MR BALLANCE ON A DOMINION OF AUSTRALIA.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 414, 8 February 1890, Page 3

MR BALLANCE ON A DOMINION OF AUSTRALIA.

HE DEPRECATES THE MOVEMENT.

[ltttiltox times special.'

Wellington’, Jan. 28. •Mr Ballance, have you seen the opinions of Mr Gullett?’ That wai the question I put to the leader of the Opposition as we sat together talking of things in general. We had met by appointment to talk about one thjng in particular, vis., Australian Federation. My question brought us to the subject sharp. • Yes,’ replied Mr Ballance, ' I have. Mr Gullett says a good deal, and says well what he has to say. The fact is that there is a great deal of federation in the air just now. Mr Ballance meant the air of Australia. Everywhere men are talking about it, restless, expectant of some change. Upon this theme we talked for some little time, until we came upon new ground. From something Mr Ballance said I felt impelled to M k if he really believed that Australian Federation meant a step towards national independence. t ‘Do they want to cut the painter? I nids • Well that is what I think the admission! Of Mr Gullett amount to.’ • Does not that put a new complexion on

the matter?’ , •Of course b doea. Yon see we hare _B Federation—lmperia! Federation—the federation with Great Britain. It is a federation greatly to our benefit, for it defends us against the world, and takes a bfrreat many responsibilities off our shoulders, yt is adapted to our present circumstances, and It will develop as those circumstances develop, iurt as our Constitution has developed In the past. We osnnot say what jt will oe in any given time, but we can say that, as the occasion arises for some new departure or some further adjustment it will beround. The last development is the new partnership in the Australasian squadron, by which we have agreed to pay an approS»t|on of the cost. Another development is the increase pf the share we have in the settlement of great questions. The AgentsGeneral of the Colonies have become more ilkeambaasadors whose functions are diplomatic, than the mere financial agents of fither d&yi>* • Then you think, Mr Ballance, that we Plight to stay as we are!' To which he fepiied io a very decided affirmative. WXA« sHAU *’« CAIN oa toss! ‘As ta joining the Australians,’ continued Mr Ballanoe, ' the whole thing is a question of gain orjloss. What shall we gain by going in i what shall we lose by standing oi»t! Mr M'Millau, of New South Wales, in conversation with me, when I asked him the question replied point blank, • Oh yes, if you join us you must ap some of your rights. To which I replied, < And what are the compensating advantages i' H« « aid ‘ h °y, we , rB three—(l) The control of the Islands ; (2) superiority of defence | (3) Intercolonial freetnde. We will take these in their crfor. * For th? first, if we do not get the control of enj, islands )t will be no great loss. The simple fact i, that there are no islands left for an Australasian qr Australian Dominion to oontrol. Germany has her sphere of Influence marked out by treaty, the line on ths map circling New Guinea and New Britain. So has France her sphere, including the Society Islands, the Marquesas and New Caledonia; and in conjunction with Great Britain by l»te arrangements, the New Hebrides. The Hervey group is British, and that group Australians will perhaps be surprised to learn has alrefltiy been placed under protection. When the Queen of Bantonga was here the thing was arranged by Sir Robert Stout's Government. Sir William Jervois in consequence wrote a strong despatch to the Secretary of State, who last year replied taking Sir William’s advice to bring the islands under British protection and placing them more directly under the control of New Zealand. The whole story is to be seen by all who wish in the blue books, where it is written in choice English as, of course, all the despatches of all the SecreSri« of State are/ « yon are no doubt •ware. So you see that, under the first head of advantage, New Zealand by entering into Australian Federation instead of gaining would lose the special and peculiar advantage she has, LWBNCB.

