The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-06 00:00:00

doubt whether they had repaid the great cost and anxiety
which they had entailed ; but whether or not, we had
entered into pledges with the emigrants who had left our
shores, from which it was now impossible to draw back.
Take the case of the Cape colony. Great complaints had
been made of the enormous expenditure which had been
lavished upon it ; but what had been our policy ? We had
r curtailed its territory; we had left a large territory help-
lessly exposed to the attacks of the natives; and we had pro-
voked the formation of a hostile republic upon its borders.
We had prevented the Dutch colonists from carrying on a
kind of warfare in which they were perfectly able to keep
the Kaffirs at bay; and we had therefore absolutely bound
ourselves to protect the colonists from the consequences.
With respect to New Zealand the question was not a mi:i-
tary one at all, but it arose from matters which were beyond
the control of Parliament. It became a matter for serious
discussion whether the house ought not to take the affairs
of the colony snore under its own cognisance. The present
war had arisen solely in consequence of the pressure which
was put upon the governor to furnish land for the settlers;
and he did not think it was in accordance with the policy of
this country that the Imperial Government should leave
such delicate questions to be settled entirely by the local
authorities. (Hear.) For these reasons he regretted that his
friend should not have seen fit to accede to the motion
(Cheers.)
Sir J. TREL AMNIA' thought it was not quite satisfac-
tory that so many heads of departments should be without
seats in that house. (Hear.) At present the Secretary for
the Colonies, the head of the Wat -office, and the First Lord
of the Admiralty, were all members of the other house; and
there was another great department which seemed almost to
have been put in commission in the Lords—he meant the
Chancellorship of the Exchequer. (Laughter.) With regard
to the proposed committee, he doubted whether its appoint-
ment would not throw upon the house the responsibility he
wished to see attached to the Government. The house repre-
sented the whole of her Majesty's subjects,not onlythe people
of this country but the natives of the colonies. By the
treaty of Waitangi her Majesty solemnly promised the New
Zealanders the whole of their rights, tribal and otherwise.
At this moment, however, there were almost troops enough
in the colony to settle a Chinese war, or to put down another
sepoy insurrection. There were already above 3,000 Euro-
pean soldiers there, and he heard that another regiment was
under orders to reinforce them. And whence did this war
arise ? Three or four years ago, when the house was asked
to guarantee a New Zealand loan of half a million, ho
warned them that there might be difficulties respecting the
land ; and everything had happened as he feared. In the
north island, not far from Taranaki, there was a plot of
land which had been obtained from the natives of New
Zealand by practices which he would not describe. This
land had formerly been held by a tribe which, for par-
poses of whale fishing, had emigratel 33 years ago to
Queen Charlotte's Sound ; but they had always intended
to come_baek. In fact the owner of the land made his son
Wirimi Kingi, or William King, promise that he would go
back. In the meantime, Governer Hodson had bought the
rights of a few members of the tribe who had stayed be-
hind, and also of another tribe who had seized it and pre-
tended to the right of conquest. The governor evidently
though he had got a capital title to the land ; but he had
really no title at all. (Question.) He (Sir J. Trelawny)
maintained that the New Zealanders had a right to be
heard ; and he hoped that the imperial Government would
not keep up the war when we had no case whatever a
against Witimi King. (Hear.)
Mr. AD DERLEY felt justified in asking the Govern-
ment to withdraw their opposition to the motion, the only
person who had expressed the slightest disapprobation of
it being the Under-Secretary of State. (Hear.) The hon.
gentleman himself admitted that the Government had, in
consequence of the pressure put upon it, made a move in
the direction indicated, and that they had not found any in-
convenience to arise front it. He knew the difficulty there
was in inducing the house to entertain a colonial question ;
but he would appeal to hon. members whether their opin-
ions on the subject had not materially ripened in the course
even of the last hour ? The question next before the house
was ono affecting the hop duties. He confessed he should
feel himself much better able to deal with the hop duties if
the Government were prepared to say they would look int o
this enormous waste. The Under-Secretary to the Colonies
based his opposition to this motion upon the report of the
departmental committee which sat last year. He (Mr. Ad-
derley) thought if the hon. gentleman had studied that re-
port more carefully he would be more eager to enter upon
this subject. It was monstrous that nine-tenths of the Bri-
ish empire should be exempted from contributing either
men or money to the defences of the empire ; and that al I
the forces for its protection had to be raised and paid for in
this small metropolitan island. What reason was there for
this ? Not only was it so, but the New Zealand colonists
accused the home Government of having produced the pre-
sent quarrel. So that whilst the money of the taxpayers was
being expended in this lavish manner, this country was not
getting even the thanks of other parts of the empire. As to
the report, what had the report to do with this inquiry ? It
had been observed that the two gentlemen who drew up
the report differed as to details, but they were perfectly
agreed in the main that it was absurd for England to go on
finding mon and money for the whole empire. Those two
gentlemen expressly declared that upon the essence of
the report they were perfectly agreed. The Under-
Secretary for the Colonies said he could imagine nothing
more conducive to the dismemberment of the empire than
the withdrawal of British troops from the colonies. He
(Mr. Adderley) had a very different idea of the nature of the
connexion between the colonies and the mother country.
But he asked would a Canadian who was equipped at the
' national expense be anything else than a soldier of the army
of the British empire ? Why the American colonies were
separated from this country only after ten years of the most
pertinacious folly on the part of George 111. and Lord North;
and even in those days they equipped not merely armies but
navies in their struggle with the mother country. But,
after all, what was it that did break dawn the connexion
between the American colonies and England ? It was the
commencement of a system of interference which was now
quoted by hon. members as essential to the maintenance of
union between the colonies and the mother country. Every-
body knew that by teaching the colonies to rest upon the
mother country they were only weakening, paralysing, and
pauperising them. He believed that subsidising the colo-
nial church only weakened it. (Hear, hear.) Then it was
said that the imperial prerogative of the Crown had the
right to make war and peace. But colonial quarrels often
led this country into wars, just as our wars threatened them
with danger. (Hear, hear.) Some mention was made of
volunteers in the colonies ; but who could say what their
numbers were ? At any rate, five regiments had been sent
out to New Zealand ; and Parliament was so far responsible
for that war. Our only course, then, was to put down the
war, and repeal the act which implicated us in the dispute.
With regard to the Cape, the waste of troops and money in
that colony was wholly indefensible. A return was about
shortly to be laid before the house which would show that,
whereas it was provided that the German Legion were to
be placed on half-pay until they were absorbed into the
population, they had as yet been drawing full pay. The
facts which had come out in the course of this debate had
had great weight with the house, and the result of the in-
quiries of a committee would again materially alter public
opinion on this subject. He again earnestly pressed the
Government to withdraw their opposition to this motion.
Lord PALMERSTON—The right hon. gentleman cer-
tainly thinks the opinion of this house capable of very rapid
formation if he imagines that it has been matured and
brought to perfection in the short period during which this
discussion has been carried on. I perfectly agree with my
hon. friend in the objections he has urged to the motion pro-
posed. It seems to me that the objects to which the com-
mittee would direct its attention may be classed under two
heads ; first of all it would have to determine what number
of troops should be retained in each of our foreign colonies
and dependencies ; and next, it would have to determine by
whom those troops should be paid. Now, I think it is not
too much to say, that the question of what should be the

