THE BRITISH COLONIES.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume II, Issue 47, 22 May 1862, Page 5 (Supplement)

THE BRITISH COLONIES.

(From the Times.) Experience has taught us that there are certain fallacies which reappear at interval like comets of short period, give a feeble glare for a week or two, and then vanish. As a general rule, we do not think it necessary to note their recurrence. The “ psychological law,” which causes a certain number of men to fancy themselves capable of great political discoveries always insures the reiteration of the same shallow theories and the same commonplace arguments. Among the oldest discussions of this kind is that which relates to the alleged inutility of Colonies. It has been handed down through the doctrinaires of two or three generations, and in our time has enjoyed almost as much favor as the projects for general disarmament or for equalizing the political rights of the sexes. But for the last few years its popul arily with “thinkers” seems to have declined. These gifted persons have been forced to acquiesce in the prejudice of their-countrymen, .which is against the destruction of the British ■ Empire. The immense increase of the national commerce which has followed the founding of the Australian Colonies, and the more recent development of those in North America, have satisfied the country that it has not been a loser by them. Nor are Englishmen generally iudiiferent to the spectacle which the Empire now presents. To have established communities in every region of the globe, and to find them uniformly prosperous and desirous of maintaining their connection with the Mother Country and each other, is a triumph of enterprise and civilization of which few among us fail to be proud. So completely has the destruction of this noble fabric ceased to be an idea of any class of men who can inlluenee the country, that when we find it from time to time reproduced by some narrowmined and illiterate politician we "are content to pass it over in silence as not worth discussing. But the subject has been just brought, forward by a gentleman who is officially entitled to notice. Mr. Goldwin Smith, Professor of Modern History at Oxtord, has addressed a letter to a contemporary, in which he advocates (he dismemberment of Queen Victoria’s dominions as a policy to bo carried out thoroughly and with as little delay as possible. Now, though the opinions of Mr. Smith as an individual may carry lit tic weight yet a Professorship of History at Oxford is a public function, and the opinions promulgated under its shelter are likely to receive notice even when they bear such evident marks of perversity as the letter of Mr. Smith. It is not always safe to count on the weakness of a bad argument. We know from experience that though nofrone Englishman in a hundred sided with the Peace Society, yet so old and able a ruler as the Emperor Nicholas was firmly convinced that Manchester would never allow England to go to war. So when we find that a person who may be held to speak with some authority, as teaching history and politics in the first English University, advocates the giving up of Canada and India, Gibraltar and the lonian Islands, declares that England has relatively declined to such an ext ent as .to make the retention of her possessions impossible, and expresses a belief that the death of Lord Palmerston will be the signal for the abandonment of these ancient provinces and garrisons, we feel bound to protest against such statements, as likely to mislead opinion in foreign countries among the populations of India, and among the discontented factions of one or two of our dependencies. Should any of our foreign contemporaries, however, labour under this delusion, we can assure them that in this country at least, Professors of History do not count for statesmen, and that the habit of propounding political theories to young men who cannot contradict them, without the responsibility of enforcing them in public life, is not reckoned the surest way to acquire practical views either of philosophy or politics. It would seem that the uprising of the British American people to defend their connexeion with England, and the enthusiasm they have shown for the honour of our common flag, arc no merits in the eyes of some among us. Those who are talking continually about “our American brethren,” meaning thereby the people of the Federal States, have no word of goodwill for their own fellowsubjects who, placed in a position of great danger, did not shrink from accepting in our cause any quarrel which the violence of their neighbours might force upon them. The late events in Canada are taken as a theme by Mr. Smith, and he sees in them, not, as others da, reason for pride and gratification, but matter which should cause us to “ think seriously.” Tho result of his own “ serious thinking’ is that the British Empire is about to be broken up by revolt or foreign war, unless we forestall our adversaries by breaking it up ourselves. We have had, he tells us, “a nar-

