GOliLlY’S LETTER TO TiH GLA.r>S'T’ONE ' *'*V^w w ' ''V- - _ S>^VV'''^^V V ^ - . ^ '*^5;'g5«i:»v.- '‘‘Vm • V.. -- >> Godley. J«R . Mr. Godley’ 6 Letter to Mr. Gladstone, on the Government of the Colonies. Savin & Edv/ards, (Privately Printed), London c.1849. MR. GODLEY’S LETTER TO MR. GLADSTONE, ON THE GOVERNMENT OF THE COLONIES. TO THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, M.P. My dear Mr. Gladstone, PlymoutJi, 12th Deceraber, 1849. On the eve of leaving England for one of our most distant colonies, I cannot resist the desire of saying a words before I go, to the British public, on the subject of Colonial politics, under the new aspect which they have lately Msiimed; a subject in which I have long been speculatively interested, and m which I am now about to acquire a deejp and immediate personal concern. And I have ventured, with your kind permission, to prefix your name to my observations ; not from any presumed accordance between your views and my own, but simply because, as you seem to me to be the one among our leadi^ statesmen who has most ftiUy considered the question of Colonial reform, so you are the one most likely to appreciate and encourage the humblest eflbrt to advance that cause. Judging, indeed, from the speeches which you have made l^te l^t two sessions, and from the line of conduct ^ think it right to adopt with reference to this ques- tiot^ infer that you do not agree with me; that is, that you are far from estimating so highly as I do the danger which threatens our Colonial empire, ana the necessity of meeting it promptly by me^ures of thorough reform. If you did, I feel sure (from my faith in your patriotism and public spirit) that, waiving all considerations of a personal and party nature, you would stand forth as the active champion of those sepching remedies by which alone the disease which is consuming our greatness can now be cured. I speak confidently, perhaps presumptuously, but my convictions have at least not been formed without much thought and observation. My occupa- tions have for some time past tlirown me into habitual inter- course wdth colonists personally, and acquaintance wum me various organs of Colonial opinion. No one has had better opportunities of appreciating the immense change whicn nas lately come over the Colonial mind, and the utter hopeless- ness of satisfying it tiow with “gradual instalments of treedom, A year or two ago I thought, as perhaps you think now, that, though a system so absurd in theory, and so unsuccesslul in practice, as that by which our Colonics are riJed, must break down sooner or later, still it might last indefinitely, tor ten years to come, perhaps for twenty; and that our efibids might safely be directed to a gradual amelioration of it. I ^ now convinced that I was wTong: the real danger is, not that the despotism of the Colonial Office wfil last ten or twenty ye^s — ^not that the colonists will be oppressed by it for an inde- finite time to come— but that it may last just long enough to break up the British empire; a consummation which, at the present rate of progress, will not perhaps take a great deal more than ten or twen^ months, I should be very glad now to be as sure that the flag of my country will not be hauled down during my lifetime m any part of the Queen’s dominions, as I am that the hours of “ Mr. Mothercountry’s” reign are numbered. The point, therefore, which I am most anxious to urge upon you, as upon all Colonial reformers, is, that whereas they have hitherto pleaded in the interests, as they thought, of sufiering colonies alone, they must now plead in the interests of British honour and British supremacy; that whereas the alternative has hitherto appeared to lie betw-een local self-government and the centralism of Downing Street, now it is between local self-government and national inde- pendence. Many causes have contributed to this change in j *1 ■4-1-k.rw /^nrha^i/\Y^ • V\n4’. ’t’.VlOYTl ‘i’-llAQ A ■■ trine that the Colomes ought to be abandoned. As i am anxious to avoid even the semblance of writing in a party spirit, I forbear to enlarge on the stimulus imparted to the operation of both these causes by the persevering mismanage- ment to which the Colonies have been of late subjected ; but it would be mere aficctation to ignore altogether an influence so undeniable and so important. On the one hand, I say, the Colonists have acquired an increased confidence in their own strength; a confidence derived not only from the knowledge tliat their material resources are yearly increasing, but also from the moral power which is imparted by the e^^erience of successful con- flicts. Not only has the Colonial Office received many damaging defeats of late, but it has so timed its resistance and its concessions as to give precisely the utmost possible