The Australian Colonies Bill.

New Zealander, Volume 6, Issue 462, 18 September 1850, Page 2

The Australian Colonies Bill.

As this is unquestionably the most important political topic affecting the Colonies in Australasia, we are willing to devote to it all the space at our disposal for the purpose. However, even did other demands on our attention permit us to copy the whole of the discussions to which it has given rise in Committee, as they appear in the papeis before us, they would have no very great interest for the majority of our readeis — being for the most part discursive and ultimately resultless conversations on points of detail. We tlv refore condense into the shot test compass consistent with clearness, the proceedings, from the date of the adverse dcci-

sion on Sir William Rloleswortii's proposition for Two Legislative Chambers, (with which the readers of the New Zealander were made acquainted on the 2-Uli of last month). For this piupose, we compile from the accounts given both by our Sydney and our Mobart Town contemponuies When the Committee resumed, on the 22nd of Apul, after a conversation — which ended in nothing — on an objection laised by Air. Y. Smith lespecling the disregard shewn by the framers of the Bill to the claims of the squatters to a fair voice in the representation, and an equally abortive attempt by Mr. Anstey to exclude nominees of the Crown from the Legislative Councils, and to render those Assemblies simply elective— Mr. J. E. Denison raised a debate of some impoitance on the 13th clause. This clause authorises the Governors and Councils of the respective colonies, subject to the provisions relating to the General Assembly, to make laws for their government, and for appropriating the revenue of each colony, provided they do not interfere with the Crown lands therein. Mr. Denison's amendment would give power to the several Legislatures of the several Colonies to dispose of the ivaste lands therein. Lord John- Russell argued that, in Western Australia and other colonies, the very large grants of land made to the early colonists, had produced the most injurious effects, and were still the source of constant disputes and evils, preventing the making of roads, the improvement of the land, and the condensation of the inhabitants. At the same time, his lordship admitted that he now saw valid objections to investing the Federal Legislature with power of control over the waste lands j and he thought the better course would be to omit all clauses on this point, and to leave the whole question of waste lands as it stood under the Land Sales Act of IS4-2. . . . Mr. Rolbuck suggested a changing the appropriation of lands as directed under that Act, by narrowly defining the limits of each colony, and within those limits leaving the appiopriation of lauds to the colony itself, but placing all beyond the so fixed limits at the disposal of the Crown. Seveial members, amongst whom was ftir James Graham, applauded this suggestion, and urged it on the consideration of (Government. Mr. Denison complained that, in a very thin house, Lord J. Russell had made no less impoitant an alteration in the Bill than the withdrawal from the General Assembly of the management of waste lands : it was impossible to tell how far the gratification with which the measure was said (o be received by the colonies, might be diminished by this change. He, however, withdiew his amendment, with an understanding that the subject might be considered again on bringing up the repoiU. . . On a subsequent day, the hon. member gave notice that he would take that opportunity of returning to the subject. [We may note that in the course of this discussion, Mr. Aglionby's identification with the schemes of the New Zealand Company exposed him to a hard hit from that unmercifully hard hitter, Mr. Roebuck. Mr. Aglionby volunteered to the Government an advice to be " cautious in leceiving the proposals put forth by the hon. member for Sheffield." Mr. Roebuck, with characteiistic promptitude and acerbity, rejoined that " he would suggest to the noble lord (J. Russell) what he should not do : he should not permit any interference with his arrangements by persons who in virtue of a pseudonym attached to a Company, had obtained from the wild inhabitants of a distant colony, at fictitious prices, power over large tracts of teintory. Hear, hear."] The 17th clause was next the theme of a discussion of considerable interest. That clause restrains the Colonial Government fiom altering the sums appropriated to the support of public worship in the colonies, without the consent of Her Majesty. Mr. C. Lusiiington moved the omission of that part of the clause, on the giounds that it trenched on religious liberty, and that it by implication imputed to the colonists a disposition to neglect the interests of public worship... The Government adhered stedfastly to the clause. Mr. Labouchere said " Formerly the Established Church possessed exclusive privileges in those colonies, a circumstance which was likely to create religious discoid ; but since the present arrangement had been established, the greatest satisfaction had prevailed. He objected to the establishment of a dominant church in the colonies ; but he was equally opposed to the voluntaiy principle, and would do nothing to encourage it." Lord John Russfll spoke to the same effect, specially urging that clergymen who had gone out to the colonies on the faith of this arrangement,, had " vested rights," of which they should not be deprived ; and that the Government, having found the present system in existence, did not think it wise to have it declared by a vote of the House that none but the voluntary system could now be tolerated. . Mr. Lushington pressed his amendment to a division, on which it was rejected by a majority of 203 against 54. On the 25th of April the Committee again sat, and several matters of interest were discussed — the decisions, however, being uni- > formly in favour of the Government proposals. The principal debate was on the 20th clause, giving power to establish a Federal Assembly for the Austialian colonies. Mr. Vernon Smith (who, as many of our readeis may re-

