IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // .// ,<^ c^ .^ r' il^. y 1.0 I.I 1.25 ««IIIIIM IIIII2.5 iM mil 2.2 6" M III 1.6 "/a m /a 'e). % / ^. ^> om Photograpliic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREFT WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 €3 i\ iV \ \ ^t^\ ^ ;\ ^^ ^ » ^^^ C^ o^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Cancdian Institute for HiGiorical Microreproductions Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mdthode normale de fiSmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur n D D n Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur6e et/ou pellicul6fl Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes D D D v Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurSes et/ou pellicul^es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcolor^es, tachetdes ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages d^tachdes Showthrough/ Transparence □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur D Bound with other material/ Reiid avec d'autres documents D Quality of print varies/ Quality indgale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du matdriel supplementaire □ Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure □ Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 fiim^es. D D Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially ob&cured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have bean refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillat d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 film6es d nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. D Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires; This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X >/ / 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X itails i du odifier ' une mage The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Douglas I ihrary Queen's University The Images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. L'exemplaire fllmd fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6ro8it6 de: Douglas Library Queen's University Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la netteti de l'exemplaire filmd, et en conformit6 av ic les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed bciginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. IS Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimis sont filmds en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont fi!m6s en commenqant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END "), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaiira sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symboie — <^>signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est filmd d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. errata to I pelure, on d D 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 : r J' HE irOLOAl A L QUESTION: irf igii^Wii^ii!^^ aii^n of CE^l^ninl IW s Jmp;eriil irditallisira \:vD tfrtonial fitiiij03frvMim, liy W. IL FULLER, M.A, i K I N G S T (> N : »'HINTK.I> AT THK "HHITISH AUKi BKKHK. iH7r>. L of] ^c ma: Qu. dut the littl Qu( of £ prii PREFATORY NOTP], The following tract was written in April, 73. an a Thesis for the Degree of Master of Arts. It is now printed at the reiinest of several friends who perused it in MS, And who have desired its publication as giving in a brief, compendious form many of the arguments bearing on the different phases of the Colonial Question, collated from many pources. Increasing attention is being attracted to the reciprocal relations and duties of Great Britain and her Colonies owing to the recent utterances on the subject of Mr. Blake and other public men of prominence, and this little pamphlet is issued as a modest contribution to the literature of the Question. In some of its references the essay is out of date, but as the general line of argument has not been thereby interfered with, it was thought better to print the whole as it was written. W. H. F. I ofT'nt?'\j^ INTRODUCTION. Though the colonies of Ancient Greece had their origin in causes widely different from those which led to the establish- ment of the outlying dependencies of Great Britain, yet the political constitutions now possessed by the more highly advanced of the latter, resemble in many important particulars the mode of Government which obtained among the former. The first English Colonies were founded by exiles, who sought in the wDds of America the freedom denied them in their native land. Notwithstanding the inauspicious causes which planted the English flag on American soil, and tho' it might not unnaturally have been anticipated that the religious out- casts from home would cherish bitter feelings against the land on which they had been conscience-forced to turn their backs, the colonists of America were long devotedly loyal to the Crown, while they voluntarily assumed such burdens as to reUeve their loyalty of unworthy suspicion. The recollec- tions of the wrongs they had suffered and the privations they had endured did not sour into feelings of estrangement, being buried in the present enjoyment of prosperity and freedom, and in that personal allegiance which they bore their sovereign, the passion of loyalty then being difficult to uproot, and exert- ing a strong and living force, whatever may be its influence in these latter days when more store is set by the utilities than by traditional symbols of power and dignity. But the states- manship which raised Plymouth Rock a monument of its illibcrality wf.s not less shortsighted than the fatuous blunder- ing which lofet England a great portion of her Western Empire — the glories of which, present and prospective, Burke elo- quently dwe^t upon in his appeal for conciliation — and conver- ted what might have been the noblest appanage of the British Crown into an alien Power, in the breasts of whose people, after the lapse of a hundred years, still rankle the memories of the Tea Tax. Kejoeti'd love cunll oil iiitouamity, auil England was reft of nearly all her colonial possossionH. The loss was repah'od to Homo extoiit, hy conqufsts durinfj; the French Revolutionary War and hy wuhsequent acquisitions from time to time, until to-day, notwithstanding the hlunder of 1776, Great Britain holds prosperous colonial sovereignty over the most extensive and empire of which History makes mention. These last inunod colonies, as said, were either wrested from hostile nations hy the force of arms, obtained by treaty or cession, or established in obedience to tliat acfgressive and adventurous coloni/Jng spirit so niurkod a feature of the Anglo-Saxon character. In no case was a colony founded by England for the reasons which dictated its establishment by Greece. The latter erected colonies, in order thero to trans- plant the surplus populations of the parent State, necessary to be weeded out that those who remained behind might have a4equate room for freedom of action. The constitutions of tb)B»o colonies reflected in an eminent degree the national characteristics of the Greeks, the first lessons taught them bemg independence and self reliance. " The mother country, " tho' she considered the colony as a child, at all times entitl- '' ed to great favour and assistance and owing in return much " gratitude and respect, yet considered it, as an emtincipated " child, over whom she pretended to claim no direct authority " or jurisdictioii. The colony settled its own form of Govern- " ment, enacted its own Laws, elected its own Axagistrates, as " an independent State which had no occasion to wait for the " approbation or consenit of the mother city.''=" From this it will be seen, with the important exception that English colonies dp not make peace or declare war, the colonies of Greece largely resemble the free colonies of Great Britain, to-day, in their mode of Government. At the present time the superin- tendency exercised by the Imperial Government over colonial affairs is of the most iu)minal character, the prerogative of the Crown to revise tho legislaiion of the colonies being rarcdy as- serted. This conditi(m of independency is of late development, tho' but the revival of the policy first adopted towards tho colonies by the Govex-nments of Great Britain. That policy and the succeeding ones, Sir Charles Adderley,| a one-time Colonial Minister, divides into throe clu'onological classes. During the period embraced within the first, the colonies were "Smith's WealMi of Nations, p 228. +Review of "The Colonial Policy of Lord J, Kussell's Administration," by Earl Grey, 185.3 ; and of siibse- quent Colonial Hintorv. By the Rt. Hon. Sir C. H. Adderley, etc. TiOndon ; I8fi3, p. 3. eni- as thfi is it lies eeco ill rin- >iiial the as- !llt, the licy line liseb. vpre left to govern theuiHelves, and throve ahuudiintly, as tlie statis- tics collected by Burke (Speech on Conciliation with America) amply attest, tho' handicapped by false notions an to the ad- vantagcB ariaing from monopolies of colonial trade. This policy, wholesome in many respects, was succeeded by tlie attempt, which proved fatal, at taiuporing with colonial self-government, and which lost the American provinces to England. Fright- oned by the successful rebellion of those Plantations, English statesmen sought to prevent the recurrence of a similar calam- ity by tip;htening the relaxed reins of power, governing the colonies from Downing Street, and asking no suit or service fi'om them, while paying many of their expenses out of the Imperial Treasury. This, in turn, was abandoned, being as inexpedient in practice as it was false in principle. The right of self-government has, of late, been again conceded, in return for which tho burden of their expenses as portions of the British Empire is being gradually transferred to colonial shoulders. Such is the colonial policy now put in iovcc, and its wisdom cannot justly bo (juarrelled with, it being very evident that the colonies have arrived at such a stage of social and political development that they will not brook outside in- terference with their local affairs ; nor are they, on the other hand, disposed to deny the justice of tlie proposition enun- ciated by the English Government, that the assumption of tho HaldlUies of citizejishio of the British Empire is the natural corollary of the concession of its rufhts. On the whole, the treatment received by the colonies, since 1776, has been generous, if not always wise ; and the time has perhaps come or is rapidly approaching when the burden of expense should be more equitably distributed. Unlike other colonizers, Eng- lishmen have not sought to make then* colonies share the general expenses of the Empire, or to impoverish them in order to aggrandize the Mother Country. Spain ruthlessly drained her colonial possesionss, but this policy defeated itself, and eventuated in killing the goose that laid the golder 3ggs. The history of the colonial enterprises of other modern nations is largely the same. On the contrary, says Adrm Smith, " Great Britain is, perhaps, since the world began, the only " state which, as it has extended its Empire has only increased *' its expenses, without once augmenting its resources. Other " States have generally disburdened themselvas upon their " subject and subordinate provinces of the most considerable " part of the expenses of defending the Empire."