Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  


    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 57

Expressions of opinion on imperial federation, by public men at home and in the colonies

page break

Imperial Federation League.


Expressions of Opinion on Imperial Federation,


Published at the Office of the League, 43, St. Margaret's Offices, Victoria Street, S.W.

page break

British subjects throughout the Empire who sympathise with the cause of Imperial Federation are invited to enrol themselves as Members of the League, and to give all the assistance in their power towards ensuring its success.

All communications should be made to the Secretary of the Imperial Federation League, 43, St. Margaret's Offices, Victoria Street, Westminster, London, S.W.

It is to be observed that the "Annual Registration Fee" has been fixed at the small sum of One Shilling, to admit of all classes of the community entering the League. The Imperial Federation League, therefore, relies on voluntary aid, and it will thankfully receive special Donations and Annual Subscriptions from its supporters.

Cheques may be made payable to "The Imperial Federation League, " and should be crossed "Messrs. Hoares."

page break

Expressions of Opinion on the Federation of the Empire.

In reprinting, for the use of members and supporters of the League, the following Expressions of Opinion by public men at home and in the Colonies, it may not be out of place to point to the extraordinary and rapid development of public thought in favour of the movement towards closer union between the mother country and the colonies. It is but eight months since the first conference was held, and four months have not elapsed since the League was founded. Before July last the term Imperial Federation was only heard in whispers, and now it is a common and popular expression.

Deeds have given practical effect to thought, and the action of the great colonics in placing military forces at the disposal of the mother country for service in the Soudan shows that British unity is something more than a phrase, and that "the maintenance of common interest and the defence of common right" are recognized as a practical necessity in all parts of our Empire. The meeting of H.R.H. the Commander-in-Chief, the Secretaries of State for War and the Colonies, and the Agents-General for the Colonies to take counsel together, and the subsequent consultation between the Commander-in-Chief and the Secretaries of State for War and the Colonies on the one part, and the High Commissioner for Canada on the other, are historic incidents on the road towards Imperial Federation—which Sir Hercules Robinson, High Commissioner at the Cape, and successively a Governor in the West Indies, of Hong Kong, Ceylon, New South Wales and New Zealand declared in the Pall Mall Gazette of March 9th to be "a project which must assuredly be faced if the Empire is to be maintained."

page 2

The following Extracts from some recent speeches of public men in England and the Colonies are printed for the use of members of the League:—

The Right Hon. G. J. Goschen, M.P., Edinburgh, Feb. 3rd, 1885.

Lord Reay, in his most striking address last night, spoke of a possible repugnance that might be felt by audiences at this moment to have their attention turned from domestic affairs to foreign and colonial subjects. I do not know how that may be, but I am here to contend that it is difficult to draw a line; and I am not sure that I could tell you, if I wished it, where a home question ends and where a colonial question begins. Is the question of our trade not a home question? Is the question of the outlet of our surplus population not a home question? Is the question of markets for our manufacturers not a home question, and a very vital home question too? And if, through our union with the colonies, our home prosperity is affected for better or for worse, I am here to contend that you cannot say that anyone who speaks upon a colonial question is departing from the circle of subjects which vitally interest all classes of the community.

Let it not be said that this is a question of sentiment which only concerns the cultured classes. I am not one of those who would depreciate sentiment in politics, for so long as men are what they are, and nations are what they are, sentiment, whether we wish it or not, will play a very decided part in politics. We cannot ignore it. But it is not in the spirit of sentiment that I shall approach this question this evening. I wish to press home that which was urged by Lord Reay last night, which has been urged by my friend, Mr. Forster, and which is being urged now, I am glad to say, in many quarters. I wish to see interest taken in these colonial subjects. The question of the united Empire, the question of our Colonies, is to a great extent a workingmen's question. It is they who supply the chief number of the emigrants who go forth to seek their fortunes beyond the seas. It is they who work at the manufactures that are sold to our Australian fellow-subjects; it is they who would feel the effects if, in the course of the destinies of this country, any calamity should break up the colonial empire. And so I say this is a question that cannot be ignored, and that the working classes must take up; they must hold their statesmen and their public men responsible for attention being paid to our colonial empire.

