Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

naturally to an end, and, the object of the Bill being attained, it was allowed to drop. It may be observed that Mr. O'Sullivan saved himself from one consequence which would have followed had the Bill been carried out, namely, his future disqualification for office.

The debates in Parliament on Foreign Policy or on Colonial Questions during the present session were unusually few and unimportant. The point in respect to our foreign relations which most interested the public mind was the “Alabama” controversy with the United States. But this being a matter which, during the greater part of the session was actually the subject of diplomatic negotiation, there were cogent reasons for keeping it out of the range of parliamentary discussion, and the Government exerted their influence to preclude it from becoming a subject of debate. After the Treaty which had been negotiated by the American Minister, Mr. Reverdy Johnson, with Her Majesty's Government had been rejected by the Senate of the United States, the subject was touched upon, but briefly and cautiously, by Lord Stratford de Redcliffe in the House of Lords, on the 4th of June, and in answer to him by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, but discussion upon the merits of the controversy was studiously avoided by both. Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, who had a motion on the paper for a copy of any Treaty concluded between the Foreign Secretary and the Minister of the United States, respecting the “ Alabama” claims, explained that he had no desire to initiate at present a discussion on the subject, which would, indeed, be premature, considering that the official papers had been delivered to himself only a few hours before. When the time came he had no fear but that the negotiations which had already occurred would be criticised by Parliament in no carping spirit. He believed also that when negotiations were resumed, the effect of the calmer sentiment which had succeeded to the passions excited by Mr. Sumner's extravagant and absurd speech would make itself felt, under the conduct, as they would be, of a man of Mr. Motley's great and deserved reputation.

The Earl of Clarendon bore testimony to Mr. Reverdy Johnson's earnest desire to settle the differences between the two countries on a basis

ich ought to be, and which, Lord Clarendon was convinced, must sooner or later be, adopted. He sketched the negotiations between Mr. Reverdy Johnson on the one side, and Lord Stanley and the present Government on the other, with a view to amending the naturalization laws of the two States, and on the subject of the "Alabama” claims. Her Majesty's Government had felt so great a desire to bring the latter question to a conclusion, that they had gone to the very utmost in the way of concession. The failure of the Convention was to be lamented; but it was not to be supposed that the majority of the Senate, which supported Mr. Sumner's proposal for its rejection, concurred also in the extravagant tone of that gentleman's speech. Both that speech, however, and Mr. Reverdy Johnson's mission had not been fruitless, the latter having elicited an expression of the peculiar warmth of affection felt by the British nation towards the United States, and the former having made it entirely manifest, as was clear from the tone of the American Press itself, that whatever concessions this country might grant, it could not be expected to make any injurious to its national honour.

A few weeks later, Sir Henry Bulwer having given notice of a motion to call attention to our relations with the United States, Mr. Gladstone appealed earnestly to him to relinquish altogether the idea of raising a discussion on the subject this session. By this course he assured Sir Henry he would be best serving the public interest, for the United States' Government, though the recent treaty had been negatived, did not consider the subject definitely dropped, but thought it would be wiser that some interval should elapse before it was taken up again. He pointed out, too, that there had been no discussion in the United States' Legislature.

Sir H. Bulwer reluctantly yielded to the appeal, though he was convinced that we should have cause to repent it, if we left the question in its present state. He did not lay much stress on the rejection of the treaty nor on Mr. Sumner's speech, but he dreaded the effect of leaving an impression on the minds of the two nations that exaggerated claims had been made, which it would be equally dishonourable and perhaps more dangerous for us to grant at a future period. But if it was desired, he would not persevere in his design, though he threw on the Government the responsibility of what might happen in consequence of the subject not being ventilated.

The troubles of the colony of New Zealand, where the rebellion still lingered on, and, though not formidable to British authority in regard to the number or resources of the insurgents, was yet extremely harrassing to the settlers, who were kept by it in continual anxiety and alarm, became the subject of notice in both Houses of Parliament before the session closed. In the House of Lords the Earl of Carnarvon brought on a discussion upon the system of non-intervention which had been adopted towards the colony by the Imperial Government. The noble earl thought that the policy on which the existing relations between England and that colony were based might have been adopted somewhat prematurely, but that it must be accepted now as a fact, and that in time it would be so accepted even by New Zealand. The present complication, he believed, had originated in a misconception on the part, not of this country, but of the colony, which could not take sufficient account of the multitudinous subjects by which the attention of England was necessarily occupied. For himself, he approved generally the present colonial policy, which did not differ in principle from his own when in office, but he suggested that, as the difficulty arose in a great measure from the distance of the two countries, it might be alleviated by accrediting a Commissioner to New Zealand.

Earl Granville insisted on the expediency of making the colony feel that it must adopt for itself a decided course, whether that

were war, or, as he should advise, a system of wise conciliation of the natives.

The Bishop of Lichfield admitted that the present relations between England and the New Zealand colonists had been set on foot at the demand of the latter themselves; but he appealed on behalf of the colonists against any attitude on the part of the Imperial Government which could be construed as neglect. He traced the present disorders to the monopoly assumed by the Queen's Government of the right to purchase land from the natives, and he expressed a belief that the colonists would never be able to keep up a force sufficient to maintain the law. That, he apprehended, could only be done by means of an Imperial force, which should not intermeddle with the land question, but confine itself strictly to the repression of crime. He asked for such aid to the colony, on the ground partly of mercy and partly of justice.

Lord Lyveden argued strongly against any deviation from the now-established policy of non-intervention. The subject then dropped.