* To this •Wealth of Nations, p. 256. statement, India, i)erhaps, forms an exception, but as that country does not rank with thoHo free colonies, the relations of which to the Mother Country it is proposed to discuss, the qualification is unhuportant. Such generous conduct deserves ^ generous requital, but the best mode of making the latter has not been unanimously agreed upon by those whose attention has been en:^aged by colonial affairs. Some eminent pub- licists and political pliilosophors propose to go to the root of the supposed difficulty antl, by an unparalleled feat of national surgery, cut off the extremities of the Empire, and reduce it to a mere torso, believing as they do, that the colonies can best ^ show their gratitude for the generous treatment they have re- ceived from the Mother Land by consenting to the dissolntion of a partnership which is not only profitless, but actually dangerous. Others, again, keenly alive to the two-sided ad- vantages arising from the maintenance of the colonial tie, and fearful that its present relaxed condition is but the forerunner of disruption, advocate the formation of a British Federation, including in its membersJiip the Mother Country and all those colonies which enjoy representative government and free insti- tutions, (to which class alone reference is hereinafter made under the generic title,) granting to each constituent propor- tionate representation in a Federal Parliament, to be concerned alone with affairs of Imperial state, local concerns being re- mitted to local legislatures. There are, thirdly, those who maintain that the subsisting relations are satisfactorily efficient, and who see in their continuance the best method of attaining the highest developemcnt of both the United Kingdom and the Colonies, and for the working out of their noblest common destiny. These last are alike opposed to the disruptive theories of the Emancipationists, and to the scheme of Imporial Federa- tion. To a brief consideration of these three views of the Colonial Question, in the order given, the following pages are devoted. THE EMANCIPATION POLICY CONSIDERED. ♦' To propose that Great Britain should voluutarilj give up " all authority over her coloiiioH, aud leave them to select their " owu magistrates, to tiiiaet their owu laws, and to make peace '* or war, as they might think proper, would be to propose •' such a measure as never was, and never will bo, adopted by •' any nation in the world. No nation ever voluntarily gave '* up the dommiou of any province, how troublesome soever it " might be to govern it, and how small soever the revenue '* which it afforded might be in proportion to the expense! *' which it occasioned. Such sacrifices though they might be " agreeable to the interest are always mortifying to the pride '• of every nation ...... The most " visionary enthusiast would scarce be capable of proposing " such a measure, with any serious hopes at least of its ever " being adopted."* Time, the great excavator of buried re- putations, has amply verified many of Adam Smith's economic theories, but the words above quoted show him, in this particu- lar at least, to have been a false prophet. Such disruptive theories (not to speak of the delegation of the rights of self-government,) are promulgated at the present day, not alone by 'visionary "enthusiasts," but by men of considerable rank as political thinkers, and who command a respectable following in Great Britain, Even the Government of the present dayt were re- cently infected by emancipationist principles, and were suspect- ed of a desire to give them effect, until checked by the warning voice of adverse Public Opinion. But a very few years since, a Governor-General of the Dominion of Canada, in a speech delivered at Halifax, doubtless under inspiration from the Colonial Office, threw out a hint that Canadian Independence would not be opposed by the Home authorities, who regarded Confederation as a preparative to the severance of the colonial tie. These tentative suggestions were alike coldly received in Canada and by the bulk of the British public, and in the short interval which has elapsed since their utterance a still heal- thier Public Opinion on the Colonial Question has grow^n up in the Mother Country, althongh there yet lurks a suspicion that the loyalty of the present Imperial Administration :[ is not active and real, but a deferential leaning toward the will of the *W«alth of Nations, p. 254. IThia was written in April, 1873, when the Gladstone Administration i» ere in office. itThe Gladstone Ministry. mojority. It is hat just to obsorvo, however, that a i far as that suspicions arises from the carrying out of that feature of recent colonial pohoy which looks to the education of the colonies in the duty of self-reliance, it is unwarrantjl, a:?'it must be generally admitted that most of the colonial obliga • tions hitherto assumod by the Imperial Treasury should in thd future be borne by the colonies themselves, which should share the expenses as well the benefits incident to the colonial con- nection. To the adoption of the principles of Free Trade, and to the promulgation of the doctrines of that school of politicians to wliich the national recognition of those principles gave birth, are due, perhaps, more than to any other cause, the origin and development of what is currently known as the Emancipa- tionist Policy, and which has been so ably championed by Mr. Goldwin Smith. The pith of the arguments advanced by the advocates of this policy is that it does not "pay" the Mother C Hintry in pounds, shilluigs and ^ence to retain the colonies. " vVhile," argues Mr. Smith, "we monopolized their trade in a " general age of monoply they brought us a real advantage, " though of a narrow and selush kind. Now they bring us no " advantage at all."* The profit, it is urged, is all on one side, "dth no countervailing advantages on the other. This view of so imperial a question may be denounced as narrow- minded and mercenary, but so averse to sentimentality are those who press it that an answer must be found to the objec- tion widely different from that which would have satisfied Englishmen when they boasted of being first in war as well as in commerce. It will not do to attempt to upset their matter- of-fact-theories with Carlyle's impetuous words : — " Colonies are not to be picked off the street every day ; not a Colony of them but has been bought dear, well jmrchased by the toil and blood of those we have the honor to be sons of ; we cannot jmt afford to cut them away because McCroiidy finds the present nmnagement of them cost money. The present manar(>pose throuj;l, Heaven's bles^inqr to retain them a while yet ! Shame on us for unworthy sons of brave fathers if we do not. Brave fathers, by valiant blood and sweat, purchased for us, from the boiinty of Heaven, rich possessions in all zones : and we, wretched imbeciles, cannot do tht functions of administering them ! And because the account* do not stand well in the ledger, our remedy is, not to take shame t ) ourselves, and repent in sackcloth and ashes, and amend our beggarly imbecilitieti and in- sincerities in that as in other departments of our business, -but to fling the business overboanl, and to declare theb ujiiess itself to be bad ! We are a hopeful set of heirs to a big fortune !" f *The Empire, p. 93. f Latter-day Pamphlets, p. 127-8. 7f icfa • .d of them loney, for while 3rave ty oi mnot not and nd in- g th« are a lo Such outbursts as these would produce little effect upon the •' dull cold ear" of the average politician bred in the Manches- ter school. To him, national honor and imperial prestige ara but empty-sounding profitless words. In his matter-of-fact way he contends that, since the abolition of differential duties, England has derived no benefits from her colonial trade which she would not have reaped had they been inde- pendent States, and cites in proof of the assertion statistics of recent commercial transactions which, if admitted to be correct, would show that colonies are not more valuable customers of Great Britain than foreign naiions. The statistics marshalled by Mr. Smith, who may be taken as the chief exponent of the emancipationist theory, in support of his separatist doctrinesf are not to be relied on, being erroneous in point of fact, while the deductions drawn from them are equally incorrect. Not only does Mr. Smith estimate the amount of the EngUsh colonial trade too low, but he jumps to the unwarranted con- clusion that, inasmuch as it much less than the foreign trade . in amount, it is much less valuable, leaving out of sight the important factor of the problem — the difference in population of the countries he compares. It is hardly to be expected that colonists would buy as largely as foreigners, when the latter outnumbei them thirty fold, excluding uncivilized countries from the computation. Mr. Jehu Mathews, in his ably written book on the Colonial Question, ■'' demonstrates the fallacy of Mr. Smith's reasoning, and produces satisfactory proof that colonists consume 2000 per cent., more of British goods, per head, than is consumed by each foreigner generally, 1200 per cent., more than is consumed bv each inhabitant of civilized Europe, and 550 pjr cent., more than is consumed by each American, the calculations being based on the' Trade Retm'ns of 1861, those of 1870 showing a slight difference in favour of the Americans. This broken, Mr. Smith has another string to his bow. He *A Colonist ON THE Colonial Question.