The Right Hon. Earl of Rosebery, Epsom, Feb. 9th.

After all, commerce is a foreign policy in itself. The various creeds of which the nation over which we rule is composed indicate another foreign policy. The colonies force us into another foreign policy. There is hardly a question in life which may not be converted into a foreign policy. You remember the story of Captain Jenkins' ear. Captain Jenkins was a gentleman who turned out to be a liar. Having travelled a good deal in the Spanish dependencies in the West Indies, he came back without an ear. Captain Jenkins said he had his ear cut off by the Governor of page 3 one of the Spanish colonies. The nation blazed out about the ear, and they went to war with Spain in order to avenge this un-fortunate mutilation; but it afterwards turned out that Captain Jenkins had cut off his ear himself, or lost it in some other way, and that the Spanish Governor was perfectly innocent. If Captain Jenkins' ear could create a war, we may say it is not very easy to keep out of a foreign policy. Let us take the affair of the Congo. When this question came to the front a great many of us were, perhaps, not so well aware where the Congo was as we ought to have been, but lately the papers have been full of the Congo, and we were anxious to know whence the agitation comes for dealing with the Congo. The strange part of it is that, as far as one can trace it, the agitation about the Congo comes from Manchester—the very godmother of that school of politics which says that we have no concern outside these islands. Well, a great many of the people of Manchester have learned that that doctrine is an excellent and an attractive doctrine, but not a wear-and-tear, every-day doctrine, and they have found out that we every day require fresh outlets for our trade, which has suffered under severe competition; and the result is, that Manchester has agitated and sent deputations to the Foreign Office, to see that British interests in the Congo are zealously taken care of. Gentlemen, to put it briefly, trade opens the door through which foreign and colonial policy insists upon passing. We cannot, therefore, I contend, be so happy as to be able to do without a foreign policy. That does not, as I take it, mean interference, or annexation, or war, but it does mean some steadfast or definite courses whence foreign nations may always understand what to do and what to avoid with regard to this country.

Then I am afraid, gentlemen, that if we wish to remain the possessors of a great empire, we must also have a colonial policy. Now, here I am sorry to be at issue for a moment with the greatest name but one in our party: I mean John Bright. One feels such an unbounded respect and admiration for Mr. Bright, and affection for him, if one has the privilege, as I have, to know him, that it is painful to differ from him even on one point. But the other day at Birmingham Mr. Bright attacked those who, like myself, are anxious to bind the colonies closer to the mother country, and he called their doctrines "childish and absurd." I see that the resolution I have to move seems to think that these doctrines are not "childish and absurd"; but what I was very much more interested in were the arguments by which these epithets were supported; and the first was that all great empires had disappeared—the Empire of the Mogul, the Empire of Cæsar, the Persian Empire, and so on—and that if we tried to have a great empire we should disappear also. I do not know whether we shall disappear or not; but I am confident that we are much more likely to disappear if we have not a great empire than if we have. But in one respect I am a much better Liberal than Mr. Bright is, if that is not a presumptuous thing to page 4 say, because Mr. Bright is guided in his argument by precedent, and I am not guided by precedent. I say there is no precedent for the British Empire, and you cannot find a precedent for it. The British Empire is going on a way of its own without a precedent. It must be guided by the wants and powers of the moment. Citizens of the British Empire must never be discouraged into the belief that it is going to fall because other empires have fallen before it. Then Mr. Bright said, "Look at Ireland. You have been trying to govern Ireland for centuries, and you cannot do it. What is the use of trying to govern more?" Well, one of my greatest reasons for wishing to associate the colonies more closely with the mother country is that I am unwilling to be left alone in the world with Ireland. It may be a political Utopia, to be left as a united kingdom—more or less united—of which a considerable proportion is Ireland, but that does not realise my idea of the maximum of human happiness. The third argument was that we could not bind our colonies closer to ourselves for the purpose of defence, because they had not the same tariffs as we had. We wish to treat that argument with all respect, but I submit that it really amounts to very much the same as if you were to say because Australians are allowed by local law to marry their deceased wife's sister, and we are not, that it imposes an insuperable barrier in the way of our union.

