The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-15 00:00:00

THE SUN,

by the House, otherwise he should feel bound to op-
pose it.
After a few words from the Earl of LUCAN, the Bill
was postponed.
ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion of the Marquis of WESTMEA 1H
the House went into Committee on the Encumbered Es-
tates (Ireland) Bill.
The Earl of CARLISLE had no objection to the
principle of the Bill; but he objected to the amendments
to be proposed in it.
wasT The
aMnaxriqo
uu iss
H
confiscating the entire property of the country.
toof W
pressE St
hTeMßill Tw
, saidthat the
Cr eoaus rote was
The Earl of CARLISLE suggested that the Bill could
be passed through Committee pro forma, and the amend-
ments could be discussed at a tuture stage.
,
The Bill was then passed through Committee; the
third reading and the amendments to be taken on Tues-
dATSTRALIAN COLONIES GOVERNMENT BILL.
Earl GREY moved the order of the day for the Com-
mittee on the Australian Colonies Government Bill, and
the House went into Committee thereen accordingly.
Clauses 26 to 29 inclusive were adopted.
On clause 30, conferring power to establish a general
assembly for the Australian eolonies being proposed,
Lord STANLEY said the Noble Earl (Earl Grey)
had given no reason that he (Lord Stanley) knew for
establishing the system of government proposed to be
introduced to the colonies. It might be true that
in regard to those various colonies there might be
several subjects, as in the case of the North American
colonies, of common interests, in which the colonists
themselves might have an opportunity of knowing and
understanding what was best for their interests; but no
such case had been made out by the Noble Earl, wherein
some colonies should overrule others. They were now
legislating, they should recollect, for colonies having
separate interests, and they should take care, by no act
of theirs, to give one body of the colonists a power of
over-riding the acts of others. He thought the course
of proceeding in this way was very contradictory. For
example, they first proposed, by an order in council, to
delegate to the colonies a power of local legislation, and
then, by another order in council, they proposed to give
to the legislative council, or federal assembly, a power
over the acts of the colonial legislatures. The Noble
Lord then proceeded to analyse the constituent power of
the several colonies, and having protested against the
power proposed by the Bill to be delegated to the
supreme legislative body, concluded by moving, as an
amendment, the omission of the 30th clause and the
following clauses to 34 inclusive.
Earl GREY trusted their Lordships would not adopt
the amendment proposed by the Noble Lord. Those
clauses were proposed under the condition that there
were common interests in several of the colonies. For
instance, an Act had recently come home from New
South Wales, proposing to establish an uniform rate of
postage (2d.) for the whole colony. In the North Ame-
rican colonies there was a difficulty. In the Australian
colonies the subject was one of very great interest.
Again, in New South Wales, there was an Act under
consideration for establishing steam navigation. In the
West Indies a general assembly had been established,
and they were anxious to re-establish a corresponding
interest between one state and another. There was ano-
ther point of great importance in the settlement of the
Australian colonies question,—namely, the establishment
of a court of appeal, so as to avoid the trouble and delay
of an application to this country. Now a single colony could
not have a court of appeal. He had not the least
objection to it; on the contrary, he bad proposed
an amendment, the effect of which should be to
enable any legislature applying to be included in the
arrangement proposed by the Bill to be included only for
certain purposes. The Noble Lord had objected to the
wide authority to be given to her Majesty's Govern-
ment by the provisions of the measure, especially with
regard to the details of the elections, but he did not
think his objection was founded on justice, and certainly
if the Noble Lord succeeded to the Colonial-office, he
(Earl Grey) should never dream of offering opposition
to their exercise by him. Having stated other reasons
in support of the measure, be proceeded to contend that
it was by no means of the unprecedented character at-
tempted to be shown, and in support of his argument
he quoted from the Autobiography of Franklin, to show
that a congress of commissioners, as similar as the
altered circumstances of the times and the country would
permit, had taken place in the United States long be-
fore the American war, in the year 17.54.—(Hear.) This
circumstance confirmed, he thought, the opinion, that
the measure rested upon some strong foundation. Unless
they adopted some such measure as the present, doubts
and. difficulties and questions would continually arise,
which would create greater doubts and difficulties in
their settlement than those now apprehended.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE generally supported the Bill,
but recommended a postponement of the clause objected
to by Lord Stanley.