— By Jehu Mathewa, of To- ronto, Loudon, 1872, Mr. Mathewu's book contains the ablest treatment of the subject which we have met. Though dissenting from the wisdom of the conclusions he reaches, we rtadily admit the argumentative skill with which he fortifies the positicms that he assumes and the very extorsive ac- quaintance with (he subject which his manner of treatment betrays. His book is in striking contrast with many of the dissertations ou the same subject, in which imperfect notions are frequently veiled in vague generaliza- tions and frothy declamation. We are fre<]uently indebted to Mr. Mat- hews for facts and figures, and desire here in a jjeneral acknowledgement to repair to some extent any omission to credit a specific obligation. t The Empi-e, p. 23. t I s justly observes that " arguments drawn from the amount of " the colonial trade prove nothing unless it can be shown that " the prosperity of the trade in some way depends on tlie cou- " tinuance of the political connection. The immense increasa " of our trade with the United States since the severance of *' their political severance with the Mother Country, proves " that the reverse is the truth."" Mr. Smith here repeats the error which destroys his argument as to the value of the colonial trade, by omitting to state the facts that the Americans now number nigh forty millions, while at the time when they were colonists, they numbered ^ it throe and a half millions. It was strange indeed, taking these facts into consideration, if the Americans of the present day, even in the face of high tariffs, did not purchase more largely than they did a (!ontury since when British manufactures were comparatively in their infancy, and the consumption correspondingly hmited. But there lurks still another error in Mr. Smith's argument. He also omits mention of the fact that the American consumption, per head, of British goods is less to-day than it was in the colonial times. Then the Americans bought English goods at the rate of £1 per head; in 1861 tlie rate had fallen to lis. 4d., though at the i^resent time, it is considerably above these last figures, and is likely to rise still higher. So that, from whatever cause arising, the American imports from Great Britain have suffered a large decline since the severance of the colonial tie. To the argument advanced by Mr. Mathews that a similiar decline would be felt bv the colonial trade of England were the colonies to be cut adrift, though by no means a weak one, we cannot yield an unreserved assent, as it is more than doubtful that, in such an event, prohibitive tariffs would be adopted by the latter. Australia has already a tariff somewhat protective, and Canada a fifteen percent, one.f Both these tariffs are revenue tariffs, and it is improbable that, in case of separation, they would be so raised as to exclude British raanutactures, for the reason that, to make them prohibitive would be to destroy the customs' re- venue, inasmuch as there would then be not sufficient imports, from the duties on which a revenue, adequate for the demands upon it, could be raised. A combination of revenue and pro- hibitive tariffs might be adopted, but that would not material- ly affect the amount of imports from Great Brit: 'n. The case of the United States does not weaken the effect of this argu- " tThe date of the writing u 1873. •The Empire, p 41. 9 meiit, onleHH we look to tlie future, wbeu the colomud fyopola- tiou shall be as large aw that of the Republic within tlie last decade. The large population of the latter has enabled its Governmeut to levy highly protective dutie>s, th*^ wants of i±s people being so vast and so vaa-ious that the imports vfejco still sufficient to yield an ample revenue. This phase, then, of the argument that tiie dismembeCTBant of the Emphe would entail a loss upon Biitish Trade does not seem conclusive. It is showy and plausible, but infeoten- tial at best. We may, it is true, hoist the Eraaacipationiats with theh own petard, by pointing to the United States, and urging that similar results would follow in the case of the col- onies, if separated, but the Enghsh-Americau trade is steadily increasing, and it is by no means improbable that, under a lowering scale of duties, within a few yeiu's the United States .imports of British goods will be larger than the old colonial rate. Deductions drawn from tlie American case are danger- ous to both parties to the argument to make. Colonists will continue to buy Enghsh goods so long as Great Britain main- tains her trade supremacy, for the double reason that they are the cheapest in the world, and their consum^/tion enables col- onial governments to raise the customs' revenues. "Common "institutions," says Sh Charles Dilke, "common freedom and "common tongue have evidently more to do with trade than "union has."- But, the admission of the probability that Emancipation would not be followed by a decrease of tlie British colonial trade is subject to a very important qualification. The states- men deserving of the name, cannot afford to overlook the possibility of England becoming involved in war, flnatwitli- standing the gi-owth of peace-at-any-price doctrines among a considerable portion of her people. In order that, in such a contingency, slie may preserve her trade supcemacy, *4t is " necessary to maintam a first-class rank if only to keep for- "eign markets open." ( But, this would appear impossible, :if she denude herself of her colonijil possessions. In time of war, if her merchant seamen are to penetrate to all quarters of the globe, as they now do, they must have adequate protec- tion from Enghsh guns. But British cruisers cannot operate wiuicessfully in distant waters unless England jretaina th« coad- ing stations which the Emancipationists counsel her -to aban- don; and this is all the more important, since the rule adotp- ted by the Geneva Arbitrators declare coal contrtibattd of 'JMBr. *Gxea.ttr Britain, p ..TJ7. fBritish Q»arteti»ly ReView, April, 1«71. 10 The lack of nuch bases of supoliew would paralyze the mari- time arm of England. The uuinterruptad How of her trade is of vital consequence to Great Britain, of all nations, as near- ly one half of the breadstuffs consumed by her people is im- ported, and if the importation were stopped, they would be brought face to face with starvation. This consideration will show that the colonies are not the sources of weakness which tiie separatists would have us to believe, nor yet so commercially profitless. Nor should the contingency that England may one day cease to be able to undersell foreigners in the markets of the world be kept out of sight, as no con- clusive reason can be assigned why other nations should not go on imitating, until at last they excel their exemplar. Labour d'stvtrbances, which now take the shape of strikes, may assume wider and more alarming proportions, and pre- cipitate England's commercial decline. Should such a con- tingency happen, England would be forced to abandon her extreme Free-Trade doctrines, which she put in practice when her manufactures were so firmly established that foreign com- petition w^as no longer to be feared, and return to a protective tariff. Thus, she would be prevented, as at present, exchang- ing her manufactured goods for raw materials and breadstuffs, and, consequently, she would be unable to pay for the latter with the former, unless she entered into treaties Avith other nations, guaranteeing them reciprocal advantages. Such trea- ties could not be protiiably entered into by young countries, like the colonies, whicJi can alone afford to import manufac- tures largely, and yet ftnd employment for their people ; and because the diversities of their produce could alone supply the wants of the Home market. '•= Repudiating the plausible theory that trade follows the flag, and ignormg the commercial benefits which would accrue to England in case of wnr from their retention, the separatists contend that the colonies are from military and naval points of view, sources of unmixed weakness. Canada is especially pointed at in proof of this theory, it being the most vulnerable of the great colonies. But, even in the case of the Domhiion, the arguments of the Emancipationists are not so strong as might be thought at first blush. Mr. Smith contends that by reason of the retention of Canada, En^'lnrK^ "stands always on " the brink of a war with the g—.^t, Anglo-Saxon Republic. f" The worst method of avertiiig a war is running away from it, and none the less is this true in the case of England, Canada "A Colonist on the Colonial Question, p. 52. tThe Emi>ire, p. 131. 11 and the United States. Canada is unlikely to embroil the two States in war, but, should war arise between them, it is more than doubtful that England would bo weaker, instead of stron- ger, from the loss of Canada. An Anglo-American war would, in case of Canada's separation, be a strictly naval one, carried on near the shores of England or the United States. It is em- inently desu-able for England that the battle should be fought in American waters, hut how would that bo possible, under the now recognised conditions of marine warfare, if the naval sta- tions now held by England in British America, were abandon- ed by her ? A very able answer to this pertinent inquiry was given by Sir John Rose, in one of a series of letters addressed to the Thvrs, in 1870, under the signature of 'A Colonist,' a portion of which is here transcril>ed : — "In my last letter I c )nteiided that the colony which is the most expoaed of all was dtfensible in case of war, and that on the gronnd of military ex- pediency it would be more to the advantage of England to defend than to retire from Canada. I^et me now look at the alternative of the case : that Canada is given up, and that the whole Confederation in any future strug- gle is neutral. This, it is to be kept in mind, involves the consequence that, on no part of the Atlantic coast north of Bermuda, nor on the American side of the Pacific Ocean would England possess a single harbour where she could coal, or refit a vessel, or obtain supplies. T«i repair damages a ship must return to England.and if the United States were left free to operate with all their