proper amount of garrison from time to time and from
year to year under the ♦arying and fluctuating circum-
stances of the empire and its relations with foreign powers
—what should be the actual number of troops in each
of our dependencies, varying infinitely in their actions
and relations—cannot be properly determined by a com-
mittee of this house, but is one which must be resolved by
the discretion of the executive Government, con-

versant from time to time with all the considerations by
which such a decision is to be governed. Then as to the
question of how those troops are to be paid. It is not within
the competence Oa committee, nor of the House of Com-
mons, nor of the British Government itself, to determine
what amount of contributions each of these colonies should

of garrisons could only be effected by
t
the expense
make ; because we all know that many of them have inde-
B British Government and Colonial
negotiations
nd Legislatures. Such negotiations could
Governments a
pende.nttiloetgis
sblaettwureees: and that any arrangements for divid-
ingthe is overnm
not be carried on by a committee of the House of Com-
mons. Therefore I am bound to say that the tendency
of the motion is rather to transfer to a committee of this
house duties and functions which properly belong to the
responsible advisers of the Crown. This is my opinion;
and I can therefore anticipate no great political result
from a committee, if the house affirm that one should be
appointed. The right hon. gentleman who has just sat
down, in his zeal to induce the Government to consent to
the motion, made use of an argument not very likely to
carry conviction to our minds. He said that if the Govern-
ment would agree to this inquiry, he should be greatly
tempted to vote for the abolition of the hop duties. (Laugh-
ter.) If the Government in its negotiations with colonial
legislatures should be provided with no better arguments to
produce an impression on them than those which the right
hon. gentleman has endeavoured to use in his negotiations
with the Government, I am afraid that neither the Go-
vernment nor the colonies would make such progress in the
distribution of expenses which the right hon. gentleman
wishes. (A laugh.) But although undoubtedly Ido not
think any good ground has been laid fora committee, and I
cannot anticipate any good results from it, yet if it appears
thattbeit eingtehne urercaolwsieSh of the
debate—(ironical use,te as I
ihcalav ron ceh collected
is of
this
have no such strong objection to the motion as to induce
hao—(ilirs)-1

the Government to divide the houseuponTt:— At the sam;
time, I repeat that I do not anticipate those ad►antages
from the appointment of a committee that the mover es-

pacts, bee:l-nee- we think that the inforinatio4 goccoaary for