row escape” of-a war in defence of Canada. To protect dependent colonies wo burden our people with taxation. What do wo gain in return ? “ What is the use of appointing governors of Colonies, except to the circle of men who make governing Colonies, their profession?” “This extensive and perilous connection”—namely, that between the Mother country and the Colonies —“ has entirely survived its sole legitimate cause,” which the writer declares was the monopoly of the Colonial trade. “We now are very naturally beginning to grumble at being put to the expense of doing anything for them. If they are to do nothing for us, and we are to do nothing for them where is (he use of continuing the connexion?” On the sentiment and style of this sentence we need make no comment. Nor does the argument call for much notice. Mr. Smith falls into an error of which no one conversant with the mercantile affairs of this country could be guilty. So far from the foundation and maintenance of Colonies being of no advantage to England, it can be proved by figures that our export trade has grown up and is now in a great measure supported by the settlements which Englishmen of past or present days have made in distant regions of the globe. Commercial monopoly has nothing at all to' do' with the benefits which a country like England receives from its Colonics. Those benefits depend on the fact that every emigrant becomes a far more productive customer when set down on a new soil then when ho was struggling for existence at home. He immediately obtains the means of comfort and even of luxury. His ideas of both are formed from what he has seen and envied in his own country. His wants are those of Englishmen. He naturally becomes a largo consumer of English productions. English manufactures, though not of the purest taste, English eatables and drinkables, though sometimes tar from delicate or wholesome, are exported in immense quantities to supply what is really a piece of England iu the New World or at the Antipodes. The wants of the colonist arc not only larger than those of the German or Russian, the Mexican or the Brazilian, but they differ in kind, and the difference is in our favour. France, with her artistic industry and the wines which she alone can supply, may be more cosmopolitan and more independent of special markets. But the statistics of Australian, Canadian, and Indian trade prove that even now the British settlements abroad are large elements m England's mercantile greatness. This the whole world secs and acknowledges. Not even the conquest and re-conquest of India have excited more admiration of late years among for eign nations than the colonization of Australia. Every French traveller breaks forth into raptures at the prosperity of Melbourne, and regrets that the Orleans Government did not assert its right to the Islands of New Zealand. Yet it is but a few years since the Colonies of Australia were denounced as failures, and philosophers of Mr. Smith’s school declared that the attempt to renew the cx-periment-of America must end in ruin. Australia has grown up and now takes our manufactures by millions. ’I he truth is that there is no wiser policy for a country like ours than to take possession of the waste places of the earth, and give our populations the power of settling in them under our own laws, modified if need be, to suit their particular exigencies. Men will not flock readily to a country where there is a strange or distrusted Government, nor will they so readily choose a land disfigured by slavery and mob law as one which still cherishes a feeling of loyalty to the Sovereign and of attachment to the institutions of their native country. Wo will venture to say that, of those who once had misgivings as to the policy of retaining Canada, nine out often are by this time convinced of their error, and are prepared to give her all the assistance she may require, either for maintaining her allegiance to this country, or for working out her independence, whenever she is able and willing to do so. It is true that Canada numbers as large a population as the Confederate States in 17GG; but-when the American Colonies revolted there was no powerful Empire on their borders ready to absorb them into the gulf of democracy, and uo one has elsewhere depicted in stronger colours than Mr. Smith himself the extreme pain and reluctance with which they realized the neccessity of separation from the British Crown. As to the question of military expenses, that will, we think, bo settled by the united good sense ot Englishmen and colonists. Doubtless money had been wasted, as in the Caffre wars at the Capo ; hut more recently the duty of self-de-fence has been acknowledged by every Colony of importance. This journal has for years lost no opportunity of inculcating on the people of Canada and the Cape the necessity of a military organization of their own. The example of our own \ olnntecrs has had a powerful effect, and the demonstration just made in Canada shows that henceforth those provinces need not not draw largely on the resources of England for their defence. It is also as well to remind the Professor that the Colonists have rights as well as ourselves. They are British subjects, and as long as they choose to remain so the Mother Country has no right to deprive them of their heritage. That they are contented with their position Mr. Smith does not deny, though, like the publichonse orator who claimed credit for being the first to apprise his audience that they were downtrodden and oppressed, he informs them that they sutler great evils by their connexion with us. The provision for the wants of members of the Church of England in the Colonies is denounced as “ overlaying the religion of the Colonics with a feeble Anglicanism, the creature of historical accidents iu this country and incapable of permanent!}' forming the spiritual life of a new nation.” The attachment of the French Canadians to the English Government is thus requited : —“ Our presence in Canada artificially preserves the French Canadian clement, an antediluvian relic of old French society, with its torpor and bigotry, utterly without value for the purposes of modern civilization.” But if the greater Colonics arc to be abandoned ootn lor their sake arid ours, to save them from constitutional monarchy and Anglicanism, and to save ourselves from bankruptcy, India and the Mediterranean garrisons must be given up for other reasons. • • Gibraltar, we arc told, cannot be much longer held against the Spaniards. “ The revival of the Spanish power will render Gibraltar

every clay a more dangerous and expensive possession. » * It seems to be admitted that since the vast improvement of guns and batteries it could not stand a naval seige- * * We have no longer, as when our Hag was planted on the Eoek of Gibraltar, to deal with the decrepitude of the old Spanish Monarchy, and tee must not bear ourselves as if we had.” In other words, Gibraltar must be given up, because England can no longer hold it from Spain. For similar reasons the surrender of Malta and the lonian Islands is desirable, because we cannot “ undergo the enormous expense of coping with the Mediterranean Powers in their own waters.” As ior India, the only profit of winch Mr. Smith considers to be “ a perennial supply of old Indians spending Indian pensions at Path and Cheltenham,” the prospect is a series of revolts which will soon cause the days of our dominion to be numbered. It is almost an insult to our readers to repeat such st utf as all this, but when we reflect on the ignorance of nations respecting each other, and more particularly the incredible opinions which prevail in regard to British power and policy, we feel that it is as well not to pass it over. It is no uncommon thing to find matter equally worthless reproduced abroad as the utterance of English opinion. Even the “ Discussion I ovum ’ occupied the attention of the French police long before the people who walked along I loct-street daily knew of its existence. So we may as well declare at once, for the benefit of Americans and Spaniards, Russians and lonians, Sikhs and Sepoys, that England has no thought of abandoning her transmarine possessions. If they read Mr. Smith’s letter, they will find he admits “it is not to be expected that an inch of the Empire will be given up by the present Premier,” who is too “ old in ideas” to recognize the “exigencies” which the professor has discovered. And when the hopeful event of Lord Palmerston’s resignation or demise takes place they will be much dissappointed if they expect that he will be succeeded by statesmen “ disposed to retrench the Empire.” So far from believing in her own decline, England believes that she was never more powerful than now, or more capable of holding what she has won. To the people of the Colonies we would say that, as long as they show the goodwill to the Mother Country and the loyalty to tho Crown which now prevail, no party in this country will ever dare to deprive them of the birthright of British citizenship. A r o party, we believe, in this country desires to keep them against their will; nor do we pretend to deny that the time must come when they will no longer require our aid, and when it will be better for both that they should set up for themselves. In the meantime, whatever their race or religion, their rights are secure ; and, if the letter which we have drawn from its obscurity be read in Quebec or Montreal, wo would ask the French Canadians to believe that it in no way represents the opinions of any class of Englishmen, but only the fancies at one morbid mind.