I suppose the position of the Imperial Federation League is this, that the armaments and fleets of this country may have to be increased in order to afford protection to our colonies and coaling stations. The colonies might, in that case, wish to contribute to the support of these armaments, and of course the contribution would be raised in whatever way the colony thought fit—whether by a protective or free-trade tariff is a matter it does not occur to us to investigate. We have given them local government, and local government must be respected in tariffs as in everything else. Let me go back for one moment to the words "childish and absurd." You observe that these words rankle in my sensitive mind. I felt very deeply this scheme being called "childish and absurd." But let me read you a quotation of what was said by the Liberal Prime Minister of this country in March, 1841. This is what Lord Melbourne said :—"To leave the whole agricultural interests without protection I declare, before God, I think it the wildest and the maddest scheme that it has ever entered the human mind to conceive." Five years later, owing to the exertions and eloquence of Mr. Bright, the agricultural interests were left without protection, and that "wildest and maddest" scheme had been revised. I think we may take comfort from the fact that Mr. Bright and Mr. Cobden were able to upset a much stronger dictum uttered by a man engaged in guiding the State; and if Mr. Bright could give us the eloquence and influence which he exerted then it would not take five years to bring about this federation. It is with distress that I have even appeared to differ in the remotest degree from one that I admire page 5 and love so much as Mr. Bright, but we cannot submit to be completely snuffed out by epithets, and I wish to draw this further lesson from this matter, and it is this, that though Mr. Bright does not agree with the Imperial Federation League about the colonies, yet the Liberal party is big enough to embrace Mr. Bright and those who think with him, as well as those who take a warmer and a closer interest in the colonies.

After some observations on the commercial aspect of the

J. Bryce M.P., Bow Liberal Club, Feb. 10th.

question, and the advantage which it was to England that the overflow of her population should go to countries politically connected with her, where they remained British citizens, capable of all places in the public service, and resuming their active civic duties as soon as they returned home, Mr. Bryce enumerated several points in which the colonies also gained by their political connection with the motherland. Were they separated, they would be at the mercy of great foreign powers such as Germany and France, and would have, at, much greater cost to themselves, to provide for their own defence. Their internal political struggles would lose the valuable moderating influence of the imperial connection; their national spirit and tone would suffer were the idea of citizenship in the world-wide English State to disappear. Both they and we were ennobled by this idea; we were greater in the world's eyes, and more able to fulfil our mission in the world as the heart and centre of a nation spread over the earth, than we could be if reduced to the narrow bounds of our own islands. How then could the existing union be preserved and cemented? What was needed was a scheme for combining the efforts of the colonies with our own for the attainment of common objects. A common fiscal policy, however desirable, was evidently unattainable at present; still less could there be any notion of constituting a federal body which should interfere either with our ordinary domestic legislation or with that of the several colonies. They must therefore reject the suggestion that the colonies should send representatives to the English House of Commons. The example of France had been pleaded for this scheme, but it would not work with us. In a reformed Upper House, however, room might with advantage be found for colonial members. The main common object to be regarded was naval and military defence. England had now all the liability, nearly all the expense, and had also the control of foreign policy involving the issue of peace or war, for the colonies as well as for herself.

He believed the colonies would be willing to bear their share in the expense; but if so they might fairly ask to be consulted in foreign policy also. Thus the problem before us was how to find a means of ascertaining the wishes of the outlying part of our people, and enabling common action to be concerted with them. The suggestion of a representative colonial council well deserved consideration, for it would be a quicker and more effective organ of colonial opinion than any which now existed. Such page 6 a council would, perhaps, be in the first instance merely consultative. But a consultative body is not necessarily weak: it may be-like the great councils of the kingdoms in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, very influential without defined authority to determine issues by a vote. Most of the questions of foreign policy which now arose were of consequence to our colonies no less than to England; the whole group of Indian questions for instance, and of the routes to India, affected the Australasian colonies; the question of the Panama Canal affected both New Zealand and the North American colonies. As respects the tendencies of opinion, he believed that the sentiment of the self-governing colonies would be very similar to that of the masses of the English people, generally pacific, disposed to trust any able and upright executive in minor matters, prepared to repel by arms any attack on grave national or imperial interests. Fully recognizing the difficulties of the question, and believing that it could not be solved until colonial opinion had been more fully elicited, he conceived that it had become a practical and might soon be a pressing question; and so far from seeing in the suggestion of closer political relations between scattered branches of our people anything aggressive, or, to use a popular term, Jingoish, he held that, by tending to the cohesion and stability of the British Empire, it would make for the peace of the world.