power against Bermuda, how long ctmld that island be neld ? Being within easy access of the United States, it must, at all events, how- ever guarded against reduction or actual capture, he closely blockaded, and for all effe;;tual jmrposes, would be .useless. If Bermuda fell, how long would the West Indies remain British ? ^, » , # » Anend- encies being quite able to defray the expense, while the ad- vantages flowing from the consciousness of self-reliance will furnish no mean ingredient to the national character of their different peoples. The saving, however, to thepocketr of Eng- lish taxpayers by the withdrawal of British troopb from the colonies is by no means as consider.ible as some mi^Djlit sup- pose. Apart from the advantages of concentrating the forces of the Empire at its heart, the saving from their non-disper- 8icn is simply the difference between the cost of theh susteuta- tion at Home and abroad. While, then, it would appear that Emancipation would not befruitfuloftho.se a. 1 vantages to the mother country which its advocates contend for, it would bo simply disastrous to the colonies, and nothing short of child-desertion. The colon- ies, at present, are not able to stand alone. As fax as Canada is concerned, we have fresli and competent testimony on this point. In the House of Commons on the 81st March last, ! the Premier, Sir John A. Macdonald, referring to the question 'of Indepeiulence, said "he believed that Independence and An- ■*' nexation meant the same thing. Ho believed that Indopend- " enoe was absolutely impossible m the present state of the '« Dominion We «(oiild iiot walk alone ; we *' mnst either retain our connection or sink into Annexation ". . . . He believed that if we were separated from Eng- '** land, in five years we would be absorbed in the United " States. "§ Australia, of all colonies is best fitted for Inde- pendence, but, even in her case, it would be casting on her re- sponsibilities to the discharge of which slie is unequal. Se- paration means an army, navy and diplomatic corps for each separated member, and those it is unable as yet to support, even if the multiplication of armed forces were not opposed to the interests of Peace. What tliat expense would be, may Teadily be inferred from the fact that the small standing army of the United States, of about 87,000 men, cost in 1872, thirty eight millions of dollars, not to make mention of the other twenty one millions required for the naval service. But even A standing army and a navy would not, without England's *The recent transference of the English guarante* of the Defence TiOan to the peaceful purposes of the Pacific Eailway would seem to look toth* Telenae ofthis obligation. fMftrch 73. ^Toronto G^^iwReiwrt, April2ml, 1S73. a n it 18 assistance, preserve Canada's autonomy. As Sir John Mac- (louald stated, absorj^tion by the United States would be the certain fate of the Dominion. Badly as it fared in the Wash- ington Treaty negotiations, there is every reason for appre- hending that if it had been an independent State, it would have lost not only the sole property in the Fisheries, but its separ- ate existence as well, persistent violations of the plainest rules of international duty in the past crushing out all hope that the condi.ct of tho United States towards Canada as a separate nationality would be regulated by tiie laws of fan* play or the comity of nations. •IMPERIAL FEDERALISM CONSIDERED- The idea of an Imperial Federation, which, of late, has en- gaged some public notice is by no means a novel one. A cen- tury ago it crossed the mind of Burke, but was dismissed by him as impracticable."'' His contemporary, Adam Smith, en- tertained a more favorable opinion of the project, and saw no insuperable difficulties in the way of its consummation. "If " to each colony," wrote Smith, "which should detach itself '• from the general confederacy. Groat Britain should allow " such a number of representatives as suited the proportion ot " what it contributed to the public revenue of the empire, in " consequence of its being subjected to the same taxes, and in '* compensation admitted to the same freedom of trade with its "fellow subjects at home; the number of its representatives to " be augmented as tho jaroportion of its contribution might af- " terwards augment ; a new method of acquu-ing importance, " a new and more dazzling object of ambition would be pre- " sented to the leading men of each colony,"! The modern revival of this project is due, in a large measure, doubtless, to the reaction which has set in since the hold of separatist doc- trines has waxed faint. If we cannot agree with the advocates of an Imperial Federation, it cannot but be admitted that they present a tolerably strong case in its favour. Some of the more formidable difficulties which stood in the way when Adam Smith wrote are now either out of sight or reduced to insignificant proportions. Distance has by modern invention been bridged in a manner scarce dreamed of a hundred years ago, and even annihilated by the electric wires which net the face of the civilized world and link together distant shores. *Speeeh on Conciliation with America. fWealth of Nations, p. 257. 14 '♦A' Corniali miner and his family can now emigi'ate to the " Burra Burra, with greater ease, and at a less expense thaji a "hundred years ago, they would make their way to a Lanca- " shire coal pit. St. George's Channel, at the time of the *♦ Union with Ireland was harder to cross in stormy winter " weather than the Atlantic is at present. Before the Panama " railway was opened, and the roadtoCahfornia lay round Capo ** Horn, London was as near it as Now York; yet California was " no less a State in the American Union.""'- British Colum- bia, we might add, is further distant from Ottawa than is the latter from London, travelling conveniences considered ; and yet British Columbia is a member of the British American Federation. The objection to the scheme on the grounds of distance would not seem to be well-founded, for, though it might appear to be fatal in the case of Australia, it must not be forgotten that it is now in more rapid communication with London than was the latter with Oxford forty yeai-s ago. Nor must it be supposed that the age of maritime invention is over, that civihzatiou will rest satisfied with its present acliievements in subduing the perils and shortening the duration of ocean passages. There is ample reason for co;ij(^*(,uring that twenty years hence the steamships of to-day will be regarded as curi- osities of naval architecture. The triumphs of modern inven- tion increase in a geometrical ratio ; but so self-suflicient and so unmindful of the lessons of the past are we prone to be, that we are little less shorted-sighted than our ancestors, who regarded themselves as arrived at the highest possible stage of advancement, and took no thought of what the future had in store. So difficult was travelling in the early days of the Be- public that Hamilton expressed an opinion to Josiah Quincy that the Union would not last thu'ty years, but would fall to pieces by its own territorial weight, and for want of those iron ligatures which he failed to foresee the invention of the railway would provide. Experience should t jach moderns to be more trustful of the future. Distance, there can be little qu istion, will every year be more completely abridged ; and even the the Antipodes brought near to England to such an extent that we do not now dream of. But, distance is by no means the chief obstacle opposed to tlie practicabihty of a federation of the Empire. The project is hedged on all sides with difficulties. The question of distance aside, tliere is, at the outset, the want of geographical unity which marks no successful Federacv already formed. Not- "Short Studies on Great Subjects, by .T, I, 210-11. A. Froude, London, 1872, Vol 16 withstanding the distance of tlie Pacific States from Wasliing- ton, there yet exists a geographical hond of connection with the Atlantic State.-i, the like of which would bo absent in the case of a British confederation. Nor is it wise to forget that the Am- erican Union was prevented from splitting asunder, only by one of the most stupendous struggles of modern or ancient times. Germany has built up a Federal Empire, but its con- stituent parts are so fitted together that their fusion into a homogeneous whole was not a very difficult task. Canada has adopted the federal form of government, biit it possessed with- in itself the geographical elements of solidarity. Its future success, which its i)resent prosperity would seem to warrant, is yet shrouded in uncertainty, two races, alien to each other, living within its borders, l^ut "countries separated by half " the globe," says Mr. John Stuart Mill, "do not present the " natural conditions for being under one government, or even '• members of one Federation. If they had sufficiently the " same interests, they have not and never can have, a sufficient " habit of taking counsel together. They are not part of the " same public ; they do not discuss and deliberate in the same " arena, but apart, and have only a most imperfect knowledge " of what passes in the minds of one another. They neither " know each other's objects, nor have confidence in each others •♦ principles of conduct."''^ In addition to these, other prime conditions are wanting, and render Imperial Federalism im- practicable. In the first place, as Mr. Mill elsewhere points out, there must exist a large amount of sympathy between the peoples to be united. As far as sympathy may be regarded as synonymous with loyalty, there is no lack of it among colonial communities, their fidelity to the Crown being of the most en- thusiastic character. But the very reasons on which this perfervid loyalty, is founded would, it is thought, be extinguish- ed by Federalism, As many who live under monarchical forms of governmont, sigh for a republican regime, not doubt- ing that it would i ling all manner of political blessings in its train, so distance lends enchantment to the colonial view of the Crown and robes it in a most attractive hue. Federalism, however, would quickly replace these colonial sentiments by others of a far less agreeable character. Let Englishmen and colonists be placed in the same political arena, and the con- flicts which would ensue would rapidly engender among the latter feelings towards the mother- country of a far less rever- ential character than those now entertained. Colonists are 'Representativn Government, p 132. 