The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1877.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5133, 5 September 1877, Page 2

The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1877.

The sketch of machinery for giving effect to the scheme of Confederation proposed by Sir J. Vogel, in his article, “Greater or Lesser Britain,” is, of necessity, vague, and incomplete. Indeed, it may be taken as having not been meant for "more than a series of hints of what might be considered as worth trial in initiating a great change. The writer evidently desired mainly to put his views into such a shape as to lead to an opinion that something should be attempted; and he would,, therefore, avoid the check to such opinion which might result from suggesting a definite mode ; of action that might fail to command approval by many who sympathised with his principle. As was said in the notice we published on Monday, Sir Julius takes for granted that, a declaration by the Imperial Government that the, union between the colonies and the Imperial country is meant to be indissoluble, and is not to be open to question, would stop development of theories that the colonies are entitled to look forward to [independence as nations. We do not agree with that view ; our reasons for dissent need not be repeated. But supposing such a declaration to have been made, and to have had the predicted effect, Sir Julius thinks that the next step should be the formation of a Board of Advice sitting in London, composed after the fashion of the Council of the Secretary of State for India. From the outset, he would have the colonies contributing towards the cost of the Federal Navy. “The, share of control should increase with the share of contribution. It is not to be supposed that the contribution would be very large at first, though made on strictly fair terms. A census throughout the Empire might be taken every five years, and on the results, the payments of the next five years be based. Although there should bo so much payable on account of population and property, it should be open to each part of the Empire to make up its contribution in the way it determines.” The time, Sir Julius supposes, would soon come when a Federal Legislature would be called for, and he says that to create it would not bo a difficult task. The House of Lords should form one Chamber. “The House of Commons, as the House of Commons,for Great Britain, should not be disturbed. It is a question very important, but which need not be decided at the moment of, confederation, whether the Federal Lower Chamber should bo the House of Commons plus the colonial representatives, or whether the Federal representatives of Great Britain should be distinctly and separately selected. The Imperial Parliament, until the Federal Parliament grew into being, should,, as it now is, be superior, and the Government of the United Kingdom would be the Executive of the Confederate Empire.” It should bo no part of the policy or scheme of Confederation to interfere with the local government of either the mother country or her confederated dependencies. This is, perhaps, as satisfactory a rough draft of possible machinery for Confederation as could ’ reasonably be expected ; and we agree with Sir Julius that completing the machinery would npt be a .trying task. But of the difficulties that have to be cleared away before there will be, need for attempting that task, we think much more seriously than Sir Julius appears to do. Especially is that the case, respecting the. Tariff, question. “There is every reason to believe that, if Confederation took place, the colonies would readily lend themselves to the consideration of a Customs Union, or agreement,” says Sir Julius. But what if the colonies should think that, a settlement of the Customs question should necessarily precede Confederation 1 The colonies do now raise, and apparently will continue to t raise, a very largo proportion of their required revenue by meins of Customs tariffs; and they might think it too important .that , they . should remain unfettered in that respect, to consent to the possibility of outside interference ? And what if a confederated colony should come to bo convinced that the terms of

! an. agreed Customs Union-operated injuriously for her? Is'^tliere’’anything that the British race would ’ho likely to feel more/keenly, ,or' to*, resist more determinedly 1 'Vjjfas not tne\American due South’s ■writhing udder aT^ortherff'tariff,''as to the South’s endeavors to prevent the North limiting the of alave : holding “Stiles 1 Sir ’-Julius"^ l^ .forcibly on rilie miseries'• resultihg' from wars .between ‘unsettled youilg nations,” supposing the colonies-to become actually independent, ,1a .there not warranty for supposing-'that’a Confederate tariff might provoke wars ? | Amongst the advantages promised to the colonies from the Federation scheme is the continuous, investment of British capital in them. Investors, it is said, do not fear that colonies of Great Britain, as such, will ever repudiate loan liabilities; but they have a fear that indebted colonies may declare themselves independent; and they also fear that, as young nations, liable to internal discord and to attacks from without, the ex-colonies might not be able, however willing, to pay their debts. The London Times, it is said, has printed, under the heading, “ English Charities, Abroad,” a list of defaulting foreign States, showing that they owe to English creditors, for principal and interest, £335,000,000. But surely, that only proves that Englishmen have unwisely invested very largely in the hope of high interest, with peoples that have been very dishonest or very unfortunate. It :is to-; be ,inferred, from such a fact, that the field for investment .has been much limited; and it is a fair further inference that while there is money in Great Britain that cannot be profitably invested in that country, I the owners of it are more likely to be ready to trust communities of British descent, even if called foreign countries 1 because not dependencies of Britain, than they .are to trust communities of absolute foreigners. To Great Britain there is I offered, as a, result of Confederation, the glory of an Empire such as the world has not before witnessed, and a navy such as would enable the Federal Government to decide whether any other nations should or should not engage in war. It is urged that emigration to what are now the colonies would be- in no sense a loss of population ; and, as it is taken as proved that “ trade follows the flag,” there is the added boon of a trade with the confederated colonies such as would go far to make up for. the loss of that foreign trade which has been great, but which-is now, seemingly, steadily and inevitably declining. Indeed, in the statement of probable or possible gains from Confederation, alike to Great Britain and to the colonies, Sir Julies Vogel’s paper is singularly interesting and complete. It offers rich “diggings” to advocates of the’ scheme, "and will, we believe, be freely used by those : who desire to write |or talk "about it; and, on the other hand, it will provoke to activity very many who are opponents of the scheme. - There are also included in the paper some very pertinent remarks on the question of colonies resorting to an income and propertytax. Victoria alone is spoken of as likely to impose such a tax. Sir Julius thinks an income tax would much discourage the introduction of foreign capital;, and that “a property tax on sold land would more than by its own amount reduce the value of the land which remained to be sold.” But Victoria may have “divested itself of so much laud” as to'have “approached the margin beyond which the return from a property tax may more than compensate for the injury to the value of the unsold estate.” Clearly, Sir Julius is not likely to sympathise withJVlr. Woolcock’s motion, or to admire the “sudden-thought” determination of the House of Representatives, that property and income shall be speedily and soundly taxed in New Zealand. We have plainly expressed our belief that Confederation is not likely to be so soon or so easily achieved, as Sir Julius Vogel thinks; but we hope that we have not conveyed the impression that “ Greater or Lesser Britain ” is other than a very able and very interesting article. The question of which it treats is a great one. It may not bo an urgent question ; but it is sure to get itself well discussed. Its discussion must do good ; and our late Premier has; made thereto a timely and provocative contribution.