encouragement to Colonial revolt. Canada, for example, gained by rebellion nearly all for the sake of which she rebelled, and which during years of peaceful agitation she had been refused ; and she is now given to understand very plainly by official j^eople, that the rest of her demands will be similarly granted, if she apply in a similar way. New South Wales, too, has more than once within the last two years repulsed the aggressions of the Colonial Minister. But the turning-point of the conflict I consider to be the successful resistance of the Cape of Good Hope. It is morally impossible that the authority of Downing Street over the Colonies can long survive the shock which it has just received in South Africa. That small and feeble but highminded dependency has taught a lesson which others, more powerful at once and more aggrieved, wiU not be slow to loam. The machinery which she has employed for her special purpose may be employed by any other colony for any other purpose with respect to which the colonists shall be at issue with the Imperial Government; and, if equal energy and unanimity be displayed, with equal success. It will be used to obtain immimity from convict emigration in every shape ; to acquire local seli-governraent, or even to assert independence. Forti- fied places we may continue to hold, and naval stations : but I think it is henceforth established that we cannot govern, or even occupy, a distant colony permanently without the con- sent of its population. It woida bo useless to deny that these facts, and the knowledge of them prevailing among colonists, arc very dangerous under present circumstances to the stability of the empire. On the other hand, a political school has grown up in this country which is supposed to advocate the abandonment of colonies, on the groimd that they do not “ pay.” I say sup- posed to advocate, because I do not know that the doctrine has yet been distinctly stated and fairly avowed. Still, there is no moral doubt of its being in fact held, or of ite being in accordance with the general tone and views proclaimed by a powerful and increasing class of English politicians. With those who entertain this anti-imperial doctrine, I need hardly tell you that I feel no sympatny ; but I cannot help per- ceiving how formidable it is, because it falls in with the positive and material character of the age, and especially \^th the habits of thought prevailing among the now very powemu middle classes of this country. Moreover, I see manifold ^’ounds for believing that statesmen of far higher position and greater mark (some from spite, and more from indolence) regard the possibility of a separation between England and her Colonies without any kind of dissatisfaction. “Mr. Mothercountry ” is of opinion, no doubt, that if our Coloni^ empire is not to be kegt as a toy for him to play wdth, it is not worth keepmg at all. On the whole, then, it appears to me that we are on the eve of what may truly be called a revolution in our Colonial relations ; and that during the next year or two, in all probability, it vill be decided whether “ the British Enmire is to endure and to grow, as it has hitherto grown, for an indefinite time to come, or whether it is to shrink by a rapid progress of disintegration into the dimensions of two small islands. Now, although to me, an intending colonist, this consideration is one of deep and mo- mentous import, it will appear, I fear, to a large portion of my countrymen a matter of comparative indifference. There are trvii powerful and popular reasoners who w'ill soon inquire openly, ’ ” > 105 ' as they now do by implication, “ What shall w^e lose by sepa- ration P If, as you say, colonics are no longer to be used as fields of official patronage — no longer to be debarred, for our profit, from the commerce of the world — no longer to be made receptacles for the surplus population of our gaols — if, in short, their proper functions are to be henceforth undischarged, t, w^e beg leave to ask, is the good of colonies P” This w hat, w^e beg leave to ask, is the gooa ot colonies Y' This will soon become the question of the day ; iijid it is one for which it behoves us to prepare betimes an answer. The best argument, perliaps, against separation, is to be found in the strength and prevalence of a moral instinct which separatists do not recognise, and which they hardly understand, though they bear a strong testimony to its truth in the remarkable reluctance which they manifest to avow their doctrines. A true patriot personifies and idealizes his coiuitry, and rejoices in her greatness, her glory, and her pre- eminence, as a loving son w^ould exidt in the triumphs of a parent. Doubtless such greatness and glory may be too dearly bought ; but that is not the question. I say that, in- dependently of reasoning, they 2ivefeU to possess a great and re^ although an immaterial value, and that they are the more keenly so felt in the most heroic periods of a nation’s history expansion — is an unfailing symptom of lusty and vigorous life in a people ; and that, subject to the conditions of justice and humanity, it is not only legitimate, but most laudable. Certain I am, that the decline of such a fechng is alw^ays the result, not of matured wisdom or enlarged philantlu'opy, but of liLxurious imbecility and selfish sloth. 