CoBHDg to defence, the second heading, I contend that onr first line of defence is the fleet, ae General Edwards and all the authorities before him hare invariably told ns. We have entered lately into a treaty with Great Britain about the Sect, which, as I have already explained, is equivalent to a step forward of an existing Federation. We should have to surrender that advantage if we entered into an independent Federation with Australia, which cannot have a fleet like that for two centuries to come. Let us remember that Great Britain built actually a better class of vessels for this partnership than she had covenanted to do. There was no huckstering about our ally; she simply SOM in this matter to a high sense of national responsibility. That is a oonnection worth keeping. Our second line is the land force. No help is possible from Australia to New Zealand, or vics ven&. We have each to defend our shores against raiders. As long M the first line is unbroken we can defend . ourselves. We do not want help from AusAtralia. and if we did we should not get it.* HL J remarked here that the point made by other side was that British wan are, and will always be, carried on without our con. sent, and that if we became detached and independent no living creature would interfere with ns. * Tee I know. The second of these points Is the quintessence of folly, and the first is the quintessence of selfishness. No living creature touch these rich countries I Europe is in every unsettled state, of which no one can tell the outcome; but we may all shrewdly guest thar there will bo great hunger among unscrupulous and powerful nations. Look again at the Chinese nation, only just beginning Co develop its gigantic power. Can anyone tell that the Chinese nation will not be a great menace in these seas one day ? Then as to a pretext for fighting us, the unscrupulous, who •Iso are strong, do not seek for a good pretext; any kind of a pretext will do for them. And the tone of Australians, let mo remark in pass* iog, it not always oontiliatory. So much for the tolly. Now for the selfishness. To hear Australians talk one would think that they insist on doing fill the dictating. England must go to war with France to give them satisfaction against a peril in New Hebrides, but if she attempts to defend her own great trade Interests by coming near to a war with Buuia, Australia must fly out to indeptn. dance. At for realising that such a war mutt neoessarily be for ths benefit of British trade —for the Russian policy is exclusive and narrow—and that the benefit of English trade is felt by the Colonies in proportion to their growing importance, the Australian selfishness is not sufficiently enlightened to realise things. Moreover, our voice about these European questions is, as I said before, becoming greater from year to year. Our voice used to be hoard in a whisper in confidential despatches of Governors k, iferret. ! es of State. Now it comes from the AgeuiGeneral, who has nearly the attributes Of an ambassador, who speaks from the housetop. In these latter days their remonstrances have been successful in several very important instances, t.a., the recidivists escapee question the other day, the Chinese question, the appointment of Governors, and Queensland. I have saM that our Imperial Federation is growing by natural development. There are others, s.C., our legislation proceeds on all fours. Ws have taken lately from them their patant law, their Trade Marks Act, their Act for the Registration of Designs, their Settled Land Act, at much of it as is efiWFMIWWMi MW {emaihswi Thru

there is the criminal code, the great work of Fitsjsmes Stephen, which we must pass one day as the Imperial Parliament must, I have no doubt that we are on ’he high’road to co-ordinate our whole criminal law with the English. All these are signs of the growing development of common interests. ISTBECOLONtAL FBEBTBADE.

I come now to Intercolonial Freetrade. In the first place, no nation that has any self respect is likely ever to barter away its constitutional rights for a mess of pottage. In the second, what security should we have against their taking away the pottage? We shall be, remember, five out of a Legislature of thirty-five. In the third place, trade is mutual. If we do not Federate with Australia, Australia cannot on that account refuse to trade with us. Already, in ordinary seasons, they send us more than wo send them, and in droughts they will not starve because we are not Federated. Fourthly, Australia cannot help us by taking our great productions. Our wool goes to Europe, our flax goes everywhere. They cannot take any of the European market, for our dairy produce is growing and multiplying so fast it is illimitable; while the Australian fluctuates with the uncertainty of a weathercock. Not one of our million carcases of frozen meat finds its way to Australia, if it did it would find its way back again. But this export, great as it is, is only in its infancy. As to our minerals and our timber, Australia is notoriously not the market for them. Intercolonial freedom would not touch the bulk, of our trade. Fifthly, about Freetrade being outside of the Federation. We should be able to make any treaty we chose with Australia. We should be therefore in a position of power. That power we should lose by becoming part of a Federation which would give us only five representatives out of thirty-five. Federation would actually take away our power, and place us at the mercy of Australian majorities, In the sixth place, the Australian desire for Freetrade is the hope of making Melbourne the great commercial capital. The federal revenue is admittedly to be raised by a Customs tariff, the proceeds being distributed among the federated Colonies according to population. But superior advantages of capital and the cheaper freights of large centres would increase the trade,o! Melbourne at the expense of th* rest in the Federation. The population of Melbourne would increase in the same ratio, and perhaps ih a greater. The qanaeuuenoc woqld fia tfiat the revenue paid by the fltfter Colonies would remain much of it in Melbourne, swelling tfiat great centre at their expense. New Zealand wggld a.ink into an Australian parish.'