J. Cowen, M.P., New-castle, Feb. 14th.

Everything seems to indicate that we have entered an era when States will be bigger than they have been. England must not only hold her own, she must buttress her possessions, or she will be thrust from her position of a world to that of a European State. Englishmen may not have mastered the philosophy of imperial expansion, but their instincts and impulses will prompt them to oppose a spiritless surrender of lands that have been watered by the blood of their best and bravest. They survey with vigilance, but without jealousy or displeasure, the colonising zeal of other Powers. They have no desire to check it. Every new market created benefits, and every old one ruined injures them. But such aggrandizements impose precautions. It is not a neighbourly act for a competing State to plant a settlement in inconvenient proximity to one of ours. It will generate disputes as to jurisdiction, and may become a source of rivalry and vexation. Nor is it tolerable to have adjacent islands seized, not for the purpose of trade, but as outlets for criminals. France cannot be a successful colonising power, and for this all-sufficient reason—she has no, surplus population. Her peasantry, too, prefer their native fields to the parched plains of Senegal and the fever-stricken delta of the Red River. "The Fatherland wants soldiers, not colonies," was once the motto of Prince Bismarck. But, unable to arrest the exodus, of his countrymen, he seeks to divert it, speciously suggesting that it is the consequence and token of German prosperity. More disinterested authorities say it is the consequence of the conscription, of excessive taxation, and political repression. But the page 7 Greater Germany that her Chancellor dreams of will never be created if the Draconian Code enforced at home is applied to it. Emigrants will prefer the free prairies of America to settlements in which the fermenting anarchy they have fled from is reproduced. If Germany does not bestow upon her over-sea possessions the right of self-government, they will languish as the Dutch and the Portuguese do, or she will lose them as Spain has lost hers. We need not fear our rivals, nor rush into panics over their preternatural activity. Fear is a fertile source of evil and misfortune. Nations cannot be afflicted by any more insidious, injurious, or undignified influence. The clouds that have gathered so loweringly over us can be dispersed by a clear enunciation of our rights and a firm assertion of our determination to maintain them.
There are the seeds of a noble destiny in our dependencies. Neither of us can rudely sever the bonds of sentiment and confidence which centuries have entwined. We are a source of mutual strength, and by liberality and forbearance, by removing all alienating restraints and leading the colonists to feel that they are fellow-citizens in something more than name, this strength may be indefinitely increased. Distance was once a barrier to such a union, but it is so no longer. The world has become a great whispering gallery. Quebec is, for all practical purposes, as near to Liverpool now as Liverpool was to London when Wolfe stormed the heights of Abraham. Intercourse with India is more easy now than it was with the Highlands before the Pretender planted his standard on the braes of Braemar. Turgot's famous aphorism that colonies, like pears, fall when they ripen, is striking but defective. Distance seems to quicken colonial loyalty and attachment. The combination of a series of self-controlling cantons or principalities, once scouted as chimerical, experience has proved to be practicable. The United States, whose disruption has been so repeatedly and so exultantly predicted, have survived a century, and they supply a felicitous example of federated expansion. Why cannot England and her congeries of common-wealths federate also for their separate advantage and corresponding security? They present a surface vulnerable at many points, but few empires combine in an equal degree the danger of being stricken with the power to strike. The public business of England is the private business of every Englishman, and surely no weightier business can enlist their study than the security and prosperity of their native land and her affiliated provinces. It is incomparably more important to them as citizens, and to England as a nation, than the recriminatory topics on which political partisans love to ring the political changes.

Hon. Evelyn Ashley, M.P., Under Secretary for the Colonies. London Chamber of Commerce, Feb. 18th.

