The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-14 00:00:00

Til

meeting, on the Government for having deferred it last
year. He trulted the anendnaer,t of the Hon. Member
for Maltoa on the subject of the waste lands would re-
ceive the favourable attention of the Government, as
wok as that which he had himself suggested with respect
to the police expenditure, and more especially as he be-
lieved the principle of the Bill would not be at all affected
by either.
Mr. AGLIONI3Y begged to make only one or two
remarks in that stage of the debate. On the subject of
the waste lauds he would not cuter, because he conceived
that to be out of place on the present occasion. With
respect to the civil list he would only observe, that he
thought it ought to be put under the control of the local
legislature, and the sooner the better. Now with re-
spect to the present Bill and the various amendments
proposed, it seemed to him that the question raised by
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxford was
simply this, "would they take the Bill as it was, or post-
pone it for another session?" Now, weighing the balance
of good and evil, he (Mr. Aglionby) was for assenting
to the Bill as it was at present. He concurred in a great
deal of what had fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman

opposite, and agreed with him in some of his objections;
but, at the same time, he considered iL was better to take
the Bill now than postpone it. It would be of import-
ance to show the colonists that the Imp trial Legislature
was disposed to take a step and then a vote on the
management of their own atfa:rs. If he thought that
was a coal measure, he would oppose it; but as it recog-
nised a proper principle of self-government, and gave a
means for improving and reforming the constitution

hereafter. if toil. nd expedient, he did -not think it ought
to be put off for another session.
Mr. SCOTT said the Honourable Member who had
last spleen supported the Bill because it was not a final
one. He considered it a bad and a faulty measure, and
therefore he hid come to the conclusion that he ought
to vote in favour of the Bill. Now he (Ur. Scut) hoped
other Hon. Members would come with him to a different
conclusion, and vote for the postponement of the third
reading. because it was a bad and o, faulty Bill. It was
not at all astonishing that some of the colonies should
be anxious to obtain representative institutions; bat he
denied the assumption that the present Bill was so much
desired by the colonies as had been stated. They who
thought with him maintained that there was by no
means sufficient evidence before the House to show that
the colonists were in favour of the Bill. That was the
reason why they moved that the third reading should
be postponed until further advices were received from
the colonies. They were not to take statements from
newspapers as authoritative documents with respect to
the state of public feeling in the colonies. They shotild
look to the reports of the Legislative Council, the ad-
dresses of the governors, and the opinions expressed in
their petitions by the colonists themselves. The Go-
vernor of New' South Wales, in two separate dispatches,
hal strongly stated his opinion in favour of two
assemblies; and the Governor of Van Diemen's Laud
had expressed a similar opinion—an opinion which was
also entertained by the Legislative Councils of South
Australia and of New South Wales. Her Majesty's
Ministers themselves had stated that the measure was
not in accordance with their own views, but had been
brought forward to meet the wishes of the inhabitants
of the colonies. Then, again, it was laid down in the
report of the Privy Council, which might be looked upon
as the portion of the Government most capable of torming
a wise decision upon the subject, that a double chamber
would be preferable to a single one. Such an arrange-
ment would at the same time be more consonant with
the principles of the British constitution. With regard
to the proposal for the establishment of a federative as-
sembly, be should say that, in his opinion, it would be
more desirable that the colonists should send their repre-
sentatives or delegates to this country than that they
should send them to a federative assembly in any of the
colonies. He believed that the measure as it then stood
was not approved of by the colonists, while it was con-
(lerened by the Privy Council in this country, and by a
large portion of the House of Commons; and he there-
fore thought that they ought to postpone the third read-
ing, end endeavour to bring in a Bill ot- a less objection-
able character, and one more likely to produce satisfac-
tion in the colonies. _ _

Mr. SIILEON said he could not help feeling much
surprise at the course which her Majesty's Government
had pursued upon that subject. At the commencement
of the session the House had heard a most liberal colo-
nial policy clearly pointed out in the Speech from the
Throne. The establishment of a double chamber had
been strongly advocated by Honourable Members on
both sides of the House. The colonial assemblies and
the colonial governors had expressed their opinions to
the same effect ; and yet the House was then called upon
to pass a measure of the directly opposite character.
He was not one of those who looked upon the colonies
ab incumbrances to this country. On the contrary, he
thought that the Imperial greatness of Great Britain was
bound up in their maintenance, and he would never be
a party to a course of policy which would, at whatever
distance of time, present the. *ista of a severance. The
two prominent points broughterward in this discussion
were, the question of a double chamber, and that of Im-
perial control over the local tiNina of the colony. With
resuect to the first they were fad- that the Bill gave a
power to the colonists to modify the it constitution ;
but they ought either to have legislated for the
colonies, or have Liven them the power of legislating for
themselves ; but they had done neither one thing nor
the other. It was said that the materials for a second
chamber did not exist in the colony, and it was pos-
sible that a difficulty might be found at present in form-
ing such a body; but the course which they were asked
to pursue would tend to perpetuate this utifirtunate state
of things. With reference to the second point, it had
ly:en asked what were local Acts ; hutithis he thought
had been sufficiently answered by the lion. Baronet the
Member for Southwark. After all that had been said by
the Noble Lord at the head of the Government what did
they see? A Bill brought forward, under which the Co-
lonial-office was left an incubus still pressing upon the
colonies and paralysing their energies. With these
views be would support the amendment of the Right
Hon. the Member tor the University of Oxford.—(Hear.)