PEDEBATIOS AND FBOVtKCIAL BOWESS. Mr Ballance said I—i Th*?’ M* three great advantages we are offered in exchange for our rights and privileges, our dignity, our standing as a nation. The advantages are illu?ionary. Can you touch upon some of the points on which we should Buffer by resigning our rights.’ • I remember to have heard, Mr Ballance, that the Provincial powers in all federations are vpry strictly defined.’ I So tfosy are, so they are; very true. Lord Lome, in Canada, was of ftfiat opinion first, but he soon found out, and placed hi* opinion on record, that the tendency at the ceptral power is to grow and absorb the other powers. We should grow, Sir, into what Mr Deakin is candid enough to call the Municipal unit. Public opinion would centre in fhe great capital of the Confederacy, Sydney or Melbourne. A powerful Press would give its voice and mater Jal for thought by elaborate and full reports of all political proceedings. The outside public opinion would be but half instructed and therefore powerless, and it would! lack energy, vigor, life. The capital would direct, the provinces would lose all self-respect and all dignity; they would be constantly snubbed, insulted, rebuffed, treated with contumely. The acts of their Legislatures would be vetoed as they have been in Canada; asery land of harsh ness in every exhibition of decent independence. Bah! Don’t talk to me about Provincial powers being defined. And why do I go as far afield as the Canadian Dominion for an instance, or so far as the House ot Peers for ap authority! Have we not seen the working of the central principle in the days of our own Province?’ * Then, Mr Ballance, the upshot of all this is that in your opinion we should do very much better to keep to the Imperial federation we have, than fly to the Colonial ederation we know nothing of, except that in all probability it must fee something very bad ’’ • Decidedly. That Is the view I have been inculcating.’ ‘There is one point you have not touched upon. It is this: The Australians tell us that if we federate we may retire whenever we find the march of Federation is justifying our fear. What haye yog to say to that ?’

COULD WE BETIRE ’ ■ I have to say this, that the right to withdraw would never be conceded, no matter wb»t Hhe agreement might have been. Remember, ye should have five out of thirty-

five, and there would be precedent against the five. The State of South before coming into the American Union made a special stipulation reserving the right to go ont at discretion, tut the majority discovered that circumstances had altered, or that there were fresh circumstances: in short, gave one of those reasons ffhioh determined majorities have always at their command, end thd right of South (Carolina to secede was heard no more. No, Sir, let us stay as we are. There is no necessity to change, and Federation is being developed within decent limits and proper. We passed an Act about our share of the cost of the fleet the other day. When a change is required we shall pass another Ast retaining the power we hold—the power of absolute equality of terms of negotiation for each fresh case a? it arises. If we keep ont of the Australian federation, we shall keep our right and privileges intact, our dignity, self respect, and our national bouyancy unimpaired. We may also, by our example, restrain the Australians from pushing their Separatist tendencies to extreme limits.’ EXCLAND'S MMOOBACV.

* Let us consider,* said Mr Ballance, 1 the march of the Democracy, and how that Democracy (a progressing in a manner more rapidly, more steadily, and with greater stability than the democracy in any part of the world, We are allied to this Democracy of England, and in that alliance lies our best hope of progress.’