16 but Britons iii distant lands, and cheriHli the same spirit of in- depeudeuce which marks their fellows at llouiu. llavmg tas- tdd self-governmont, so dear to the Anglo-Saxon, they would bo loth to sijik their autonomy in federative union, even with England. Had Canada possessed representation in an Im- perial Parliament she would never have tamely submitted to the lease of her Fisheries ; and she only ratified the act, when protest was useless, to make, as Mr. Lowe said of England, the best of a bad bargain. Equally averse w^ould Englishmen be to colonial interfe;-o nee with what would be chiefly English af- fairs, though ranked under the generic title of Imperial con- cerns. On this point, Sir Charles Adderley expresses the op- iuion "that the English Parliament would not endure the in- fluential interference of distant fellow-subjects in their gen- " eral legislation. "••= And again 'I have already said that " the problem of a common representative Legislature of Eng- '* land and her colonies for Imperial purposes has been com- " pletely reduced by argument (dl iinposnihilr. Even if such " a Council could be got together, and the subjects of its " debates defined, we know the Colonics would not submit to " be taxed by English votes, nor we by the Colonial." t" How- ever great the sympathy now existing between the colonies and the mother land, the attempt to hicrease and intensify it by closer union would only result in abating it. Their interests are too diverse ; they have too long been accustomed to think and act for themselves to brook iutirference, one with the other. The true pathway lies along the middle course which is now being travelled. A second condition necessary for the stability of a federacy laid down by i\Ir. Mill is that the separate states should not be so powevful as to bo able to rely for protection against for- eign encj oachmont on their individual strength. This obstacle is not so formidable a one as that last recited, the colonies be- ing incompetent for their own defence ; wlide, if England be able to withstand invasion without colonial assistance, it is not equally clear that she would be able without such aid to maintain her mercantile supremacy, for the reasons we have ventured to set forth above. Still another requisite enuncia- ted by the same authority, is that there be not a very marked inequality of strength among the several contracting parties. If this be admitted a vital one, its absence destrovs the feasi- bility of the federal scheme. So unequal in strength would be the constituent i i-ts, at the outset, and for many years to 'Colonial Policy, pl2. tibid, p 421. It come, that a feeling of powerless insigtiificauce could not but ariiie in the colonial mind, which would not be compensated by those balances which maintain the equipoise in other Fed- eral combinations. L jrd Brougham points out in his work on Political Philosophy the taadency of federation to create mutual estrangements, and even hostility, between the diffarent parts — a tendency which would bo greatly aggravated by the causes, indicated. These feelm js would bo intensified by the differ- euce in the habit of colonial and English political thought. Colonies are largely democratic in thair politics, while England is a constitutional monarchy, under which have grown up in-, stitutions alien to colonial soil, an established church, a land- ed aristocracy and an hereditary House of Peers. No real political sympathy could exist between nations possessed of such diverse constitutions, for though the control over the monarchical adjuncts adverted to might not come with-^ in the jurisdiction of the Imperial Parliament, yet the political traditions inspired by their existence for centuries would effectually bar that active community of political feeling so necessary for the harmonious working of a federal scheme, the parties to which should be knit, together by tliQ warmest ties of partnership. But when we come to investigate the practical, as apart from the theoretical aspects of the project, the difficulties thicken fast around us. The author of Ginx's Baby, who con- tributed two articles on this subject to the Contemporary Ee- vieiv, in the beginning of 1871, confesses his inability to grasp the details of the vast scheme, and mould them into an even ap- parently practicable whole. "Attempts such as recently have " been made," writes Mr. Jenkins, who is an enthusiastic champion of Federalism, "by able and sincere advocates, to " limn out in detail the form of a British Federal vsystem, are, " from the conspicuousness of their failure, more likely to in- " jure than to advance their cause." '•' This is a singular ad- mission for so warm an advocate to make, and very like an in- stinctive confession that adverse judgment musu go against his cause. Mr. Mathews, however, is not content with dwel- ling upon the abstract beauties of federalism, but boldly pro- pounds a plan for confederating the empire, laying down, as necessary to the consummation of the scheme, the following measures : — " I.— That the Colonies should be left in possession of the "Contempi»rary Review, April, 1871. " system of local sclf-govoniracnt aturesont onjoycd by them. •• And that means hIuhiUI be takou to secure the same privil- *' age to the United Kinj^dora. V,II. Thiit thir^jvenno roqiiired to maot tho expsndituro of " the Federal Govornmont hIduKI bj rained o.'i a uaifoni rate «• of taxation, th()U},'h not necessarily on a uniform system, " over th3 whole of th ) Empire, and thit tlij inhabitants of it " should bo equally liable to military and naval service. " III. That a Federal Lej^islature co isisting of two cham- •• bers, should be formed, the Lower House to consist of re- " presontativos returned on on^ uniform syatsm by the " British Islands and the Colonies, and that prjvisun suould " be made for colonial representation in the Upper House also. "IV. That the Federal Lijjislature should succeed to all tho '• prero<»atives now enjoyed by the Imperial Parliaui Mit, ex- " ceptiug o ily those granted to the body, as bodies, appointed *' to legislate for the local g)vernment of the liritish Islands ; *• and should also enjoy the right of taxation all over the Fed- " eration." * It is urged in defence of this plan that it would be largely beneficial to the United Kingdom, whose Parliament now stag- gers under the huge legislative harden annually imposed upon it. There is little douot that this is a grievance for which a remedy will have t > be found at no distant day, though that the mod(j above indicated will not be adopted is equally certain. The amount of work done, and the amount of work necessarily left undoi are simply enormous, The legislative wants of the Kingdom are so vast and so various that it is impossible for the Imperial Parliament constituted as it is, to adequately attend to them. The time of the House is frittered away with private-bill legislation, when it should properly be devoted to affairs of Imperial state. The relegation ui private and local legislation to subordinate tribunals, and the retention of juris- diction over matters of national concern alone, are being gradu- ally admitted necessary for the proper working of the legisla- tive machine. That the revenue raising proscsses of the different constitu- ents of the projected Empire could be so assimilated as to produce financial harmony, there is grave reason for doubting. A uniform tariff is out of the question. This is admitted on all sides. England's tariff is a Free- Trade one, Canada's a revenue tariff, and Australia's to a large extent protective. To A (Joluniat ob the Colonial Question, p. 69. 10 To obviate the difficulty, which stands guard atthethreshholdof the inquiry, Mr. Miithows pruposeH tiint the local logiulaturos should hi allowed to enact their own tariffs, a maximum rate of duties being fixed by the turmn of the Union compact, and never to be exceeded by any member of the Federation, oa goods the product of any other part of it, such tariffs to be fixed for periods often years. This plan, while it does credit to the ingenuity of its propounder, is at best a clumsy one, and contains in itself a condemnation of the Federal scheme, for there can be little hope for tlie success of a Confederation thus arrayed against itself. There can be no political unity unless there be financial unity, says a distinguished publicist, and this is confessed impossible by the proposal that the vari- ous sections of the Federation should levy, hostile tariffs, one against the other. The fatality of such a confessed want of commercial harmony (which, it is true, mufht be avoided by direct taxation,) renders unnecessary an examination of the mode proposed for the distribution among the colonies and Great Britain of the expenses to be borne by the Federacy, for the impracticability of the method advanced for filling the Im- perial Treasury does away with the need of inquiring the best plan for gauging the extent of the several contributions to it. The rci)re8entative features of the Federal scheme might, perhaps, be aljusted, were it not for the stumbling block op- Ijosed by the House of Lords, but apart from that difficulty, others only less formidable present themselves for considera- tion. To carry out the Federal idea, there would require to be local legislatures for England, Scotland and Ireland, and, iu the case of latter kingdom, therein would be foi.nd,it is urged, a panacea for the various ills, real or assumed, which, afHict it. These legislatures would necessarily consist of Upper and Lower Houses, (the former hereditary chambers,; to be con- cerned with local legislation alone, as likewise would be the Federal Legislature, the popular branch of which according to Mr. Mathews's scheme, would "consist of representatives re- •' turned on one uniform system by the British Islands and the '* Colonies." Such 'uniform system' might be devised without great difficulty, but how would the Upper Chamber be con- stituted ? Mr. Mathews has an answer ready to hand, so fertile is his ingenuity in constitution -making. ** We would '* suggest that one proportion — we wiU not say how much— ^ •* of the House should be elective ; that a