SYSTEMATIC COLONIZATION. (From the Times, May 22.)

New Zealander, Volume 4, Issue 252, 28 October 1848, Page 3

SYSTEMATIC COLONIZATION. (From the Times, May 22.)

Dobs it ever occur to the Government or individuals to estimate the i-xpense of main aiuing a single pauper through i\il the veai in a woikhouse undei oidinaiy cucuiiittances ? Do they further take into considers* tion tlie aveiaje number of persons wlu receive occasional out-dooi relief in the different, parishes or England ? Do they count up the whole expenditure which, unit r the system of local taxation, is annually incurred for the suppoit of the recognised poor ? But if ihey do this, do they rcfl'ct on the sums which no cnmpulsoiy assessment could extort, hut which private and often nimeless charity fretly bestows on those who, though they aie not classified as paupers, yet receive mo^t substant al and necessary aid from our infirmaiies, hospitals, dispfiisaiies, and local tocieties ? 1 We su ipect that few persons who have not some ] official call to do so ever give their attention to this most in -meutous branch of social statistics, except when they are pinched by the pressure of parochial taxation. Yet on a knowledge of the«e details, and on their due consideration, depends the solution of the momentous and appalling problem of the day — the reconcilement of property with the increase of our population and the clams of our poor. Taking the report supplied by Mr. Porter, in his Progress of the Nation, ai the basis of our ealcultttions, we may infer from the Poor Law expenditure of the bix yearn ending 1841 that its average amount now is about £5 000 00 J a»year, or something moie th<m a pound for each head of a family in England. Nor is there any likelihood of this being diminished. On the contraiy. the popular sentiment is running strongly in favour of changes on the side of humanity, which must involve a more liberal outlay of money. This £5,C00,')U0 will, then, piobably run up to M 000,000. But even then it will not fairly represent all that is spent upon the poor.' Putting aside that uumerosa tokors wh'» depend upon the contribution of friends or patrons for preserving the externals of" respectability" — theclsss whicb is too feeble to woik, or too proud or ti o timid to oeg— how ru'iny are there for who.n the exettiomof priva'e chai ity and the powers of private influence, and the conscientious remembrr.ncc cf services long ago poifoimed, are consttntly exercised to rescue them fro u the shame of the " inmates" or the disconufoit ot thtt " caiuai" ward I Then, add to these the number ot applicants for admission to metropolitan and county hojpitrilb, alm&houhes, and orphan schools and shall we err in a serting that the legal and national tax col lected for the pour represents only half the money which, is annually expended on them? We are not grumbling ut this. If we did not Know the sin und mibchiel of a chuckling and self-eomplaceney we might exult ut an exhibition of munificent and spontaneous gener sity sudi as no other na ion in Europe can boast of. But we simply indicate the fact. We know that ihe poor shall never cense in the land. We know that whatever it done by the state or by individuals, by bounty, by advice, by reproof, by chiding, on one hind, or even by prudence, arrangement, aul saving, on the other, still there will exist a great mass of uureheted iniseiy, a gr^at pie»su c of unemployed labour. We are huxiuus to dimmish, as tar as possible, both the misery and the pressure. Destroy them we cannot. But — when we look round to the imperial tesources ot Great Bnuiii — to the markets she has created, the a.ts she has invented, and the comraeiCJ she lus developed — 1,0 what sh" has done, and to whtt she has ra c opportuni ie.s of doing — when we look to what Ameticd once was and what she now is— regard the present along with the possible conditon of Austria dv— we are convinced that it is quite within the scope ol Dur capacity to turn that which seeass a cuise into a bl bsing, and to supersede the turbulent discontent of h<tlNeiu^luyed multitudes by the iyell»direo:ed effort* of tt nation >1 col nuz.i tion.

