The Globe. MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1875.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 325, 28 June 1875, Page 2

The Globe. MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1875.

The colony of New Zealand enjoys a very large amount of public attention at the present time. The leading Journals of the United Kingdom publish numerous articles in which the history and future prospects of the colony are dealt with. Mr Tellowes and Sir Julius Vogel have had a wordy war in the columns of one of the chief English magazines, and the difference of opinion expressed by sundry London journals as to tho merits of the case as stated by the disputants, shows that the subject of New Zealand finance is attracting much thought m

the old country. The articles which are constantly appearing concerning this country, show in some cases a thorough knowledge of the subject treated of, whilst in other instances the ignorance displayed by the writer is ludicrous enough to residents here. Of course the condition of New Zealand is a very interesting subject to the various Australian newspapers, and we have both laudatory and depreciative articles, concerning the policy to which this colony has been committed for the last few years, appearing in their columns. The Melbourne Leader has always had a fling, whenever opportunity occurred, at New Zealand. One of the writers in that journal would not consider his weekly contribution to its columns complete without a reference, more or less disparaging, to this colony and its financial system. But an article has lately appeared in the Leader with which we cannot but agree in the main. The opening sentence of the article we allude to reads as follows: —“lf Mr Disraeli retired to New “ York, taking the gout with him, “ and permitted Parliament to as- “ semble without the head of the G-o- ---“ vernment being present, the unpre- “ cedented act would form a subject “ for trenchant criticism, and most de- “ servedlytoo.” Aparallel is then drawn between such a case and the present conduct of Sir Julius Yogel. It is true that we have been informed that Sir J. Vogel’s colleagues are “in a “ position to tender his resignation if “ necessary,” but no signs of this resignation being considered necessary, seem yet to have appeared to these colleagues. Parliament will meet very shortly. Does any one conceive it to be possible that Sir J. Vogel’s Ministry can stand throughout a session if their leader is in England, or is nursing the gout we hear so much of at some German baths F It might be possible for the present Ministry to struggle through the perils of a session, if they were not committed to the attempt to introduce great constitutional changes; but neither in ability or debating power do we think that, Sir J. Vogel being absent, they are equal to the task of carrying through the important “ Constitutional Changes Bill.” The idea promulgated in the Leader that Sir J. Vogel is trying to enlist for some of his schemes interest and support in England that he cannot find in the colony, is we think, very farfetched, The policy of non-interfer-ence with the colonies is now firmly established in England, and it is not likely that this policy would be changed through the persuasions of our present premier. But the most astounding statement in the article is [reserved for the conclusion, and it is, that “ Such is the “ appreciation of Sir J. Vogel’s ser- “ vices to the colony that, according to “ the latest news, it is proposed to vote “ him £20,000 as a testimonial.” Truly this is news indeed, but unless the Leader has sources of information which are denied to all the New Zealand journals, we may put it down as an item furnished by a “ special eor- “ respondent,” and evolved out of his inner consciousness.