second proportion '* should consist of men who had filled certain offices in the n 20 " State, aa i a proposed by Mr. Mill in his hypothetical scheme •'for a second chamber in Eiiglaud ; that a third proportion " should consist of members to bo appointed by the Crown un- " conditionally ; and that a few hereditary seats, might, per- •' haps, be sprinkled in with advantage, to keep alive the " principle. The eiectivj members, we would have chos- " en, in the Colonies, by both brandies of the Colonial Legis- " latures, and in the British Islands, by the Upper H>uses " only, in order to leave untouched thj hereditary rights of " the peerage." * This plan, certainly, does not lack elabora- teness. It is a most curious mosaic, the cai . bestowed on its. construction attesting the difficulty of tho work. It scarcily requires serious argument to point out the impracticability of the sclieme, were the wisdom of intrjducing colonial legisla- Ir-toi's into a House of Beers a.lmittoi. It is alrealy cj.it3nd- ed in England, with some sho yv of r jason and the corrobora- tion of some experience infavourofth3contentio;i,that thaH )usa of Lords is out of step with the tim3s, that it fails to respond to national sympathies, first opposing, and in the end yielding an unwilling assent to popular measures. Tlio reasons which exist for the maintenance of a Chamber so constituted, in Eng- land, exist in none of the Colonies. If it represents anything> it represents the landed interests of the Kingdom, but the col- onies Lave no such such territorial magnates as are found in the English House of Lords. The representatives which the colonies might send to the Federal House of Peers could not well be lords, unless they received patents of peerage, with their certificates of election, and patents of peerage, without the wealth supposed to be necessary to maintain the dignity of. an hereditary title, would be but idle mockeries. Nor would there be the least community or harmony of political sentiment between the British and colonial members of the Upper House. The question, however, does not invite serious analysis. It would be about as practicable to propose that the American Senate should be reformed by the introduction of additional, hereditary members, as to suggest that British peers and colon- ial senators should meet together in legislative council. The incongruity would be too great to leave room for the slightest hope of harmony of thought, or action, or of usefid and fruit- ful conference. The project of a British Federacy, while prompted by a lofty motive, cannot reasonably be entertained. It is trifling with the aphorism that union is strength to urge that the closer '■ '"ibid, pp. 111-12. ~~ 21 union of the several political sections of the British Empire would result in greater strength to the whole. Union is strength only to a certain degree and under certain conditions. The constituent parts of the united whole must have certain well- dehued alhnities for each other, if they are to fuseharmoniousiy. The strength of the chain is the strength of it' rraakest link ; and we have seen that there are several weak links in the chain with which it is proposed to bind the colonies and the Mother Land more closely together into a Pam Britannic Empire. The points of divergence iu essential particulars are too numerous, the lack of the necessary sympathy and similarities too marked, to allow us to entertain the hope that the bridal would be a happy one. The scheme is certainly a magnificent one, well calculated to dazzle political. dreamers, and enlist the advocacy of doctrinaires. But it is, at once too vast and too intricate foi. successful consummation. The machinery re- quired to put it iu operation would necessarily be so ponderous, and yet require to be so delicately adjusted in its ten thousand parts, thot its construction must be regarded as impossible by all who estimate things as they are, and not as they ought to be. And, then, its working ? The difficulty of its manage- ment, its existence being supposed, would be equalled only by the task of keeping it in repair. It may not be brilliant states- manship to err on the side of caution, but prudent and wise conservatism are often better than sensational constitution- tinkering. As has been said by an eminent professor of politi- cal science, "The wisdom of a statesman is the result of ex- " perience and not of theory." The hand once put to the plough, there could be no turning back to the present condition of affairs, which is by no means as black as it is painted. Should failure attend this effort at Empire-building, it would be a disastrous failure, and precipitate the very evils which we are told are now imminent, but of which there is no just cause for aijprehension. COLONIAL CONSERVATISM CONSIDEKED. Hav..ng attempted to show the unwisdom alike of the schemes of the Emancipationists audi Federalists, it now only remains to consider the present relations subsisting betweein the Mother- Country and the Colonies, and whether any other modification or reformation of these relations is desu*ed or desirable, and, 22 if so, ill what direction the change should be made. It is unquestionable that Federation is not desired either by Great Britain or the colonies, whether Federation pure and simple, or any qualified form thertM)f. Only the other day a proposal was made in the English House of Commons by the member for Leith to the effect that it was desirable to establish an Imperial Council for the management of the general affairs of the Empire and to be fashioned as follows : The Ministry of Great Britain to be divided into two parts, one to take charge of domestic, the other of Imperial affairs. In the Imperial division there would be associated with the English Ministers colonial representatives, in due proportion, so as to make a Council of thirty-two in all. To such Council would be remit- ted the Government of India, the general policy of the Empire, the negotiation of treaties, the extent of armaments, the de- claration or war and the conclusion ofpaaca. Unfortunately, Mr. Macphie mixed up this romantic proposition with a very i^seful one, in reference to the subject of emigration to the col- onies, and asking a special committee of enquiry. The conse- quence was, that attention was distracted from a very practic- able to an impracticable question, the motion regarded by the Government as a side-blow to their Colonial Policy, and the request for a Committee whose enquiries on the subject of emi- gration might have been of the highest value, was denied. The coldness with which the proposition was received, showed however, if the Commons is a tair reflex of English public opinion, that the latter is averse to drawing more closely the bonds of union with the colonies. That that feeling is recip- rocated in one of the colonies, at least, we have the evidence of the debate in the Canadian Parliament, during which the Pre- mier made the speech, already quoted fiom, and in which he confessed the inabilityocf Canada to stand alone. So little importance was attached to the motion •* that an humble Ad- ** dress be presented to Her Most Gracious Majesty praying ** that the Imperial Parliament may be recommended to take " into consideration a Confederation of the Empire, or some '• other plan that will give to Canadians the full rights and " privilege T of British subjects," that no leading member of either Party, save the Premier, thought it worth while to dis- cuss it and those who did take part in the debate, with one or two exceptions, only rose to condemn the proposition, and to express their unreserved satisfaction with the present position of colonial relationship. Frim this it will be seen that the 28 uneasiness, said to be felt iu the colonies and United Kingdom, is confined to an insignificant and non-representative few. It is true, as we have seen, that some soreness was felt in Aus- tralia at the time of the withdrawal of the troops from that colony, but the irritation has passed away, as time revealed the wisdom of the poUcy which dictated the withdrawal. A very deeply-seated feeling of loyalty pervades all the Enghsh dependencies, as far as the general public arc aware, towards the present relations, which, though apparently too relaxed for abiding union, are yet far stronger than if more rigid. During no former period of the colonial history of the Empire were the feeling between Crown and dependency of a more amicable or satisfied character, or the wish of the latter against separation more firmly maintained. But there are those who do not wish to disturb the political status of the Colonies yet, nevertheless, contend that the fin- ancial relations between them and the United Kingdom are unjust and unsatisfactory. They maintain that the Colonies should contribute an equitable share of those Imperial charges from the expenditure of which they derive du*ect benefits. They argue that a considerable portion of the Imperial expen- diture in the colonies is for the benefit of commerce, and that, consequently, the latter should share it. This doctrine, which was preached by Adam Smith," was, on the 7tli March last, embodied in a motion submitted to the English House of Com- mons by L)rd Eustace Cecil, and proposing that ** each colony "should be invited to contribute, in proportion to its popula- " tion and wealth, such annual contingents of men,or such sums " of money, towards the defence of t) > Empire as may by ar- " rangements between the Home and Colonial Governments, " be hereafter deemed just and unnecessary." It does not ap- pear to have occurred to any of the gentlemen who took part in the debate which followed that, iu the absence of any pro- vision therein for colonial representation, the proposal involv- ed a violation of the principle that taxation without represen- tation is tyranny. The Under-Secretary for the Colonies, in reply, showed from the latest returns that "the total amount " expended on the Colonies which might be said to be in their " local interest was £475,000, of which the Colonies would " l)ay fully one half. He should state the matter more fairly " if he said that all the Colonies would make a full repayment " for the expenditure incurred in their behalf, except those on "Wealth of Nations, p. 22:^ " the West Coast of Africa and the West Indian Colonies," which justly could