FEAR OF NEW ZEALAND IN AUSTRALIA.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2269, 20 October 1891, Page 3

FEAR OF NEW ZEALAND IN AUSTRALIA.

Referring to the fact that the Federation Bill was to be considered in the Legislative Council «n Tuesday evening the Argus on that morning in an article made the following remarks : —“ By far the most important amendment is that which changes the federation from an Australasian to an Australian union; which in other words omits New Zealand on sentimental grounds. This change may be objected to, but from the practical standpoint there is,little in it. There is no prospect of New Zealand entering into any union which we can form here, no prospect whatever. The land of the kiwi and the rata is not the land of the gum and wattle, and the two countries have few business interests in common, and politically speaking the people are not in touch. That New Zealand should have one tariff and Australia another does not occasion any practical inconvenience to any one ; and as to defence, it is obvious that it must be conducted on entirely different lines. Thus there is no common bond to-day, while, as it so happens, strong adverse influences are at work. The New Zealand politicians profess the idea that Australia means to haul down the British flag and to let the Chinese into the northern territory, and they desire to shun us accordingly. On our part farmers have notions about the consequence of competition with New Zealand farm produce, which are none the less effective for being somewhat exaggerated. The wisest course under these circumstances is not to attempt the impossible, that is to from the Australian Federation, recognising that we are extremely lucky if we are able to do so much. Once let the Union be established, and objections which now seem formidable will disappear, and we shall see States which are at present reluctant and coy become eager to apply for admission. And we shall find, on the other hand, the reluctance now manifested to admit States outside of the Continent rapidly disappear. Nothing is gained by omitting New Zealand, that colony, with no very good grace, having omitted herself by declining to consider the proposals, while it will make an important difference it we include New Zealand, and to some extent create a hostile farming vote.” The question came up in the Legislative Council on the 30th ult., when Mr Connor proposed to follow the lead of the Assembly by omitting the name New Zealand in clause 5. He dealt upon the inability of Victorian farmers to compete with New Zealand in certain classes of produce, and Mr Buchanan sounded a note of positive alarm, declaring that New Zealanders had, by virtue of their country and climate, blood, brain, and stamina that Australians could not hope to equal, and that to allow them to enter the federation would be to materially retard Australian progress. Mr Service put a different complexion on the debate. His remarks are thus reported:—“ Mr Service ( said he positively blushed with shame when he saw that the other House had passed a distinct and formal resolution excluding a sister colony. To pretend that was because she did not want to come in was adding insult to injury.” Mr Fraser—“ She excluded herself.” Mr Service —'• But we need not slam the door in her face.” Mr J. M. Davies—“ How long would you keep the door open.” Mr Service would leave the door open as it was, and pass the clause with the words as they stood. He was one who objected to New Zealand voting on equal terms at the Convention, after she had said she did not come in, but New Zealand having been named, it was for very paltry reasons they now desired to strike her out. He would point out that New Zealand could come in hereafter under this identical clause, even if her name now was struck out. He suggested that the clause be postoned until a later stage. This suggestion was agreed to.