Mr. Ashley, in responding to the toast of "Our Colonies and Possessions," spoke as follows :—I see, Mr. Chairman, that you have given this toast a place of honour, and I am glad that it is so. I need no such proof to convince me that the London Chamber of Commerce feels a pride and deep interest in the prosperity of page 8 Greater Britain. Your published transactions and your spoken words amply show it. But in giving this prominence to the present toast I venture to assert that your Chamber is but the exponent of the feelings of the whole community, and that the future of Britain's sons and daughters beyond the seas, which has long seized the minds of the imaginative and the thoughtful, is now the care, I may add the hope, of even the most dull amongst us; and it is high time that it should be so. I speak not only of a languishing trade—though in this assembly it would not be inappropriate. I speak not only of an overcrowded home—though that is a matter of anxiety to every lover of our race. I speak also of the position of the Empire—that Empire which, without boasting, we may say has largely contributed to the commerce, the freedom, and the civilization of the world—that Empire which, in the presence of many rivals, whether friendly or hostile, can only successfully retain its position, and so continue its work, by knitting together in close alliance its various parts, which, physically separated and morally united, look to the same flag and are loyal to the same Queen.

Federation is the watchword in vogue. I care not for the name, so long as the thing is done. But there are some few, who ought to know better, who call it Utopian. Utopian! when within one short week Canada, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia, all flash through the ocean offers of their gallant sons as soldiers to fight for the Mother Country. Utopian! when our Queen accepts their willing services, and we, their fellow countrymen, grasp the hands held out to us, not so much because we at present need them, but because of the loyal and friendly spirit of which they are tokens. Why, I venture to affirm that the day that Greater Britain sees her forces, called from her various shores, marshalled side by side in face of the enemy, Federation is an accomplished fact. All that will remain for us to do is, if necessary, to clothe this new embodiment in some garb of formality. We will do so, but let us not be in too much hurry about this. It must not be the hasty, though ingenious, work of some Abbé Sieyès, but the gradual creation of Anglo-Saxon loyalty and common sense—not a hot-house plant, but one of natural growth; and we, perhaps, should be wise to remember that our own old unwritten Constitution has been more enduring, because more elastic, than many of the carefully mapped systems of some of our more logical neighbours. But there is one initial and practical step which, though small, I think important; .and which, in un-capacity as a Member of Parliament, I venture to suggest. Some two years ago, by the courtesy and appreciation of the late Speaker, I was able to obtain an order that the High Commissioner for Canada for the time being, and the Agents-General of the other Colonies, should have a right of admission at all times to the Ambassadors' Gallery in the House of Commons. A very proper recognition of their just claims, as far as it goes. But when from time to time I look up from my seat and see my page 9 friends aloft, I feel an irresistible wish to bring them down from their empyrean, to take their seat among us all below. They are not Ambassadors from foreign States, but welcome messengers from our kith and kin. I do not know whether my honourable friends (the Agents-General) here present to-day will thank me for my suggestion, but I cannot help that. It is not to please them, but to aid the Empire that I desire their presence. Now why do I say that this step, though small, would be important? In the first place, there is a great truth in the French proverb: Ce n'est que le premier pas qui coûte—The first step taken, others will more easily follow. At any rate, the Colonies will feel that they are represented in the great Council of the nation. Then, again, what the Colonies most need, in my opinion, is the power of bringing, directly and without delay, pressure upon public opinion in this country and on the Cabinet. True, we at the Colonial Office regard ourselves as the servants of the Colonies, and I appeal to my hon, friends here present whether all in that office, from the highest to the lowest, do not with a will place themselves at the disposal of the representatives of the Colonies. But we are, after all, only a department, and my experience is that nothing stirs a Cabinet so much as a well-laid and well-supported motion or action in the House of Commons.

Sir Charles Tupper, High Commissioner for the Dominion of

The High Commissioner of the Dominion of Canada.—Same time and place.

