The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1894-05-08
ENGLAND AND THE COLONIES
A Policy that W Guild Lead to separa-
ton.

A Policy that " ould Lead to separa-
ton.
The Premier this afternoon, speak
ing to representative Of the Star,
made an important statement Oh the
question of reciprocal treaties Us
affecting the British colonies. IL is
subj ct of vast Importance which
is engaging some attention in Lon
don Just now in consequence of rep
reservations which have been made
to the Imperial authorities by Mr..
Robert Reid. Veto ian Minister for
Defence. Replying ia direct query
Sir George Dibbs said: No, do not
think what Mr.. Reid suggests can he
done. Do you suppose, he question
ed, that the Imperial Government
will be willing Ia give coordinate
powers to the colonial Grvernments
un this matter! certainly do not.
The English Government claims.
aud has always claimed the sole
right to make any treaties for the
Empire, and is perfectly justified in
making the claim. What is now be-
ing sought by the Nictorians is the
right OF the colonies To make trea-
ties, so that We could say to the
United States of America for in
stance, "if you will let our wool in
free we will let you send in various
manufactured products without
charging any duty" What would
then be the situation! England,
who has always let our raw material
in free, would be- in u worse position
than the United States in regard To
those manufactured articles of
the latter country which under
such a treaty we should exempt.
England would not De- likely tn let
that state Of affairs continue. NJ,
the English Government will never
give such a power to any hran"h of
the Empire. II would bp lik. allow.
ing the left arm to make a treaty
against the right arm. Say. for
argument sake. that the colonies had
the power, aud the wool class got
the upper hand here. They would
simply force wool on to all the mar.
kets Of the world. aud To- do So would
make reciprocal treaties with other
nations to take certain Of their pro
| ducts in exchange. Because Amer.
/ lea would take our wool free they
would say Wa will take Californian
wheat free tn the injury ot our own
! farmers. The end would he that
England would find that rival States
were "rcciprorating" her out Of the
! Il. l.ata - 1. nj kkHn AZ.
admitted our produce free, and she
would lind that her colonies taking
advantage Of that would hm con.
! tracing with outside nations in u
way that would give them an undue
advantage over her. II is like inter.
I colonial freo.trade, IL sound, welt in
the ~ but would not work O'It salts
factorily IN practice. 1, would al
low the manufacturer Of Victoria IN
the one ease, or a foreign power IN
the other. Ia send To us free or duty
clothing or whatever h" might make.
while the Englishman would hayetu
pay duty On what he supplied Us.
How long would that stand with
England! II would simply force
.oparsti"n npnn nS whether We liked
il -, not. "" have NO right to put
England in a worse position than
any of her colonies, or than foreign
state. 4 foreign State would. OF
course, jump at such chance oi
weakening England ny taking away
the trade which now bclong- To it,
II is Of no use the colonies wishing
To exercise the rights of independent
States 10 this way. Lord Il psebery
will no doubt give considerati ion Ia
the matter, hut the people al
England will, when they come /,
look AT ii, see what the poSsibl" dan
gers are, and never consent Ia H.,
risk Of being placed IN II worse posi-
ton relative to other powers than
they now occupy. England j. III,
country We have relied on for the
money We have borrowed. She has
protected aud reared Us in our in
fancy, aud why should We seek I,
put her ia "a weaker position. do
not think anyt iing eau b" done in
giving a preference of trade ~ he,
tween England and tn. colonies
She might perhaps let our wines in
on better terms. -Nyd""y star.