Earl GRANVILLE said he approved of the general
tenour of the measure, and he had not gathered from
either of the Noble Lords who had spoken against those
four clauses that something of what they proposed to
enact was not desirable. The Noble Earl who had
charge of the Bill had stated that those colonies who
refused to send delegates to the proposed assembly could
not be compelled by the measure to do so; and he had
also stated that he would introduce a clause, on a former
stage of the measure, to leave it optional to join with the
othr colonies in this assembly, but on what particular
subjects or interests they should feel themselves most in-
terested. That he considered a fair proposal, and one
which would prove most beneficial, and therefore he must
oppose the amendment.
The Earl of HARROWBY said if it was the case that
those clauses only proposed to give those colonies an
opportunity of conferring together on what was best
fur their mutual interests, he could not oppose the
whole of them, but he would alter them so as to limit
them simply to electing commissioners for that purpose,
and not for controlling the legislature of those colonies.
Earl GREY agreed that the proposed meeting of as-
semblies would be more a meeting of commissioners than
anything else, but it would be unfair not to give New
South Wales, which had three times the population of
Victoria, a preponderance over the latter in such assem-
bly, and, therefore, having those commissioners elected
according to the population of the different colonies was
desirable.

Lord KINNAIRD said, he firmly believed that the
first thing those delegates would do on meeting would be
to alter the constitution proposed by this measure in re-
spect of one chamber, and that not to elect an additional
one, but to get rid of the nominees. The danger, there-
fore, of passing the clause was plain, for by doing so
they gave virtually over the control of the Secretary of
State in this country respecting those colonies to the
caprice of those delegates. He had some fear of demo-
cracy becoming the prevalent doctrine in those colonies,
and he thought the passing of those clauses would be the
means of giving an impetus to the establishment of that
principle. He was sorry to have to differ from the
Noble Earl at the head of the Colonial-office; but so sure
was he that those clauses would be productive of evil
that he was compelled to do so.
Lord LYTTELTON supported the amendment. He
contended that the colonies who refused to send a deputy
to this league would be placed in a most invidious
position.
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the clause... ... ••• 23
Against it
Majority for the clause 22... —1
Earl GREY gave notice, that upon the report being
brought up he should move the addition of a clause to
provide that a colony sending delegates to the general
assembly might except certain local questions from the
jurisdiction of that assembly.
Lord STANLEY said the effect of such a clause as
this would be to send delegates from the different colo-
nies with power to vote upon some questions and with.
out power to vote upon others, and that there would
thus arise perpetual doubt as to what questions they
would have power to vote upon.
On the 32d clause, empowering the general assembly
to make certain laws,

Lord STANLEY said that one of the objects cf this
clause was to give the general assembly power to enact
laws for the formation of roads, canals, or railways, tra-
versing any two or more of the colonies. Now, would
the Noble Earl say that in the event of establishing a
railroad between Victoria and New South Wales, for in-
stance, the colonies of Van Diemen's Land and Western
Australia should contribute towards the expense of its
construction in proportion to the revenues of each co-
lony? In that case the contribution of Victoria would
be very small, whilst that of Van Diemen'sLand, which
would have no interest in the work, would be very large
indeed. Surely the Noble Earl would not give power
to the general assembly to tax the whole of the colonies
fur a purpose of that sort.
Earl GREY—The clause gave power to the general
assembly to tax the colonies for purposes of common
interest.

Lord STANLEY—They were also to hare power to
enact laws for the erection of beacons and lighthouses,
and to raise the sums which might be necessary by.an
equal per-centage on the revenues of all the colonies.
Now, supposing a lighthouse were erected at the port of
Sydney, of what benefit would that be to the colony of
maintenance of a people
Western Australia
of England for the erection and
to tax the whollveaosf
well tax the Why the noble Earl might as
given to the General y
the clause pew„
to the benefit which the colonies—not in proportionAssembly
lighthouse at Constantinople. Yet b
to the full extentof
might each be supposed
derive, but in proportion they mito
understandgs the clause in that
re-
venues.
Earl GREY did not
wordsA their
the General Assembly
money only for common
light. As he read it, it
power to make appropriation of
Assembly
clause were
purposes.
Lord STANLEY—The
--.1, That the said General
should have power to make and enact such of Australia
might be required for the formation of roads, laars as
railways traversing any two or more of the an-e-5 colonies,or
the erection and maintenance of beacons and lighthouses
for
on the coasts of such colonies, and for the appropriation-u"
-to any of the objects or purposes for which such assem-
bly should legislate of such sums as might be necessary
for the same, and for the raising of such sums by an
equal per-centage on the revenues of all such colonies."
Lord WHARNCLIFFE was of opinion that the
machinery of the Bill would make the assembly a mere
congress of commissioners, whose proceedings would
create the greatest possible confusion.
Earl GREY—It was hardly possible in creating an
authority like this to devise words which would effectu-
ally prevent all abuse of authority; but the very object
of creating a representative assembly was to deal fairly
with the whole community. He admitted that it was
necessary that some proviso should be introduced by
which the colonies net equally benefited by any public
work should not be called on to be equal contributors.
After a short conversation the clause was agreed to.
Clauses 33 and 34 were agreed to.
On clause 35,
Earl GREY,11a1'd ,in accordance with what be had