Viscount Bury, about the same time, drew the attention of the House of Commons to the affairs of New Zealand. The noble lord drew a picture of the disturbed state of the colony, and pressed the Government not to withdraw from it the sympathy and countenance of the mother country. For the present troubles the colonists, he contended, were not liable; they sprang entirely out of the policy of the Home Government. What the colonists wished was not money or soldiers, but the support of the mother country. We might guarantee them a small loan, and we ought not to withdraw the last regiment which had been left there, for its departure would be regarded both by the hostile and friendly Maories as an evidence that the Imperial Government did not approve the conduct of the colonists. By throwing them entirely on their own resources we might drive them into an Australian Confederation, or into the arms of the United States; and in the interests of the Maories, he urged that the Europeans should not be compelled to protect themselves by a policy of desperation.

Mr. Magniac supported Lord Bury's appeal, enlarging on the importance of the colony from statistical returns. Sir H. Selwyn Ibbetson earnestly deprecated the entire withdrawal of British troops from the colony. Mr. R. W. Fowler expressed strongly his opinion of the disgrace it would reflect on England if, instead of civilizing the natives, she resorted to a policy of extermination. Mr. R. Torrens espoused the side of the natives in their disputes with the colonists. Mr. Digby, on the other hand, defended the Imperial policy.

Mr. Monseil, Under-Secretary for the Colonies, defended the action of the Colonial Office, which was not responsible for recent events. The withdrawal of the troops had been imperatively demanded by the colonists, and while it was being carried out the Government of the colony had neglected to take adequate

a

means for the protection of the settlers. It was most unreasonable, therefore-and it would be a fatal gift to the colonists-to return to the old vicious policy. As to a guarantee, Mr. Monsell objected to it by a comparison of the weight of taxation on the English and colonial population, and also on the general ground of policy that, having given the colonists the complete management of their own affairs, we ought to leave them to carry it on without assistance.

Mr. Adderley strongly deprecated the smallest step backwards towards the old meddling system, which was at the bottom of all the misfortunes of New Zealand. Admitting the mistakes of the old Crown Government, he denied that the British taxpayer ought to pay for them ; and, attributing the present unprotected state of the colony to party conflicts, he urged that the Colonial Office should support the party which advocated a self-reliant policy.

The Supplies having been voted, and the Bills which the Government had undertaken to pass having gone through their stages in both Houses, the time arrived for releasing the Members of the Legislature from the labours of a session which had been unusually onerous and fatiguing. Although in actual duration it did not exceed the usual term, the length of the sittings and lateness of the hours, as well as the onerous and exciting character of the subjects under discussion, had been such as to task severely the physical endurance of the House of Commons, and especially of the Ministers of the Crown. The Prime Minister had suffered in health from his severe labours, and some of his colleagues also were debilitated by over-exertion. It was, therefore, a welcome relief to the Members when the Prorogation of Parliament took place on the 11th August. The ceremony took place by Commission, and the Lord Chancellor read Her Majesty's Speech, which was in the following terms :“ MY LORDS AND GENTLEMEN,

“We are commanded by Her Majesty to dispense with your further attendance in Parliament.

“Her Majesty announces to you with pleasure that she continues to receive from all Foreign Powers the strongest assurances of their friendly disposition, and that her confidence in the preservation of peace has been continued and confirmed during the present year.

“ The negotiations in which Her Majesty was engaged with the United States of North America have by mutual consent been suspended; and Her Majesty earnestly hopes that this delay may tend to maintain the relations between the two countries on a durable basis of friendship.

“Her Majesty has a lively satisfaction in acknowledging the untiring zeal and assiduity with which you have prosecuted the arduous labours of the year. “In the Act for putting an end to the establishment of the

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Irish Church, you carefully kept in view the several considerations which at the opening of the session were commended to your notice.

“It is the hope of Her Majesty that this important measure may hereafter be remembered as a conclusive proof of the paramount anxiety of Parliament to pay reasonable regard, in legislating for each of the three kingdoms, to the special circumstances by which it may be distinguished, and to deal on principles of impartial justice with all interests and all portions of the nation.

“Her Majesty firmly trusts that the Act may promote the work of peace in Ireland, and may help to unite all classes of its people in that fraternal concord with their English and Scottish fellowsubjects which must ever form the chief source of strength to her extended empire.

“ Her Majesty has observed with pleasure your general and cordial readiness to unite in the removal, through the Assessed Rates Act, of a practical grievance which was widely felt.

“Her Majesty congratulates you on having brought your protracted labours on the subjects of bankruptcy and of imprisonment for debt to a legislative conclusion, which is regarded with just satisfaction by the trading classes and by the general public.

“The law which you have framed for the better government of endowed schools in England will render the large resources of these establishments more accessible to the community, and more efficient for their important purpose.

“ It may reasonably be expected that the Act for the supervision of habitual criminals will contribute further to the security of life and property.

“The measure which has been passed with respect to the contagious diseases of animals will, as Her Majesty believes, add confidence and safety to the important trades of breeding and feeding cattle at home, without unnecessarily impeding the freedom of import from abroad.

By the repeal of the tax on fire insurance you have met a long-cherished wish of the community; and in the removal of the duty on corn Her Majesty sees new evidence of your desire to extend industry and commerce, and to enlarge to the uttermost those supplies of food which our insular position in a peculiar degree both encourages and requires.

“Her Majesty trusts that the measures for the purchase and management of the electric telegraphs by the State may be found to facilitate the great commercial and social object of rapid, easy, and certain communication, and may prove no unworthy sequel to that system of cheap postage which has passed with much advantage into so many countries of the civilized world.

“ GENTLEMEN OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS,

“We are commanded to state that Her Majesty thanks you for the liberal supplies which you have granted for the service of the

« PreviousContinue »