baronet had said were all but crushed and ruined.—
(Hear, hear.) He would take a single case, that of the
colony of New South Wales. He would show to the
House by official statements its rapid prosperity. In the
exports the increase had been as twenty to one—taking
the period of twenty years from 1828 to 1848, and in the
imports the increase had been nearly as great, in 1828
amounting to 57,0001., and in 1850, 1,500,000/. Then as
to pcpulation—in 1828 the population of New South
%Vales was 36,000, and in 1848 it had increased to
200,000.—(Hear.) Nearly similar statements could be
made with reference to the other colonies of Australia,
—and it might with truth be said that they were more
prosperous, and the increase might be called
more marvellous than in the Western States
of America.—(Hear, hear.) He did not deny the
distress that was stated to exist in the West Indies;
and one thing was certain, that if ho went back
to 1934, and that there had been then in existence an
independent colonial legislature, it would have been the
means of perpetuating evils far more serious than any
that now existed.—(Hear, hear.) Did any man think
that the Act of slavery abolition would ever have been
passed by an independent colonial Legislature?—(Hear,
hear.) Tho set of constitutions which the Hon. Baronet
proposed seemed to be something in the nature of a con-
federation—a military confederation it could not be, and
he (Mr. Stanley) confessed he could not understand what
such a confederation could be; for it would cf necessity
be—" each for himself and Heaven for us all." As to
one point of the case of war, if this country declared
that in any war the colonies must pay, they must give to
the colonies the power to determine the war.— (Hear,
hear.) They could not do so, for in that case they must
allow the colonies to contract any alliances they chose,
and if they allowed that this country could not retain
any vestige of supremacy. He (Mr. Stanley) believed
that what would follow from the adoption of the resolu-
tion would be the abandonment of their colonies.—
(Hear, hear.) To that he could never consent. It
would be an act of the most suicidal character, and
he should therefore give to the resolution of the Hon.
Baronet the most strenuous and determined opposi-
tion.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. COBDEN said the speech of tho Hcn. Baronet
remained to answer, notwithstanding all that had been
said Cu the subject. The lion. Gentleman who had just
sat do,in had narrowed the question indeed, though he
certainly professed not to understand the comprehensive
view of the Hon. Baron-t. He had not said a single
word about English commercial interests in the colonies
in the course of his speech; and had solely referred to
the colonies as means of furnishing military posts and
military garrisons. The Hen. Gentleman had called the
attention of the House to the advantage of having 1,500
miles of military frontier in Canada; but he (Mr. Cob-
den) hoped England would never have to defend that line
against 24,000000 of the bravest people in the world.
The Hon. Gentleman had prided himself on the idea of
Jamaica being made a military station; but was that the
fact? Even the Hon. Gentleman himself admitted that the
Americans were avoiding the route to Chagres and creating
another route by the way of Nicaragua to avoid that mili-
tary station. The trade of New York to Panama was di-
verted because of that circumstance. The Hon. Gentle-
man informed tho House of the great prosperity of the
colonists in Australia. He might have gone farther, and
told how the labouring man in these colonies got 4s. or
ss. a day, while if ho only turned his eyes at home he
would find agricultural labourers getting only ls. a day;
and then ho might ask whether it was not time the
people of England should have justice done to them,
taxed as they were for the support of colonial prospe-
rity. The Hon. Gentleman, however, could not be
charged with making the question a mercenary one—a
mere pecuniary question, as the Hon. Under-Secretary
for the Colonies bad taunted the Hon. Baronet the
Member for Southwark with making it. The Hon.
Under-Secretary, however, should show that there
never was a period in the history of the country when
pounds, shillings, and pence formed such an important
items in politics as the present. On Monday there was
a great debate ou the apportionment of 1,500,000/. sur-
plus; on Friday there would be another debate on the
same subject. The lion. Member for Bucks would
hardly sneer at the pecuniary view of the question, nor
would the last messenger from the agricultural interest,
the Hon. Member for South Notts. Tho Hon. Under-
Secretary of State could, therefore, have but a very im-
perfect perception of what was passing in the minds of
his countrymen, when he sneered at the Hon. Baronet
making the subject of the colonies a pecuniary ques-
tion. The Honourable Baronet, however, had Wien
a more generous view of the character of the colonistsho
than the Hon. Secretary for the Colonies; because ho
gave them, on the one hand, the rights of citizens,. while.
on thi other, had
he abolished the expenditure oncivil end
military matters—a choice which he (Mr. Cobden)_...s
Hon.
no doubt would bo accepted by the colonists.
.1-1 I
Friend had incurred much odium for his efforts in respect
of the colonies; but the only reduction that could be made
which would sensibly affect the expenses of this country
was the one he proposed—namely, to cut down the civil
and military expenses of the colonies. Free-traders and
Protectionists would be soon brought to the same view
of the case. The present surplus could not be depended
on—in fact it was, as had been stated, half consumed
already on Kafirland. He (Mr. Cobden) did not con-
sider, as a Free-trader, that because the corn-law was
repealed there would be no deficiency in the revenue;
on the contrary, a convulsion on the Continent, or an
explosion in America, would, in his opinion, produce a
collapse in the revenue. Tho only way to look for a
permanent surplus was in the reduction cf expenses,
and the expenses that first claimed attention were
the naval and military expenses of the colonies. The
Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Stanley) spoke as if money
was to be had without trouble or expense, but
he was mistaken. As a Free-trader he (Mr. Cobden)
considered the relations of the mother country with the
colonies had changed since free trade was established.
He was surprised to see the Right Hon. Baronet the
Member for Ripon had left the House, for that Right
[lon. Gentleman had taken a course on the question of
the commercial policy of the country which involved as
logical consequences the reduction of expenditure in the
colonies. When the exclusive trade of this country
with the colonies was put au end to the plea of uphold-
ing civil and military establishments was got rid of. The
Hon. Member for Lynn seemed to think there was a dif-
ferential duty in favour of England still kept up in the
colonies. He was mistaken. The colonies, by the Act
of 1846, had a right to regulate their own tariff, and they
regulated them accordingly. England had, therefore,
no favour in that respect. Canada had been alluded to,
but England had given up all sovereignty over the land
in that colony. Ile could not, therefore, conceivejt
why
she kept soldiers there. I', then, she could to
away an acre of land, or regulate the tariff, or levy
taxes in her colonies—in Canada in
Par:iar_wbat
hoar,) They
was the use of 9,000 troops?—(
could not hold the country
against 2,000,000
the people were so minded.troops?—(hear,
people, if
11e reale fact was, and he
- House, there was
knew it to be one unpalatable to
.n the expenditure of
th
an immense deal of jobbing
l
Canada, and there were consequently parties both there
and at home who had an interest in keeping things as they
were. The people of England, however, had no such
interest in the matter, and they would no longer tole-
rate_
it. The colonies were connected with England by
a stronger tie than a few troops and a paltry expenditure
—they were connected by the ties of self-interest,
through lines of packets, and other considerations of
that nature; they were also connected by blood, by reli-
gion, by feeling.
h • ) laws, and He (Mr. Cobden), there-
-1
fore; regarded the question, in its pecuniary aspect as one
of the most important that had been brought before the
House in the present session; and he considered if Hon.