Our colonies present the very re«ervoir we requite ; but to ghip off cargoes of human beings who are starving here, in order that they may starve elsewhere, is quite out of the question. As a nation, we would uot, if we could, act so. As a metropolitan state, wo cannot now do so if we would. 'Ihe Legislmures of Nova Scoua and Canada hnve put an effectual obstacle in the way of such whol sale deporta'ions, and colonies more remote are saved from such an infliction by their very distance. What the colomes want, and what we ous;ht to send them, is, fir^t, sound, healthy, and uw duitrious labour, for which employment al home is intermittent or ill paid. Next, a class of pcrsoi.s who are qualified to give a proper tone to a young society. It therefore becomes the duty, not on'y of the executive, which ii perhaps iucom|>e'ent to btruggle singlehanded with the emergencies of such a piessure, but also of the Parliament and the people, who have better opportunities of knowing what that pressure is, be» cause it directiy touches their purses, the it comforts, and their interest — it is the duty of all alike to provide means, as wel l for their own rr lief, as fo. ili.it ot others, by some-digesieii scheme of emigration. Ab it is, our colonies, instead of being, as they ought to be, a gain and a profit, are an incumbrancc and a loss to us. We turn them to no account — nay, we do worse than this. Our injustice is not merely negative, it is positive. We design greu* arMevemeuti, and leave them half done ; we draw up projects of g:iMt and specious promises ; but \y° fill up our sketch with a feeble and niggard hand. Wt benin by inundating p colony with labour uf an exceptionable kind, and then exhust it of ull labour. We first' swamp u will vagabonds, and then deprive it of servants. We fiiat throw away millions of acres on men vvho even it they had skill, had no capital wherewith to till them ; and then etirtled by the solitude which we ourselves have made, we burden capital with conditions which preclude the supply of industry. Canada bears witness against the effects of our unrestricted grants ; Ai>. o U ilia, no lew against our over-stringent condition*. The fabe of the latter especially challenges the sympathies of England. According to tue testimony of a competent witness (Mr. A. Cuningharue, from Port Phillip) before the Lords' Committee on Emigration :—: — " The wtnt of labour is by far the greatest impediment to the pi ogress of the colony, either social or pecuniaiy. * * * Four years have now elapsed, (luring which there has been scarcely any emigration. In flic year 1844 there; were about 1400 people sent out ; but, with that exception, emigration, lias been at a stand still. The result is, that not only is labour exWcmely dear, but it is almost impossible to be got at all. The wool is worse got up, and everything but woolgrowing is at a perfect stand still from want of labour. I have no doubt that from Port Phillip alone the value of the wool has been deteriorate] to the value of £4 i,OOO, in consequence of the deficiency of hands upon the last wool clip alone." Further on, the same witness says— " The colony nil I absorb many more than we cou'd count upon for future years. At present there is not merely a want of the regular animal supply which is demanded by the annual increase of both sheep and cattle, but there is ft deficient supply of three years to make up. Many colonists have not built houses, nor fenced paddocks, nor nude any improvement*!, owing to the want of labour. I think that, if ti-jiit thousand statute adults were introduced into Poit liiiilip ju-fc now, the whole of them would be absoibud at good wages, n,nd with abundant rations ; * * and that, for three or foui yeurs to come, f»ur thousand or five thousand mi^h be received each year. We can, employ any species ot labour; baciuse, shepherding is not an exhausting or fatiguing operations." With respect to the condition of the settled emigrant, he adds this important information : " Many instance hive occurred of the change of labourers into proprietors. I believe that, amongst steady and intelligent men, to set up for themselves after from five to eight yean of labour is the rule ; and to fail in doing so the exception." This was also confirmed by Mr. Morphett, who said — " One slight evil of our present state is, that the lubouier* too rapidly get out of the labour inaiket. Tne present rate of wages enables the labourers, too soon for a sufficient return to the capitalist, to get out of the i anks of labour into the class ot tenant-farmers or proptietors." We might multiply quotations of this kind ; but we content ourselves with referring to an extract from & letter which appeared in our columns on Saturday— *' We are much obliged for the stir you are making about emigration ; we are dreadtully off for labour in all parts of the colony ; men just do as they like ; ths lumpers, for instance, struck work this week, and succeeded in getting 6s pc-r day— th.s in a country where meat is Id. per lb., and bread l|d. In the interior the servants are masteis, and idle one-half their time. You must strdn every nerve to send us relief, for fully thiee-fourths of the 50U0 emigrants now coming out will be instantly absorbed on landing for domestic servants in Sydney, Melbourne, &c.'' Now, we ar« willing to maks all reasonab'e deductions from the colouiingof these descriptions The persons who wiite and speak thin are interested perBuns } true, but tiiuy are interested in obtaining labour. So far theii credit and their interests are in harmony. There is a dearth of labour in the vast plains of the northern, and a no le^s dearth in the fertile tracts of the southern districts of the Australian continent. The corn, the grasses, the sheep, the wool— all aie calling for more of the lundi and arms who do no work m En >land. Tuey oiler in return, if not the future affluence which has been promised in the warm lan* gudge qu ted übove, at least competent subsistence and permanent employment Ii ii not worth while to consider and yield to the prayei thus Vdfted from the far Aatipodes ? Is it not better to employ the funds of our compulsory and our spontaneous charity in furnishing industry with, the means of woil" abroad, than in feeding idleness in barren discomfort at home ? Is not the packet better than the poor-law officer, the pastures of Port Phillip or Sydney of more promise than the union workhouse ? Would is not be more satisfactory to each ot the 5,000,000 heads of families throughout England that, instead of the average £1 which he is annually flinginginto the stagnant and iterile pool of hoptLss and useless unworki he should invest at least half o» this ia the nourishment of present and the creation of future industry, in that great southern world which calls us masters ? To the government does this consideration mainly apply. Without governmental aid but little enn, UNDERTHE PRESENT SYSJEMOF LAND SALES, bf.effcCtually done ; but when government has done its most, then much that ii of vait moment — the management, moral control, kindly care, and the education of a new people for social and civil privileges — all this must rest with flic i I'l'li'^nro, the conscience, and the benevolence ot the colonists and their friends in .England.

' The commercial new* brought by the Britannia re p-esents moniy as inactive, without any urgent demand" Evhinse on London, 10;} to 11. In cotton the market was quiet. Breid stuffs were dull and declining. Flush's present 1.0 chunge.