Canada, replying for Canada, said there had been no time in the history of the country when the attention of men of all parties had been more steadily drawn to the vital importance of the; colonial possessions of the empire than at the present hour. If; they looked at the statistics of the trade of this country for the five years from 1878 to 1883, they would find that whereas there was an increase in the trade with foreign countries of 17 per cent., during the same period there had been an increase of trade between this country and her colonies of 27 per cent. Taking the exports from 1873 to 1883, there was an actual decrease in the exports with foreign countries during the ten years of 11 per cent., whilst there was an increase of commerce with the colonies of 27 per cent. He also pointed out the service which the colonies had rendered to the mother country in providing means of communication, upon which the safety of the empire or some outlying portions of it at some moment might depend. There was a belief on the part of Canadians that under British institutions they enjoyed a greater security for life, property, and personal liberty than under any other system. There never was a time when the sentiment of loyalty so thrilled through the breast of every Canadian as it did now. They wanted to show to the world—to France, Germany, and Russia—that Canada had arrived at man's estate, and would take its stand side by side with the mother country, and that, come what would, they were prepared to the best of their ability to discharge their obligations page 10 to the mother country, who had done so much for them, and to the Queen they loved so well.

The Agents-General for South Australia and New South Wales.—Same time and place.

Sir A. Blyth, the Agent-General for South Australia, and Sir Saul, Samuel, the Agent-General for New South Wales, also responded to the toast, both of them referring to the offers of military aid which the inhabitants of their respective colonies had made, and both of them expressing the opinion that to allow representatives of the colonies to sit in the House of Commons and not to vote would not be a satisfactory arrangement. Sir A. Blyth incidentally stated that he had himself been at one time a member of a House of Legislature partly elective and partly nominated, and it was very unsatisfactory. There must be, he said, perfect equality amongst members of any legislature.

The Eight Hon. W. E. Forster, M.P., Associated Chambers of Commerce, Feb. 25th.

Mr. W. E. Forster, who was very warmly cheered on rising to propose the toast of "Our Colonies," said he felt it a high honour and great pleasure to have this toast entrusted to his hands. Might the colonies long be prosperous; might their inhabitants remain our fellow countrymen; and might no spirit of strife spring up between us. He remembered when it used to be a very usual statement to make that there would be no difference to the trade or commerce of this country if the colonies were not connected with the mother country, whether they started independently themselves, or were annexed by another country. Many reasons were given for this supposition, but he thought the supposition had disappeared with many other exploded fallacies, and that nothing could be more brought home as a fact to the commercial community and to the public generally than this fact, that the trade of the country very much depended upon keeping up our connection with the colonies. The statement that the trade followed the flag was abundantly proved. If there was no longer a flag to follow the trade would cease to exist in this country itself.

Mr. Forster said he would take the opportunity of giving some figures which had been prepared by a friend upon whom he could rely. The trade which the inhabitants of Great Britain conducted throughout the world was about one-third of the total trade of the whole world. The annual trade of the British dominions beyond the seas with the United Kingdom was, exports and imports, £190,000,000, and with other countries £170,000,000—a total of £360,000,000, or six times the value of the annual trade of the United Kingdom at the beginning of the century. They had heard a great deal about the depression of trade which had ruled throughout the whole of the United Kingdom, and he asked, if it were not for the colonies, what would the depression be i The trade of the United Kingdom with foreign countries in 1872 was more than £248,000,000, and in 1882 it was £214,000,000, a decrease in the ten years of £34,000,000. The trade of the United Kingdom with British possessions, which in 1872 was page 11 £66,000,000, had increased in 1882 to £92,000,000. We should not, he asserted, have had these figures if the colonies had been separated from the mother country. We were also largely de-pendent for the food of the country upon our colonies, and we could not help the fact. If we attempted to prevent it it could only be by legislation, and we could only have prevented it by limiting the number of our population and by starving them down. The increase in the amount of wheat imported into the country in 1882 from India, North America, and Australasia against that in 1872, was 8,000,000 cwt. from India, 1,000,000 cwt. from North America, and 2,000,000 cwt. from Australasia. The total trade of imports and exports of the United Kingdom with the world out-side British possessions had increased from 1854 to 1882 more than 77 per cent., but the total trade, import and export, of the United Kingdom with British possessions had increased more than 170 per cent. This, he thought, was sound evidence of the importance of the colonies, and, looking at it simply in a commercial light, it was of the utmost importance to Great Britain as an empire that she should retain possession of and maintain the connection with her colonies.