member, was Under Secietary for the Colonies fiom 1539 to 1811) led the opposition to the pioposal, as being uncalled for by the colonists, and moie congenial with a republican than a t moiKuchical system. Mr. LAEouciiniß (who seems likely to achieve a yet higher reputation in Parliament by his thoughtful and practical study of this gieat measure) replied, that the establishment of a Geneial Assembly would tend lather to unite than to separate the colonies from the mother country. "If the colonies saw that they had an interest in meeting tegether for paiticular purposes, they ought to lie invited to do so legally, instead of being left to illegal means to effect that object. The power was to be only permissive after all, and he believed that by adopting the clause they would be strengthening and not weakening the connexion with this country." A long discussion issued m the adoption of the clause as proposed in the Bill, by a majority of 64 a over 10. The remaining clauses were then agieed to ; 1 the House resumed ; and the Report was ordered to be received on the 3rd of May. Th.it step would, of course, affoid opportunity to the opponents of the measure to stait their objections afresh— provided only that they a little metamorphosed in shape. Our latest papers give the following threatenings for the bringing up of the Report — the majorities against each and all of which it will, i almost certainly, be our duty to repoit in a future number : — • May 3. The following Notices stood upon the books to-rJay on considetation ol lip Australian Colonies Government BUI, as amended : — 3, Sir William Moluhwcrth— To move, that the bill be recommitted. 4. Mr. Monatt to move that the bill he so amended as to provide that the nuximum number of membeis to be nomina'cd by the Crown to the Legislative Assembly or Council, in e<-ch colony, shall in no ca-e exceed one-fouith of the whol* iiumbei of whit k suck Assembly or Count il shall tested vuly consist, 4 5. Mr. Gladstone. --H the House sh .11 adopt the . punriple of an Electhe Lr-gjslative Council to move a clause. Also to move another clause. 6 Mr. Anstey, — In schedule (C) part 1, instead of the sum of " £1*3,300," to substntite "£5000.'" To move the inseition of the following clause: — Aud be it tiiicted, tuat the fiist wi.t-i for the election of the si veral Legislative Councils for the haid colonies of Victoria, Vat) Diemen's. Lmid, South Australia, anil Western Austulia respectively, shall, a-, soon as conveniently may be after the pas^in^ of the several ordinances constituting the same, bi« usucd by the Governors, Lieutenant-Governor 1 !, n? pusoiib actually administering Uig Government of the said colonies respectively, and Licit such ordinances shall have and out nn the foice of l»w from and lminediaiely after ihe pas'iu" theieof lesuectively, anything in the paid recited acts contained lo the contiary m anywise notwithstanding. The bill, however, was not brought under considera» tion.

The town-talk since Satuiday has turned very much on a duel fought on the morning of that day by two gentlemen, from whom, — (at least fiom one ot them, who holds, or did hold at the time, the office of Justice of 'the Peace) — better things might have been expected. Our fust intention was to take no Lnotice whatever of '.he disgraceful affair — believing that contemptuous silence is sometimes a justly punitive as well as a fitting mode of treating such cases. But the notonety of the transaction, and the publication of it by our contempoiary, (in language of laudable and .faithful censure however), seems to impose < upon us the necessity of thus briefly recoiding it amongst the passing occurrences of the day. The origin of the quauel was fooh&h and unseemly ; the sequel was at once absurd and criminal. The parties implicated have hippily escaped without, injury to life or limb ; but they must make up their minds to suffer a sad (though we would willingly hope only a temporal y and remediable) loss in the estimation of the sound-minded portion of the public. Amongst scores whom we have heard speak of thexircu instance, we have not met with a single individual who did not adveit to it either m terms of ridicule, or of stern condemnation, or with a mingling of both. We abstain, however, from further comment. We can truly say that we have rarely penned a paragraph with more of unaffected regret. But we dare not permit private or personal feeling to tie our hands in a matter in which the ciuse of public morality and the interests of society are so gravely involved as m a revival of the all but exploded practice of giving and receiving what — by a perversion of language — is called " satisfaction" for an injury or insult, by recourse to an act which (however "fashionable" names may be adduced on its behalf) in its essence and spiiit involves much of the mult of both suicide and muider.

Pubiic Nuisance at Epsom — Since our -eference to this matter in a Notice to Correspondents in our last, we have received information from more than one quarter winch induces us to return to it. It appears that by jorae strange management, or rather wjes-mau-igement, in altering the road and the drains uonnected with it, the whole accumulation of hose drains has been caused to (low in such a vay as to create great public and private ln:onvenience, and even mjiuy. As one result, ye, understand that a poor old man named i*OTERELL and his wife aie only able to mlabit their cottage by having a platform put ip in it to lift them above the wafer, which loods the floor to a depth of two feet. We ie further informed, on. authoiity that we

cannot question, that on Sunday last persons wnc compelled to go tluough piivate i; rounds and get over walls m oidet to escape the necessity of " swimming" to their usual place of worship; and a gentleman lesident in the neighbourhood assuies us thai, he had to hiie a man to carry his family through the water m order to get to Ch.ipel. "I think," says a correspondent, " we shall be obliged to memorialize His Excellency to put a boat and a feiiy-inan at the spot." This really is too bad. But we lefrain from fiuther animadversion, in the confidence that it only needs to have the "lievance thus plainly laid before the Authorities, to secure its rodtess, without that application to courts of law which we aie told is contemplated.