COLONIAL FEDERATION.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5384, 29 June 1878, Page 1 (Supplement)

COLONIAL FEDERATION.

At a time when it is difficult to attend to any but ono political question, a revival by Sir Julius Vogel of tho controversy on colonial federation may at first sight be thought inopportune ; yet tho relation of the United Kingdom to the outlying parts of tho Empire may hereafter be found to have a bearing on the conditions of foreign war. Id is, as Sir Julius Vogel suggests, unsatisfactory that the bond of common nationality should, among tho English race alone, tend to relax, while Germans, Italians, and Slavs are tending to closer union. Like all other actual anomalies, tho paradox might be explained ; but, if modern ethnological doctrines can for once servo a useful purpose, it may be well to remind colonists that they aro English in blood and language. Tho connection between England and the colonies is uncertain, although it may possibly prove to be durable in proportion to its elasticity. Tho Imperial Government is powerless to prevent the scandals which have lately occurred in Victoria, or the anomalous proceedings of a Minister, iu New Zealand who was once himself an English servant of tho Crown. The slightest attempt to check the independent action of local Legislatures produces throats of separation ; and a show of indifference to tho menace furnishes a fresh pretext for resentment. The courageous assertion of his own authority by the Governor-General of the Capo may perhaps servo as a precedent for n more rational system, if his preference of the public safety over the pretensions of parties is hereafter approved by the Colonial Parliament. In time of war the necessity of united action may perhaps be apparent even to colonists jealous of their independence. Tho whole fabric of responsible government in a great colonial empire is still experimental. If the trial proves to be successful, tho relations of the Imperial Government and tho Colonies will become definite and intelligible. Tho only alternative is that separation which both parties at present deprecate. If successive Governments had insisted on maintaining tho ancient rights of tho Crown, a series of repetitions of the unfortunate and unavoidable American war would probably by this time have broken up the Colonial Empire. The concession of virtual sovereignty to Canada, Australia., New Zealand, and the Cape was the result, not of profound policy or prescient wisdom, but of a calm recognition of necessity. Tho consequent anomalies naturally offend tho sense of logical symmetry in many political theorists. Mr. Low despises a kind of connection which seems to him fictitious : and Sir Julius Vogel clevises projects for giving substance and reality to a nominal union.

Lord Blaohford, who has a perfect knowledge of tho principles and practice of colonial administration, has urged forcible arguments against the expediency and possibility of a federal English State consisting of the United Kingdom and tho Colonies. Englishmen at home would readily submit to the control of fellowsubjects on the other side of tho globe, especially when at some future time the great colonies colleotivelly, or oven separately, outnumber the inhabitants of the British Islands. On their part the colonies have again and again indicated their resolution to retain the exclusive management of their domestic affairs. The advocates of federation reply that every State or colony would have a Legislature of its own, and that war, foreign affairs, and federal finance would alone be entrusted to tho central Parliament and Government. As Lord Blaohford fully explained, the scheme would involve an entire reconstruction of the English Constitution. Tho Imperial Parliament is not only omnipotent, but omnipresent, determining for itself the extent of its powers, and interfering at its own discretion with parochial or personal disputes as freely as with general policy and international relations. A federal Legislature has, as in the United States, only an authority strictly defined in the terms of a written Constitution ; and tho component parts of a federal English Empire would be less homogeneous than the States of the American Union. If it were possible to devise a special machinery by which tho colonies could exert an influence on foreign policy, it might be worth while to make some sacrifice of convenience for tho purpose of securing their hearty co-operation in diplomacy and in war. Tho only precedents for such a combination are furnished by tho Austro-Hungarian Delegations,and perhaps by the relations between Sweden and Norway. If* tho English Colonial Empire lasts, some method of employing tho strength of tho whole community for tho promotion of national welfare may perhaps bo contrived by future statesmen. The colonies would attach no value to representation in tho Imperial Parliament by a few members elected by themselves. The system is tried in France, whore it produces no appreciable result; but the French colonies aro comparatively insignificant.

The Constitution of the United States has provided with admirable good fortune or foresight for the extension of the Republic. Emigrants to unsettled lands, at first directly subject to the central Government, are organised as their number increases, until they form territories, and ultimately States. Their resources are as fully available for national purposes as those of Massachusetts or New York ; and till they acquire fall political maturity by admission into tho number of States, they for tho most part acquiesce without protest or resistance in the fiscal legislation of Congress. When separate interests prevail over common legislation, the Federal Executive and Congress prudently connive at a partial exercise of unavowod independence. In California the Legal Tender Law and the Homestead Law have been systematically disregarded ; and yet no collision has occurred between the federal and the State Governments. It is more possible to envy than to imitate tho American system. Tho English colonies have as yet taken little interest in international affairs ; and they habitually disregard tho fiscal policy of tho mother country. Lord Blaohford showed good reasons for holding that,- when responsible government was conceded, it would have been injudicious, and probably impracticable, to make reservations which, if they had been operative,, might have prevented errors of colonial legislation. If the local Parliaments had boon forbidden to deal with waste lands and with tariffs, all their energies would have been devoted to agitation, and perhaps to active resistance. A prudent father never attempts to limit the emancipation of a son who is once of full ago. Tho colonies have injured both themselves and the mother country by perverse economic legislation. Some of.them, in the supposed interest of ignorant and selfish majorities, dis-

courage immigration; nearly all encumber commerce with tariffs intended to promote local monopoly. Nevertheless Lord Blaohford rightly holds that their legislation, good or bad, must be accepted as a necessary consequence of responsible or independent Goveremont. A federal Legislature possessing exclusive fiscal authority would immediately find itself in collision with colonial prejudices and interests. Fur many years to come tho United Kingdom would retail'll a. compact majority in favor of those principles of free trade which are obstinately rejected by thu colonies. It is extremely improbable that the privilege of returning a few members to tho federal Parliament would reconcile colonial Protectionists to thu abolition of tho present tariffs. It is perhaps scarcely worth while to anticipate the distant period at which the United Kingdom will be a secondary State in tho great Confederation. The restoration of tho Corn-laws by a colonial majority would be a startling event. The main drift of Sir Julius Vogel’s latest essay is an attempt to recommend reciprocity of commercial legislation between England and tho colonies. He regards the establishment of Free-trade as a mere concession to foreigners, who, as ho rightly judges, feel in return neither gratitude nor good-will to England. Colonial and foreign economists seldom apprehend the avowed national selfishness of English fiscal legislation. Mr. Cobden and many of his contemporaries anticipated that their principles would spread over the world, with the result of promoting universal goodwill ; yet their primary object iu removing duties was to obtain commodities at a cheaper rate. A Customs Union consisting of England and the Colonies would inclose a vast amount of territory, with corresponding facilities for trade. On tho other hand, it would be difficult to chock contraband trade on frontiers measured by tons of thousands of miles. Tho suggestion of so impracticable a scheme is an illustration of the justice of Lord Blachford’s conclusions. Whore close union is impossible, a loose connection may be beneficial as long as it lasts, nor is it certain that dissolution may not be long postponed. It is too late to inquire whether it would have been desirable to retain the colonies which have grown into tho United States. It is impossible to know whether further disruption will follow the attainment by the colonies of virtual independence. A close alliance of all the branches of the English nation would bo highly advantageous ; but, if it is ever effected, it must bo the voluntary result of natural causes.