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

,
APRIL 11) 1851.

_ ~_

~:

„

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 a 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-
ployment.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord was wrong
when he interrupted the Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Moles-
worth) and said that the policy of Sir Harry Smith was
not to destroy the chiefs.—(lnterruption.) The House
was not interested in this question.--(Renewcd cries of
" Hear.") He would not enter further upon the question,
hut 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 ho should not follow the Hon.
Baronet through the vast variety of subjects he had at-
tempted to handle. He would confine himself to the,
question of colonial economy. The Hon. Baronet con-
tended that at the earliest possible period this country
ought to be relieved from military and other kinds of
expenditure on behalf of the colonies. The Honeturable
Baronet said that there were some colonies which could
not have any value as military stations. He had in-
atenced 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.—(llesr.) 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, but he could appeal to the records of
their debates, and to the personal experience of Members
for incontestiblo 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 oue colour, but of a hetero-
gen ous 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.—
(lear.) 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 ;he
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
Wales 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 wont back
to 1834, 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,
hoar.) The 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
ho (Mr. Stanley) confessed he could not understand what
such a confederation could be; for it would of 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 the Hon. Baronet
remained to answer, notwithstanding all that had been
said on the subject. The Hon. Gentleman who had just
sat down had narrowed the question indeed, though ho
certainly professed not to understand the comprehensive
view of the Hon. Baronet. 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 fuinishing military posts and
military garrisons. The Hon. 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 24,000,000 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 thatthe
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 the 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 he 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 had 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 tho country when
pounds, shillings, and pence formed such an important
items in politics as the present. On Monday there was
a great debate on the apportionment of 1,500,000/. sur-
plus; on Friday there would be another debate on the
same subject. The Hon. 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. The 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 taken
a more generous view of the character of the colonists
than the Hon. Secretary for the Colonies; because he
gave them, on the one hand, the rights of citizens, while,
on the other, ho abolished the expenditure on civil and
military matters—a choice which he (Mr. Cobden) had
no doubt would be accepted by the colonists. His Hon.
Friend had incurred much odium for his efforts in respect
e made
which the colonies; but the only reduction that could b de
which would sensibly affect the expenses of this connatry
was the one he proposed—namely, to cut down the civil
and military expenses of the colonies. Free-tradora 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. The only way to look for a
permanent surplus was in the reduction of 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
Hon. 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 an 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. lie could not, therefore, conceive why
she kept soldiers there. If, then, she could not give
away an acre of land, or regulate the tariff, or levy
taxes in her colonies—in Canada in particular—?,_b_t"
was the use of 9,000 troops?—(Hear, hear,)
could not hold the country against 2,000,000 people he
the people were so minded. The real fact Wa
knew it to be one unpalatable to the House, there was
an immense deal of jobbing in the
both there
Canada, and there were consequently parties
as they
and at home who had an interest in thingskeeping
were. The people of England,
however,o
ld. no longer ngn eor silehinterest in the matter, and they
n e cdt e d wo ifth self-interest,
England
expenditure by
tole-
rate it. The colonies were eon
a stronger tie than a few troops
the
by
ndth
othertipaltryeas considerations- of
interest,
—they were connected
through lines of packets, a
connec e by blood, by that nature; they were also H
reli-
gion, by laws, and by feeling. e ( r. Cobden), there-
tore, regarded the question in its pecuniary aspect as one
of the most important that h ad b een brought before the
House in the present session; and he considered is Hon.