Other formats

    TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

A selection from the writings and speeches of John Robert Godley

Lyttelton, January 23, 1852

Lyttelton, January 23, 1852.

My despatch of 23rd December in reply to one on the same subject to Mr. Alston, will put your Lordship sufficiently in possession of my views with respect to the questions of which your letter of 10th September treats. There are, however, some points in that letter to which it is necessary for me to refer especially. In the first place, I wish to observe that your Lordship in considering the suggestions thrown out in my letter of March in the nature of a matured plan, and proceeding to criticise them as such, is not quite doing me justice. I hold, and I think you will agree with me, that, whenever authority is to be transferred from the mother country to a colony, it is the special business of the person or corporation in whose hands that authority resides, to decide how its transfer is to be effected, and to constitute the new depositaries of it. In matters of colonial government, I hold that the duty of the Imperial Parliament is to call into existence a governing power in the colony, in other words, to create a constituency, and then to leave that local government to do its own work. So, in the case of the Association, I never considered it as my business, nor as the business of the colonists, to settle how, or to whom the powers of the Association as now constituted, should be transferred. What we wished was page 226simply that they should he transferred to a local and independent body, and to make this wish known was our primary, if not the only object. It is true that I exceeded the limits of what I have laid down as my proper province, by indicating, perhaps too distinctly and too specifically, my views and ideas as to the best mode of doing what I wished to see done. I did so hoping that the expression of them might possibly serve as a suggestion and a help, but fully conscious of my own inability to deal with the whole question, and intending, in fact, that the very vagueness of my proposals should demonstrate the nature of my object in making them. I now regret having made any proposals at all, inasmuch as I find that the minds of the Committee were thereby diverted from the main point at issue to a discussion of the value of my particular suggestions. It is really a matter of comparative indifference to me, as well as to the colonists, whether those suggestions prove to be feasible and desirable, or utterly worthless. If they had been ever so well matured, and if I had been much more competent than I am to deal with a subject involving legal questions of no small difficulty, I could never suppose for a moment that they would be fully adequate for their purpose, still less that they would be adopted wholesale, as I sent them. If, therefore, the Committee had confined themselves to a mere statement that my plan (if plan it could be called), was not practicable, or not the best, and if they had gone on to say that, with respect to the purport and intent of it, with respect namely to the immediate transfer of the Association's powers to a local and independent body, they concurred with me, and would accordingly take the best means of effecting it, I should not have had another word to say. I should then have known that my object was attained. But it appears to me that your Lordship's general conclusion is that you do not concur with the colonists and myself in the general principle advocated by me, i.e., the principle of immediate localisation. Now, upon this point my opinions are so strong, that, as you will long ago have known, I cannot undertake to carry on the business of page 227the Association upon its present footing; and I feel perfectly well convinced that your Lordship and the Committee if they had my experience of the working of such a system on the spot, would come to the same conclusion as I have done. What I wish to impress upon your Lordship, and only regret that I have not words to express adequately, is that a distant governing body always comes to be suspected and disliked by colonists: not only are those of its acts distasteful to them which are really ill-judged and pernicious, but even a policy which would be approved of, if it had been initiated by themselves, is objected to when it is imposed upon them by others. All sorts of rumours are circulated to the disadvantage of the distant authority; the simplest action is misconstrued, hidden motives are, most unjustly in many cases, attributed; every thing is looked upon from the worst point of view, and this not merely from jealousy or from irritation at fancied mismanagement, but really for want of mutual intercourse. It is therefore very far from arguing indifference for the principles of the Association's scheme, or ingratitude towards their persons, that the more thoughtful among the colonists long to see them relieved from a task which they cannot possibly perform well, and their continued attempt to perform which would soon alienate the people of this Settlement both from their principles and from themselves. I have no fear but that at present the colonists, however represented and organised, would be perfectly satisfied to take the scheme as it stands and work it, but every year, every month, every day of distant government adds to the numbers of those who will oppose not only the practice but the principles of that government. It seems therefore to me, and to all the colonists who wish well to our scheme, a matter of primary importance that it should be worked here from the first. I had every reason when I wrote the dispatch to which your Lordship's letter is a reply, to believe that the questions connected with the political constitution of New Zealand would have been settled during the last Session of Parliament, and that a Provincial Assembly, page 228representing the people of this Settlement, would at this time be administering its affairs. I thought and still think the Provincial Government so constituted would be the proper instrument for administering the land fund; and I cannot but believe that the present members of the Association have sufficient influence to procure an Act of Parliament giving to the Provincial Government the necessary powers, and binding it to appropriate the fund during a certain time in the manner specified by the first Canterbury Settlement Act. It appears to me that if such an Act cannot be obtained, there is no alternative but to adopt the comparatively unsatisfactory expedient of a local Association, which must make the best arrangement with the local Government that it can for the administration of the department which shall have been placed under its control. I see clearly that great difficulty would be experienced, and delicate management required, to secure any thing like harmonious co-operation between two bodies whose respective jurisdictions would be naturally so ill-defined and so incompatible: but as they would be in each others presence, and probably in a great measure composed of the same persons, a way would no doubt be found to overcome the difficulty. Whereas I can see no possible mode of reconciling the differences which would be sure to arise between the London Corporation and the Provincial Government. And I need not say that in case of such differences, public opinion, both here and in England, would be equally sure to support the latter.