Mr. HUME agreed with the Hon. Member that the
Colonial-office had b-en an incubus pressing on the
energies of the colonies ; and it was because he was
anxious to get rid of its baneful domination that he had
decided on giving his support to the Bill. His aspira-
tions had always been to see the colonies governing
themelves, for he felt convinced that if they went on in
the old track they would lose every colony they had.
The Cape of Good Hope afforded a good example of the
advantages of self-government. That colony had the
power of forming its own government on the broadest
principles. There were two chambers there which
ho preferred, but then they were elected Chambers
and had no nominees among them. In fast, one of his
principal objections to this Bill was the mixture of
nominees in the representation. The 35th clause gave

the colony the power of remodelling its constitution ; I
true, it must come home for approval, but this would only
cause a slight delay, and would be much better than
waiting a year to legislate.
Mr. ADDERLEY observed that even the Hon. Mem-
ber for Montrose and the other adherents of the Go-
vernment on the Treasury benches who had spoken,
while they supported the Bill, yet one and all censured
the measure in detsil. The Bill, in fact, if it passed,
would owe its success partly to the apathy and partly to
the antipathies of the House. The professed objects of
the Bill were to consult the wishes of the colonists and
to avoid delay. There was an old adage, " more, haste,
worse epeed," of which the conduct the Government
in this instance efforded an admirable illustration; for it
was not likely that any permanent settlement wouti be
arrived at under this Bill for twenty years to come. A
complete innovation was attempted to be made in the
principles on which the British constitution rested, and
upon a measure of this kind, anomalous in its character,
founded on no precedent, having no analogy with that
constitution, ho maintained the colony had a right to
be consulted. The same could not be said of
the project of the Honourable Baronet the Member for
Southwark, which was founded on the British constitu-
tion. The measure proposed having four different
parties in the chamber—there was the Government
party, the representative party, the local South Austra-
lian party, and the federal party. He was satisfied that
such an arrangement would never work well. Then
with regard to the franchise, it was evident that there
would be a general demand for an extension of the
franchise in the colony. Questions of that nature Would
constantly turn up, and the effect would be that they
must be referred t i the mother country. Endless delay
would be, the result, and dissatisfaction would inevitably
ensue. The Hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary for
the Colonies had told them that the question before the
House that night was between the possession of the eolo-
ni,s and their total loss, and he was ready to admit
that such was the case, but be denied that the retention
of the veto had anything to do with the retention of the
colonies. He would remind the House that it was the
exercise of the veto that had caused the loss of the
North American colonies, and in the case of South Aus-
tralia he had no doubt it would lead to endless disputes.
He hoped if the Government saw any means by whielt
they could more effectually carry out what thea, laid
were their two objects namely, the retention of
the colonies, and the avoidance of delay, that they
would have the courage to postpone or wiiilaraw the
present measure.
Mr. DIVETT and Mr. Macg7egor rose together, but
the latter gentleman gave "...ay. Ho (Mr. Divett) must
complain that the Hon. tientleman who had spoken last
had made the same speech three times over. He com-
plained, also, ttat the members of the Colonial Referee
Associatior. monopolized all the talking to theithselves;
and they were also endeavouring to reftrieile extreme
RadUcaliem with extreme Toryism. The present was
the third session in which this Bill was brought for-
ward; and he was thoroughly persuaded that it would
give satisfaction to the colony.
Mr. STANFORD regretted that he Was not able to
givealways his
Gentleman s
ds ui
spp; pooas reutdd t oht
he regretted
e pay
aa
ya l e na tdt me
this
tio
nt ofh
et
omthauenreyßtaihgsihnbgteHtuho,aanst.
fell from the Right II onou roalvbaelnredu
Government was
maosaonitilut
stohoguill.cel
up
pegtrheetir euxuntrtermuleluyveirf teed
theG
he had always considered that control as most im-
portant in enabling the Government at home to send
out the surplus population. He did not think that
the arguments against the exercise of the veto
were very happily urged, because the instances:referred
to could not under any point of view be brought forward
in eases cf it tyrannical interference with the wishes or
feelings of the colonists. In the speech of the Hon. and
Learned Seconder of the amendment, which he (Mr.
Stanford) had lost a very good dinner by remaining in
the House t 3 listen to—(t_ laugh)--be thought that
Hon. and Learned Gentleman had done himself injustice.
He had compared himself to a British Diogenes, seeking
for the constitution, and yet he had objected to the Bill
because it was not analagous to the constitution which
be could not find. The Hull. and Learned Member had
also described the people in the colonies as being ar-
, rayed against and hatine each other, and he must there-
, lore express his astonishment that he should have urged
as an argument against the Bill that it would not make