It was sometimes said that notwithstanding our connection with the colonies they levied duties upon our goods. If, however, they were not our colonies, judging from what had happened elsewhere, they would levy far larger duties. There was a vast difference between the duties levied by the United States and those levied by Canada, and he wondered if we should do anything approaching the trade in Canada if they maintained the tariffs of the United States. He very much doubted whether we should not have the United States tariff in place of the Canadian tariff if Canada ceased to be governed by the mother country. As to the present position of the country, we were in troublous times, and some said we were never in worse times in England before. In his opinion, the crisis was serious, but Englishmen had not forgotten how to meet difficulties. He referred to the action of the colonies in sending troops to the Soudan, and warmly commented upon this as a strong testimony to the unity of the empire. He referred to the article in The Times of that day in respect to Russia, and expatiated upon the effect which the spectacle of the United Empire would have even upon attempted Russian aggressions. The action of the colonies, he said, had astonished many, but he was not surprised. He assured the colonists that there was but one feeling, and that this action on their part would be an example and lesson to the world, showing that the empire, however spread, was one in all times of danger and difficulty.

page 12

New South Wales.

The Despatch of Troops.

On the departure of the troops from Sydney to Suakin, on March 3rd, Lord Augustus Loftus addressed the officers and men in these terms:—

"Soldiers of New South Wales—I have considered it my duty, as the representative of Her Majesty, to say a few words to you at this solemn moment before your embarkation. For the first time in the great history of the British Empire, a distant colony is sending, at its own cost and completely equipped, a contingent of troops who have volunteered, with an enthusiasm of which only we who witnessed it can judge, to assist the Imperial forces in a bitter struggle for the suppression of unspeakable cruelty, and for the establishment of order and justice in a misgoverned country.

"Countless as have been the occasions when the blood and treasure of England have been poured out freely to protect the feeble, to shield the defenceless, or to maintain right, there has never been one in which humanity has been more deeply interested in the triumphs of the arms of England, than the cause which you have heroically resolved to uphold by your valour.

"You will be greeted in Egypt by the hearty welcome of thou-sands of chivalrous soldiers who have never yet looked upon such an action as yours. The eyes of your gracious Queen will be bent upon your exertions, and in every part of the world where our flag floats, men, women and children will eagerly read of your exploits and pray for your success.

"Soldiers—you carry in your keeping the honour of this great Colony, which has made such splendid sacrifices in order to send you to the front with an equipment of which the nations most practised in war might have been proud. You will have the glorious privilege of helping to maintain the honour of the empire. In your ranks are numbers who are voluntarily leaving the paths of fortune, worldly advantages, the comforts of home, and the sweetness of domestic life for heroic service in a bloody war, in which, already, many brave men have been stricken down.

"You are doing this to show to the world the unity of the mighty and invincible empire of which you are members. Your country charges itself with the care of the dear ones you leave behind, and all that generosity, tenderness and gratitude can do to care for them and to succour and console them will be looked upon as a labour of love by the nation."

page 13


The Premier of Victoria addressed the following despatch to Mr. R. Murray Smith, C.M.G., Agent-General for the Colony in England.

"Premier's Office, Melbourne, November 20th, 1884.—Sir, In your letters of the 1st and 15th August last, you reported the holding of a conference on Imperial Federation, presided over by the Right Hon. W. E. Forster, M.P., and you enclosed copies of the resolutions passed, but you stated that, in the absence of instructions, you did not feel warranted to take any part in the proceedings beyond silent attendance.

"2. These papers were laid before both Houses of Parliament on the 5th instant, and a recent telegram in the Melbourne Journals notified that a further conference on the subject would be held in London on the 18th instant. Accordingly, on the 12th idem, I despatched to you a telegram, of which I enclose a copy herewith authorising you to give a general support to the movement; and I would now explain a little more fully the considerations which have influenced me in this matter.

"3. The chief of those considerations is, the very anomalous position which these colonies occupy, as regards, respectively :—Local Government, and the exercise of Imperial Authority. In relation to the first, the fullest measure of constitutional freedom and parliamentary representation has been conceded to the more important colonies; but, as regards the second, we have no representation whatever in the Imperial system. Subjects of this part of the Empire may be deeply interested in the action, or, it may be, the inaction of the Imperial authorities, but they have no voice nor vote in those councils of the Empire to which Her Majesty's Ministers are responsible; thus, in all matters in which the exercise of the Imperial authority has interests for them, that authority is, to all intents and purposes, an unqualified autocracy; on the one hand we are under constitutional government, on the other under an antiquated autocracy or bureaucracy.