'Vvlien the lloman eagles retreated across is i!! l! . 5 the Danube, not the lo8s of Dacia, but the satisfaction of the Koman people at the loss, was the omen of the empire’s fall. Or, to take an iUustration nearer home, it is unquestionable that, notw-ithstanding the disgraceful circumstances under which Americm was torn from the grasp of Lugland, we suffered less in prestige and in strength by that obstinate and disastrous struggle, than if, hke the soft Triumvir, we had “ lost a world, and been content to lose it.” Depend upon it, the instinct of national pride is sound and true ; and it is no foolish vanity which malces Englishmen shrink from the idea of seeing their country diminished and humbled in the eyes of the world. But the case of those who defend the preservation^ ot our Colonies does not rest on any such instinct alone ; it rests also on perfectly tangible and material grounds. I will admit, for the sake of argument, that our trade wdth the colonies miaht not suffer by separation, though I have little doubt in fact tliat it would. A certain kind of emigration, too, such as that which now proceeds to the United States, would ot course go on. But there would be no good colonization : no English gentlemen — indeed few Englishmen of any class who were not bad specimens of it — would deliberately renoimce their allegiance, and place themselves in a position where they might be called upon, by their duty to their adopted country, to fight against the country wdiich ^ye them birth. They would not consent to stand towards their friends and kindred in the relation of “ foreigners ; they would never give up the name, the rights, and the privileges ot Englishmen. This may be a very foolish and unplulosophical feeling ; but experience as well as theory shows that it is enter- tained : and consequently, by making “ foreign countries o our Colonies, we should cut off on the one hand the best part of the British nation from colonization, and on the other we shoidd abandon the plain duty of building up society ^ lest form throughout those wide regions w^chare destmed to be peopled by our descendants. We shoidd deliberately pr vide for the construction of hostile democracies out o e worst of the materials w'hich compose the British , Again, the imion of the provinces which make up empire constitutes a positive element of material strengt . is perhaps true, that now' the value of our Colomes , counterbalanced by their cost ; but such has been t le c y since the invention of the Colonial have made colonies effeminate by oi^ nro^ction and , by our tyranny. The early British Colonies con < largely, both in men and money, to the mditary the Imperial treasury ; they fitted out confine the commerce of the common enemy ; nor did t y themselves to the defence of their own territory agamst ag- I gression, but single-banded they conquered and kept new Wliy should we doubt that modem It -j allowed sunilar liberty, would show equal loyalty t- 1 heir Imperial patriotism is a thing of which we at home have but a faint idea. Until they are spoiled by bad government, they delight in their connexion with En^and, thoLbf tl»e^ eyes fiU with tears It the eSin tf t^™®’ 1 ““dtJieir highest boast is the share they claim m the triumphs of English literature, arts, and aims. c)!l natural dispositions towards hmids colonists will not endure at our Tbev woIl? ’x' governed from Downing Street. not bo Englishmen if they did. By a steady and government, we rfo succored in a^l 3ZV.W — { mother-countiy, ana implantmg in its nlace a feelmg which is peculiar to co- hke , ®’ “ made up of jealoufdis- dereridwtnJ this is facditioisly engen- aeied, and would disappear with the causes that produced it Jeslmblc'ltoatfeh'r*'’^ colonists towards Englind greatly sSl nnf i t lx hy ourselves towards our Sovereigns We from fhll Sr «« thiy abstain K Sd reS '? enthusiastic, but fi TorroS a7 nr® “ eympathize with Sest naT’l fniri l” “ii"'^®^ Personal rheve that there are not many indi- TnSlife to Sa who wo^d hesitate to sacrifice property and life m order to save the Queen from indignity or daLer |£|Sfr ;ri “a Mttisrfi s loyaltyZcS as“Zt~sc^lbef (aSdTuZ aSTs’ plrSly consistent with a determination to be self-governed) ^oes mrt d,JrZLTo[ £*001^2 *H I do not think so, however; and iCf lure timi ZrP*' ^orth notice lias been said on the other. Besides have passed the argumentative stage in this nart nf + 1 ^ ness. That the Ce'ntral system, n^ctW r ^ irSt be speeddy abolished, no man with a grain of notoiZ’f ...