The Globe. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1876.

Globe, Volume VII, Issue 728, 19 October 1876, Page 2

The Globe. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1876.

As a rule despatches passing from Colonial Governors to the Secretary of State for the Colonies are models of dry officialism. But the despatch of his Excellency the Marquis of Normanby, laid before Parliament recently ia of a very different character. It is singular for the absence of the characteristics to which we have alluded. It is outspoken to a degree, and shows, we regret to say, a strong feeling of partisanship which should never have been imported into it. WitJjnut re-

ference to the matters in dispute between Sir George Grey and the Government, which led to this despatch, we may just point out the ill effects, generally speaking, if the Governor of a colony takes up the cause of any one party. The position of a Governor, we take it in relation to political parties, should be that of an impartial unbiassed arbitrator. To take up any position but that; to identify himself with, or become the champion of, any particular section of politicians, is derogatory to the high post he holds. Now it is impossible to read the despatch referred to, without noticing the very strong spirit of partisanship infused into it. Indeed, had it been written or dictated by Sir Julius Vogel himself, it could hardly have been more so. We think this is a mistake. The proper course for his Excellency to have pursued was to submit the telegram and despatch forwarded by Sir George Grey home, to his responsible advisers, for them to found a memorandum in reply, and content himself with forwarding it in the usual course. They were the parties accused of using influence with the Governor to get the men-of-war stationed on the coast moved up to Auckland to enforce abolition. It was therefore for them to reply, and the despatch before us would have been a perfectly justifiable defence from them. A memorandum from Ministers was sent it is true, but it did not deal with the subject in that comprehensive manner which one would have expected from them in the circumstances. It appears rather as supplementing the despatch of his Excellency, instead of being the principal portion of the reply. On the question of abolition, his Excellency was perfectly justified in giving his reasons for transmitting the measure home for approval. As her Majesty’s representative, he deemed it his duty to support its ratification by the Home authorities, hence no exception can be taken to that part of the despatch. But to the incorporation of a private letter written to the A.D.C, of the Governor there are grave objections. Such a course is quite unprecedented, and appears to us to bear out very strongly the idea of partizanship on the part of his Excellency. That a private letter written by a political opponent of Sir George Grey should be thus accepted, without an opportunity of the latter refuting it, is quite opposed to ail notions of justice. Here we have a letter sent home to the Secretary for the Colonies, behind his back, containing the imputation that Sir George Grey had, for political reasons, set afloat a canard, and afterwards used it in support of his arguments. We do not for one moment believe that anyone seriously believed, even in Auckland, that any Ministry would be mad enough to commit such an outrage on the liberty of the people as to advise the enforcement of measures by armed force. Bat, white wo say this, we cannot but feel that this portion cfrhe despatch was ill-advised and entirely out of place. The tone, too, of some parts of it are scarcely in keeping with the dignity of the office of Governor of a colony ; especially those referring to Sir George Grey. Taken as a whole, therefore, we think that it is matter for regret that the Governor should, in any way have allowed himself to be drawn into the differences existing between the two parties, and especially that he should —as the despatch undoubtedly proves have espoused oue side, with what we cannot but characterise as more vigour than discretion.