"4. The weakness of this position has at times been most disadvantageously apparent, and its humiliation keenly felt. Lately, more especially when policy of the highest concern to the Australasian Colonies has had to be administered by the Imperial Government, we have occupied the position of outside petitioners to the Colonial Office, with scarcely more influence than a county member of the House of Commons. I thankfully acknowledge the courtesy extended by the Colonial Office to yourself, as well as, I believe, to the other Colonial Agents-General; but it is something more than concessions of courtesy that is needed—Colonial interests are sufficiently important to entitle us to some defined position in the Imperial economy—to some tangible means of assserting, if necessary, our rights.

page 14

"5. It may be difficult to say in what way so vast and scattered an empire can be federated; but any scheme that may be decided upon, while it cannot take from us anything that we at present possess, must give to the colonies more tangible influence, and more legal and formal authority than they have now. I, therefore, had no hesitation in directing you to give a general support to the idea, guarding, of course, our local self-government.

"6. A further consideration is, that Victoria, and I am sure Australasia, is and always has been heartily loyal both to the Throne and the Empire—a national sentiment which has never failed to express itself on every suitable occasion. The notion, before now openly propounded by Professor Goldwin Smith and others, of disintegrating the Empire by cutting off the Colonies, has, I am persuaded, little sympathy from Australasians—nor is this altogether a matter of sentiment—but we believe that the Colonies, justly and wisely governed, may be tributaries of strength to the parent State; that they and it may be mutually recipients of numberless advantages. I am sure that I speak the mind of the colonists generally in expressing our desire to remain, as now, an integral portion of the Empire; and it is in this view, therefore, that I desire to support the movement for Imperial Federation.

"I have the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient servant,

"James Service,


"Robert Murray Smith,

Esq., C.M.G., "Agent-General for Victoria, "London."
page 15

New Zealand.

Extracts incidentally referring to Imperial Federation from speeches delivered during a Debate in the New Zealand House of Representatives, November 7th & 10th, 1884.

Mr. Stout, M.H.R., Premier.—"Sir,—I believe the closer we can make the alliance between the Mother Country and the Colonies the better."

Sir George Grey, M.H.R., late Premier.—"Wherever the Anglo-Saxon people settle they are found in masses. Look at the United States, at Canada, look at New Zealand, look at Australia, look at South Africa. You will find everywhere we are in strength. We are gathered together in great masses, which enables us to stand firm at each separate point, and unite with the Parent State against the whole world. There again is another cause for our being federated with the British Empire."

Major Atkinson, M.H.R., late Premier.—"I do not believe it is possible that the bond which is keeping us together at the present time will bear any great strain. It will have to be drawn closer or be very much slackened. Now, I am very strongly of the opinion that the happiness of a great part of the human race depends upon the federation of the British people. I believe there is no difficulty that cannot be overcome; but I say whatever difficulty there is has got to be overcome, because if ever we are to be that power in the world which we ought to be, and if we are to preserve happiness to the English-speaking races, it will be by federation."

Sir Julius Vogel, late Premier.—"I am one of those who think we should help on as far as we can the federation of the British Empire. I agree with the honourable member for Egmont, and think he took a far-sighted view when he said he looked forward to the time when we should form part of a confederation of the Empire, and show ourselves to be in complete harmony with the Mother Country in Imperial matters, by contributing towards the cost of the navy, which he is undoubtedly right in saying is not kept up on account of the Mother Country solely, but for the protection of her huge possessions all over the world. I think we must face this alternative: either we must consent to meet a responsibility of the kind, or we must accept the conclusion that we are only a part of the Empire for such a period as may suit convenience, and that separation from the rest of the Empire is only a question of time. There must either be disintegration or complete union. I believe that federation of the Australian Colonies would mean a large weight thrown into the balance towards disintegration, and not in the direction of federation of the Empire."