ENGLAND AND HER COLONIES.

Hawke's Bay Weekly Times, Volume 1, Issue 22, 17 June 1867, Page 141

ENGLAND AND HER COLONIES.

(From tlie London Review.)

There are few subjects of more importance at tho present time than that of the relations between Great Britain and her colonies. 'We are all proud, and we have a right to be proud, of our many and thriving dependencies. We never hear without a thrill of sa tisfaction any allusion to the empire “oni which the sun never sets and it is our favourite boast that England is the “ mother of great nations.” But we have nevertheless of late begun to perceive that this subject has a practical as well as a sentimental side. In spite of our tendency to self-glorifi-cation at the spectacle of cur own vastness, doubts have crept in whethei the empire would not be stronger it i; were les3 extended; nor are we by any means so certain as we used to be that it is either for our own interest or that of our colonial progeny that we should keep them permanently in the nurserj', aud take upon ourselves the perpetual discharge of maternal duties. The colonies have themselves been mainly instrumental in forcing this view of the matter upon us, nor do we blame them for it. As they have grown strong they have insisted on self-government. As their interests have become developed, they have set up a policy of their own, and have, insisted on adhering to it, whether we iiked it or not. While setting oil’' remonstrances at defiance, and taxing ••ur trade, they have left us only the costly honour of paying for their defence, and the doubtful advantage o; bearing the responsibility without tlupower of governing them. So long as we are at peace, we might be content to let matters take their course rathe) than incur the unpleasantness of a rupture with those who are still linked to us by ties of friendship and affection But in the present state of the world, it is by no means certain that we shall always, or even for any long period, keep out of war. And, in that event, it is impossible not to ask ourselve? whether our resources would stand the enormous strain of defending against an active enemy all the outlying settlements which would be exposed to attack. It is equally impossible not to ask whether our colonies would bear with patience and equanimity the inconveniences to which they might he subjected in the course of a conflict waged between England and sonic European of American Power, in which they had not the slightest concern. Nor can we help that, in one quarter at least, the Mangers of such a conflict arise mainly from our nominal possession of colonies which are prac tically independent, from which we derive no other advaniage than would equally accrue to us from trading with them as an independent power, or even as a part of some neighbouring state. Apart, too, from our interest in severing a connection which is as often embarrassing as profitable, there is reason to doubt whether our larger colonies would not be benefited by taking on themselves the full burthens and performing for themselves all the functions of a complete national life, ihe general set of public opiuion amongst us has certainly of recent years been favourable to the idea oi encouraging our dependencies— except such as we hold for strategic purposes to look forward to the time when they may become independent; and in that opinion we thoroughly concur. It is, iu fact, mainly owing to a conviction that this is ihe natural and true des tiny of our colonies that the scheme of a confederation of the British North American provinces has found-so much favour in this country. Nightly or -wrongly, we see iu it an organization which may grow into a state capable

of defending itself, and of maintaining its integrity as an American power; and for that reason we listen somewhat impatiently to the objections which the maritime provinces urge against it. How is it possible to regard England and her colonies as

partners ? They are not embarked—so to speak—in the same business. They form parts of different territorial systems; the interests of one are not the interests of another; the risks are unequally divided amongst them; and the effect of establishing a permanent mutual assurance society amougst theui must be to confer an immense advantage upon those most exposed to dange? at the cost of those least exposed. It is idle to talk of the general interests‘of an abstraction like the British Empire, when it is evident that hardly any conceivable case could tceur iu which it would be for the advantage of more than one partner in the firm to go to war. What, for instance, could the Australians or New Zealanders gain by binding themselves to take part in any quarrel between England and Russia about the Eastern question ? Or any conflict between Canada and the United States in reference to the right of whale fishery in the St. Lawrence ? We are aware that they are at present exposed tu the consequence of such events, and we are only surprised that they should be content to run the risk. The colonies are the best judges of what is foi their advantage; but our true course is to narrow our responsibilities, and to concentrate our means of action.