not be charged with it. Mr. Kuatchbiill — Hugessen went on to observe tliat "a country which had sever- " al colonies was like a man who had estates in several couu- '* ties ; and, just as an individual had to pay something for " his position in society, so a nation must pay something for "its position in the society of nations. It was very difficult ** to gauge the precise sum which ought to be paid by a coun- •• try like this. It would be the duty of Her Majesty's Gov- •' ernment to see that that expenditure was not excessive ; *' but this country would never wish to deal with our colonies '* with a parsimonious or niggardly hand." Mr. Crlpdstone followed in the same generous strain, deprecating sach at- tempts to revive colonial taxation as sure to produce unfortun- ate results, and declaring it to ba his opinion that it would be "far wiser, and possibly in the end far cheaper, to leave *• the matter to its free and natural growth, to be content with " gradual progress, and to endeavour to create in this Empire '* that harmony and unity of feeling which should gradually " eliminate marked distinctions in colonial jiolicy. If we ♦• could bring about that state of things, we might safely trust 1' the natural influence of free institutions and habits of .free- -' dom in the colonies to secure us, by free and spontaneous " action, colonial aspu'ations to fulfil, in a large sense, the re- " sponsibilities of British citizenship." These are statesman- hke views, and furnish a lucid exposition of the bent and aim of the modern colonial policy. It would, then, seem that per- fect content is felt on either side, and that both are anxious to let well enough alone. But alarmists and pessimists would have us believe that we are walking on the brink of a precipice, over which a single false step will toj)ple us. Tliey declare, on the other hand, that it is a false policy to impose the bur- den of self-defence upon the Colonies, and that the latter will not care to continue the connection when the motive of self- interest no longer exists. This, if true, is scarce complimen- tary to the Colonists ; but its incorrectness is at once shown by the fact that the carrying out of such a policy has not aba- ted their loyalty one jot or tittle. Canadians and Australians are to-day, not one whit less anxious for the niaintenauce of the connection than when Enghsh red-coats garrisoned their towns at the Imperial expense. If the Colonies wore held by England by so base a tenure, they would not be worth the re- tention. The desire for the continuance of the union derives 25 i>y ita vitality from something higher and better than mere con- siderations of mercenary profit, for, apart from reciprocal commercial advantages, the colonies wish to share in the trd-: ditional glories, the present greatness and future prosperity of Britain. That the affection for the mother-land is not mere sentiment and nothing more, has been proved on more than one occasion, and would receive fresh testimony did circum- stances call for action. While cherishing these feelings towards England, however, colonists do not desire closer union, but wish to be allowed to go on their several ways unmolested, hewing out their own destinies, perfecting their domestic policies as to them may seem best, developing their resources, and enrobing themselves with the dignities of nations worthy of the stock from which they sprang. "Those," writes Sir Charles Adder- ley, "who think colonial independence the forerunner of separ- " ation, I ask toconsiderthe necessity of independence to aliving " connexion and whether dependence must not be rather the " surest process through decay to severance. Life denied its " natural element seeks for it elsewhere The kindred " life of nations maintains itself by community of active ener- •• gy, capacity of partnership, identity of interest and enter- " prise, united tendencies and congenial relations with the " common origin The patron country may get some " return for supporting dependencies in their servile submis- " sion to its policy. But self-sustaining Colonies are connec- " ted by a living link. The connection with them is an active " partnership. England has the advantage of a territorial ex- " tension, liberating not taxing her resources ; uiid the Colon- " ies have the credit and good will of England's trade and " name. This is a union not likely to dissolve itself, but " daily accummulating pledges for its continuance, strength- " ening itself, and excluding instead of inviting foreign aggres- " sion." '' There is, still, one matter without reference to which any discussion of the merits of the Colonial question would be con- spicuously incomplete — the advisability of directing, by legiti- mate and well ordered means, the flow of British emigration more fully into Colonial channels. The overplus of popula- tion in Britain and the demand for an increased supply of labour in the Colonies are naturally the complement and sup- plement, each of the other. The question of emigration is per- haps the most practically important involved in the reciprocal •ColonUl Policy, pp. 190-91. 26 [• 1 relations of Great Britain and the Colonies, but unfortunately it has not received that attention at the hands of English Min- isters which its gravity deserved. No well-directed or ener- getic effort has been made in England to divert the tide of emigration to those countries which would make the most val- uable return. Mr. Froude, a couple of years since, directed public attention to the importance of the matter, through the columns of Fraser's Magazine^'' and in a warm argument dwelt upon the urgency of the English Government taking some steps to people the colonies with annual contiugeivts of Eng- lish recruits. At present, through the activity of their ener- gies, the United States attract the bulk of British emigration and thereby annually absorb a vast amount of wealth, a great part of which might under proper direction have remained British, or at least not passed into foreign hands. Had Eng- lish Ministers, at the time, risen to a level with the exigency of the occasion, and offered free transportation to the colonies to the Irish emigrants whom the potato famine drove out of Ireland, they would not have left their native country "with " hate in their hearts and curses on then- lips" for the Eng- hsh Government. Nor would the millions who have followed have been lost to England, Fenianism would never have had an existence, and the costly tribute which England is now laying at the feet of its sister kingdom would never have been extorted. The Irish residents of the Colonies are as well-af- fected towards the Crown as their fellow-subjects, but then* brethren in the United States nurse a feeUng of inextinguish- able hatred of the nation which they charge with the crime of their expatriation. But it is said that there is really no surplus poi)ulation in Britain, that trade and commerce are growing with magic rap- idity, and that the lack of employment, with its consequent poverty and distress, is due to temporary lulls in trade incident to all great manufacturing communities. But there rises up the eloquent answer, furnished by the pauper statistics, that there u a surplus population. What more crushing reply to the optimists could be had than the fact that in Great Britain one adult out of nineteen is a pauper, and that the rate is year- ly rising ? It may compose the rich to learn that mills and factories are multiplying at an enormous rate, and that com- merce is flourishing luxuriantly, but the blood of the body- politic must be charged with corruption when such loathsome t; Re-printed in Short Studies on Great Subject*, pp. 180, 348, Vol. I. %1 pustules break out all over its surface, and that persisteiitly.' Pauperism in three cases out of five means Tirant of labour, and want of labour means that hands are a drug in the labour market. What more fitting for statesmanship to endeavour to compass, than to bring these English hands and arms and the virgin soil of the Colonies together, and afford elbow-room and breathing-space to those who remain behind ? The em- ployer of labour, anxious to keep wages low, steps in the way, aiid declares that it is foreign to its legitimate bnsitress for Government, to interfere with emigration affairs, which should be allowed to regulate themselves by natural laws. But, answers Mr. Froude,"' "human things are as much gov- " erned by laws of nature as a farm or a garden, neither less nor " more. If we cultivate a tield it will yield us corn or green " crops. The laws of nature will as assuredly overgrow it with " docks and nettles if we leave it to govern itself." The lion in the path set up by the manufacturers is that staie-aided emigration would indirectly increase wages to such an extent that they would be unable to defy foreign competition in the sale of their wares. There is little danger to be apprehended on this score, as the natural increase in England will always till the labour market, notwithstanding the outward flow. There is more danger tobe feared,unless properly Weeded out,that the population of the British Islands will become so dense, and the difficulty of bread- winning Si. aggravated, that the masses will take the matter in their own hands, and attempt to re- dress the grievance in a manner one shudders to think of. We may affect to despise the wisdom of the ancients, but the ad- vice of Pericles to the Athenians that they must colonize, to prevent their people from being degraded by poverty, might with good effect be taken by modern English statesmen. That poverty has degraded the English masses is unquestionable, but there are not wanting indications that they are becoming restive and dissatisfied with the condition of affairs which keeps them poor. Even the most degraded of the English population, the agricul- tural laborer, has lately made an attempt to assert his right to get, at least, a decent living out of the wealth created by his liands, and in which his more fortunate fellows wallow. The social condition of no community can bo said to be satisfactory where the rich get rich and the poor poorer, f A remedy should be found ere it is too late. That remedy has been ~~~*Tbi(i;iri86^ ■ t Fast hastes that land to threatening ills a pi'ey, Where wealth accumulates and men decay. — Goldsmith. 