I have next to observe on what your Lordship says of the constitution and claims of the Council of Land Purchasers. I am quite aware that the constitution of that Council is provisional and defective, and I should strongly oppose any claim on its part to be considered as representing the opinions of the whole community. I have felt the impossibility of forming a regular and complete organisation of the colonists, because I had no power to fix a franchise for such a purpose. I therefore took the organisation which I found existing and page 229formally recognised by the Association, and which was composed generally speaking of men who had evinced their sympathy with our principles by their contribution towards our funds. I repeat that I have since that time invariably endeavoured to secure their co-operation, and to conform as far as possible to their advice, not as admitting any claim of right on their part to such consideration, but as a matter of practical convenience and for the general good. I would gladly have widened the basis of representation, but I feel that I had no authority to undertake a task so responsible and so delicate. But at the same time I must remind your Lordship that the "original land purchasers" whom it does represent, constitute precisely that part of the community which has the greatest sympathy with the objects of the Association, and the strongest sentiments of gratitude and respect for its members. Although, therefore, an antagonist of the Association's policy might fairly refuse to attach weight to the opinions of the Council upon points connected with that policy, an advocate of the Association can hardly do so. If I had the slightest reason to suppose that the Council go farther than the body of the population in their objections to the policy of the Association I would of course have informed the Committee that such was the case. But I can assure your Lordship that I have no reason to believe so. I feel certain that you will see upon consideration, that if the Bishop, the clergy, the officers of the Association, and the original land purchasers are unanimous, (as they are indeed unanimous) in advising immediate and complete self-government, the remaining classes of the population are not likely to be less so. We (that is those who wish well to the scheme, but disapprove of the present administration of it), are placed in a great difficulty: we are sincerely anxious to avoid the scandal of a public controversy between the Association and the colonists, and yet we feel that upon a matter so vitally important we cannot be silent; we are thus unable to do justice to our cause by inviting popular support, and we expose ourselves, when we do speak, to the retort that page 230we are speaking only our individual sentiments and not those of the community. I am perfectly conscious of this weakness in our case, hut I deliberately prefer submitting to its disadvantages rather than run the risk, without evident necessity, of giving to our common enemies occasion of triumph. If there be one thing which has hitherto distinguished this Settlement from every other colonial community of which I have heard or read, it is the remarkable unanimity of its inhabitants in all matters of public interest; but the point upon which this unanimity is most complete and most decisive (embracing as I believe it does every single individual who thinks on these matters at all), is—local self-government. We are thoroughly convinced, whatever may be our respective opinions on other political questions that those who manage the affairs of a country ought to reside in that country, and we do not believe that any advantages possessed by a distant governing body can compensate for the disadvantage of distance. Most of us thought so before we came out, and every thing that has passed since has served to deepen and strengthen our convictions. To this pervading and rooted sentiment, and not by any means either to want of confidence in the Association or of attachment to its principles, I trust your Lordship will attribute the earnestness with which the necessity of an immediate transfer has been pressed upon you. It appears to me unnecessary and most undesirable to wait during an indefinite time for the action of Parliament, while, as I believed, the Settlement was suffering irreparable injury from even the temporary administration of its affairs by the Committee sitting in London. But I never intended deliberately to recommend the transfer of the Association's functions to the Wellington Government; I have kept no copy of the private letter to which your Lordship alludes, and I cannot recall the circumstances or the context of the passage which you quote, but what I meant, so far as I remember, was that any local or representative government would be a better trustee than the London Association. I did not mean to recommend a transfer page 231to such government in its preseut form, because I thought better plans of localising the Association's functions might he devised; I may have incautiously used expressions which would lead to a contrary impression of my views, hut in no public dispatch have I intentionally countenanced any view but one based on the necessity of a local organisation, of which Canterbury should be the metropolis. I did not suppose that the limits of our block and of the Canterbury Province would necessarily be conterminous, and I should be perfectly satisfied to have our land fund managed by the representatives of the latter. But on the assumption that no such province were formed, I should prefer on the whole, with all the evils and risks attendent on it, (as the trustee of our land fund) a local Canterbury Association, to a representative government of whose jurisdiction our Settlement should only form a small fraction.