* can deb., I ropP,,. ,1.., 0WS4; Uni H djiiif jeedii; 'UlltIT,| to» lgil» flp resth % remains to be settled is, whether its abolition shall be the result of a dissolution of our Colonial empire or not. I have therefore conned myself to urging a proposition which will bo much more seriously debated, — ^namely, that such a dis- solution is neither unavoidable nor desirable, but pre-emi- nently the reverse. But it is necessary for me to state what I mean by local self-government ; as the phrase, though hackneyed, has been much abused. I do not mean, then, mere powers of paving and hghting and road-making ; nor the privilege of initiatory legislation ; nor the hberty of making subordinate official ap- pointments ; I do not mean a regimen involving the reserva- tion of civil lists, or the interposition of vetoes, or any other of those provisions in virtue of which Ministers in Downing Street are in the habit of interfering with the internal concerns of colonies. I mean by local self-government, the right and power to do, within the limits oi each colony respectively, without check, control, or intervention of any kind, every- thing that the Supreme Government of this country can do within the limits of the British Islands — with one excp^ti^. I allude to the prerogative of regulating relations with tor^gn powers. This one prerogative, the concentration of which is essential to Imperial umty, the colonists themselves woidd gladly see reserved, in exchange for the privilege and the security of being identified with the empire : but more than this it is neither beneficial nor possible for us to retain, i need hardly say that my idea of self-government mrfudes the power of making and altering local constitutions. We ought not, I am sure, to impose upon the colonies any lomi ot government whatever, even to start with. Wlien we sha have duly authorized them to act for themselves, our function with regard to their internal aftairs should end. Paper con- stitutions, drawn up by amateurs without personal intorest m the subject, never answer. All the best of the old Co oni constitutions were framed by the colonists ; and while many of them have endured, with hardly an alteration, for than two hundred years, all of them, whether altere ^ ^ the origmals or not, give (being home-made) perfect sa ^ " tion to those who live under them. I have yet to ca ^ Colonial Office constitution which has If ted ten given a moment’s satisfaction to any one but me oc , who drew it. I define, then, the Innnfrv appear to me) of a Colonial relation to the Mothe ’ ^ in three terms — 1, an acknowledged allegi^ce ; 2, a, citizenship ; 3, an offensive and defensive allian^. , . these it is idle to offer, because to thf e, i struggles, we shall come at laat ; only toat if gr struggles, and not freely, they will perhaps lose efficacy. 8 As a matter of course. Colonies enjoying, as those of Now England did, the perfect administration or their own jiffairs, ou^it not to cost the Mother-country a shilling for their government; and I am confident that, like Massachusetts and Pennsylvania of old, they would regard total pecuniary independence of the Mother-country as an important means of preserving their mimicipal privileges. There is, I suppose, little doubt that even the Colonial Office will think it necessary to “do something” in the way of Colonial reform next year ; nay, that what they do will be in advance on the absurd measures proposed last session ; but I cannot bring myself to believe that they will do any- thing “ thorough,” and I most earnestly hope that the friends of the Colonies will not be satisfied with anything less. We must hear no more of “ gradual amehorations things have gone much too far for experiments and instalments ; and the session after next it may be too late for reform, I conclude by repeating, that if to you at home the issue of this impend- ing st^ggle be a matter of comparative indifference, I ^aii answer for it that to British colonists it wiU appear one of absolutely vital moment. For my own part, I can only say, that though I might consent, in spite of reason and experience, to live in a colony permanently governed by a Minister in London, I would neitner do so myself, nor ask others to do so, if the colony we founded were destined during our lifetime to be separated from the Mother-country. It is in the hope of seeing the only means adopted W which you can avert such a consummation that I now leave England. Believe me, my dear Mr. Gladstone, Yours very faithfully, John Kobert Godley. Savill & Edwards, Printers, 4, Chandos-street, Covent-jtarden.