28 § indicated, not in the confidence that it would purge EngHsh society of the evils dwelt upon, entirely, but that it would do BO to a very large extent, and hi a most salutary fashion. There is very excellent authority for the statement that emi- gration is a business for legitimate Government concern. In his Political Economy, Mr. John Stuart Mill thus refers to the question of state-aided emigration : — " The question of Government intervention in the work of " Colonization involves the future and permanent interests of " civihzation itself, and far outstretches the comparatively " narrow limits of purely economical considerations. But even " with a view to these considerations aloiie, the removal of '• population from the overcrowded to the unoccupied parts of •' the earth's surface is one of those works of eminent social use- " fulness, which most require, and which at the same time best ' ' repay, the intervention of Government. " Much has been said of the good economy " of importing commodities from the place where they can bo " bought cheapest ; while the good economy of producing " them where they can be produced the chaapest, is compara- •* tively little thought of. If to carry consumable goods from " the place where they are superabundant to t^ose where " they are scarce, is a good pecuniary speculation, is it not an " equally good speculation to do the same thing with regard •* '^o labour and instruments ? The exportation of labour and " capital from old to new countries, from a place where their " productive power is less, to a place where it is greater, in- '• creates by so much the labour and capital of the world. It " adds to the joint wealth of the old and the new country, what " amounts in a short period to many times the mere cost of et- " fecting the transport. There need be no hesitation in af- " firming that Colonization, in the present state of the world " is the best affair of business in which the capital of an old and " wealthy country can engage." " State-aided emigration would certainly prove an excellent investment for Groat Britain, for, in addition to the reasons above quoted, the colonists are by many times larger consum- ers of English goods than the residents of foreign lands, and the bread thus cast on the waters in emigrant ships would cer- tainly return increased and multiplied. The question certain- ly "involves the future and permanent interests of civiliza- •' tion itself," and should not be subordinated to the p. 586, (People'8 Edition.) 29 greed of British manufactures whose interests are not the high- est interests of the kingdom or empire. It would not only "pay" in the modes already indicated to divert the stream of British emigration more fully in the direc- tion of the colonies, hut state-assisted emigration would li- quidate its own cost hy reducing the poor-rates, the shame and disgrace of Merrie England. Many of the paupers in re- ceipt of relief are forced paupers, receiving alms of the parish because the country refuses to give them work whereby to pro- cure the means for buying food. They are burdens on the state, not from choice, but from necessity. Let the labour market be balanced by a wisely framed scheme for assisting the deserving poor out of the country to colonial towns and farms, and the consequent saving in the poor rates would more than fully compensate for the expense thereby incurred. On this point we have direct an^ convincing testimony. In his Colonial Policy, Sii" Charles Adderley thus bears witness to the correctness of the above statement : — "But ratepayers generally do not yet take in the fact that '* every able and industrious family of labourers going out to " new scenes of industry prevents another family from be- '* coming paupers at home ; and that successful emigration •' increases the general employment of labour and capital. I *' recollect when this subject was rife, when tlie Poor Law *' amendment saved England from permanent ruin, a Hamp- " shire Board of Guardians remonstrating with an enlighten- *' ed proprietor who proposed a large subscription to enable a " great accumulation of healthy laborers who crowded the " parish to emigrate. The plan was ultimately carried out, *' and the result was that the paupers left behind soon ceased •* to be paupers, and the poor rates shrank to a quarter of " their former amount." ••' This is very convincing proof of the beneficent results flowing from emigration, even on those left behind. Poverty, it certainly will not eradicate. Pover- ty will always, must always, exist in England to a painful ex- tent ; but it is idle to assert that its present dimensions cap- not be curtailed, and 'criminally foolish for English statesmen -to stand by with folded arms and do nothing to alleviate the misery, when the door of relief can be so easily opened. Ko- man soldiers have left behind them enduring monuments of their industry, as well as the fame of their martial achieve- •pp. 112-13. 80 •^hients. And why should not EugUdi war-veHwlg in time of peace be employed in the transportiition of emigrants to colon- ial soil ? The difficulties however which stand in the way of the ad- justment of a wise and bonoticent sclu'me of state-aided emi- gration should not be underestimated. That it should be car- ried on by Great Britain alone would be only to secure its fail- ure. It can only be properly carried out by the conjoint ac- tion of the United Kingdom and the colonies, each party bear- ing a share of the expense. To send ship-loads of emigrants to a colony without first incjuiring the labour needs of that col- ony would be a most unwise proceeding,for the colonies are neither populous enough, nor their industrios so varied, that thoy can absorb all the immigrants that Great Britain could profitably spare. To send an artizan to a colony where there is no mar- ket for the productions of his craft would be a cruelty. Emi- grants should be sifted and assorted, unless they be agricultur- al laborers, for millions of whom the colonies contain ample room and verge enough. A writer in the Cobilen Club Easaya * makes the admirable suggestion that one of the best class of emigrants would be pauper children, who by translation to a distant laud would have the stigma of then* birth removed, and be preserved from the risk of being drawn back into the ranks of hereditary paupers. Such children should emigrate when their labour begins to be of value. They would grow with the growth of their new homes, and be able to choose the employment of their lives. One objection there is to this, the necessity of freeing any scheme of assisted emigration that may be devised from the taint of pauperism, for its benefits would be as tardily accepted by the self-respecting, as the emigrants themselves by the colonies to which they were trans- ferred. But these are minor details. Though important, the difficulty of their arrangement could not prevent the success of state-emigration if taken up by England with a helpful in- terest. Her willingness to co-operate with the colonies ob- tained, the difficulties would rapidly vanish. The adoption of such a scheme would be worthy of* true and enUghteued •statesmanship, and achieve a more comely triumph than the most successful foreign war. What, it may be asked, in conclusion, will be the destiny of the Colonies ? The answer Ues buried in the womb of futur- ity, and we cannot pretend to furnish it. How long their •Second Edition, p. 245. \ 81 tllG present relationship with Great Britain will last oauivot be predicted, though we feel assured that it ia the most endur- ing tie with which they can be bound together, and the most wisely adapted for mutual profit and advantage. That a Hplendid future awaits both the Australian and British Ameri- can proviucea can searcebedoubted.if they prove themselves loyal children of the "mother of free nations." They have had kindly nurture, wise bringing-up, profitable instruction and generous assistance, in theirsystems of polity they have adop- ted the best features of the Bepublican form of government, and of the most liberal monarchy the world ever saw. The foundations of their national structures were laid when the old and false systems of Government were being supplanted by the modern and more true, and they have had the experience of the past to warn them from error, and guide them aright. They fortunately escape, on the one hand, the turmoil and intrigues ot an election to the Chief Magistracy, on the other, the incapacity, sometimes the fruit of hereditary transmission of power. They have reproduced to a pleasing extent the most healthful features of old-world Anglo-Saxon society, transplan- ted with success those homely virtue8,and borrowed the flavour of that moral sweetness which have done more for English hb- erty than all the victories from Agincourtto Waterloo. "Great " Britain confides," said Bulwer-Lytton, "the records of her " Empire not to pyramids and obelisks,but to states and com- " munities whose history will be written in her language," and they give promise of being loyal custodians of the charge, and worthy co-adjutors in the civilizing task of extending English laws, manners and freedom over the World. In the assurance that they will run this lusty race, may we not re-echo the as- piration of an. eloquent divine, who thus takes leave of Canada with words of admiration equally fitting Australia ? — .-a "When I consider that here is a land which reaps all tlie benefit of monarchy— without the caste or cost of mon- archy — a land where there is no degradation in hon« est toil, and ample chances for the honest toiler ; a land whoso educational appliances rival any other, and whose moral principle has not yet been undermined ; a land which starts its national existence with a kindling love of freedom, a quickened onset of inquiry, and a reverent love of truth, and of its highest embodiment, Eeligion— I feel that never 82 a country began under fairer auspicoH, and that, if Canada's cliildroube but true to themselves, whatever their pohtical destiny may be, they will eKtabliHh a stable comnionwoath, rich in all the virtucH which make nations great — mighty m those irresistible moral forces which make any people strong. Kuto petyetua ! May no Marius evei* flit among the ruins of a proraiae sofair." ''• • Preface to Sermons and Lectures, by W. M. Punshon, LL. D., Toron- to ; Adam, Stevenson & Co.