THE NEW PROVINCE OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA.
SINCE, in the founding of a colony, every thing is created or originated, except the land of an unoccupied country, such an enterprise partakes largely of that character of originality which, more than any thing, strikes the imagination. Whatever strikes the public imagination, generally inflames two opposite passions ; that of admiration, and that of envy. Which feeling it excites in any individual, must depend on his own character. If he have a generous temper, he will sympathize with the adventurers, take an interest in their success, and help them if possible : if his own nature is bilious, he will sneer at their enthusiasm. prophesy their ruin, and prevent them, as far as he can, from obtaining the happiness and the fume which would attend upon their success. These considerations may account for the warm support which the project of founding a colony in Australia has received from one set of men, and the abuse which has been heaped on it by another set. If we are to believe in proverbs, the patrons of the measure wage an ur- equal war with its detractors. If " detraction never wants a large and partial audience," those who are moved by envy may be supposed to outnumber those who give way to generous sentiments. Besides, it is very easy to detract from that which cannot, for some time, be more than a project or speculation ; and safe as well as easy, because if the project should succeed, the detractors will be forgotten : while, on the other hand, it is riot only difficult but impossible to prove beforehand that any project will succeed ; and those who support a project are sure to be blamed if it should fail. Finally, in this case, the patrons of the measure are known ; while its detractors, with the exception of Mr. GOBBET?, endeavour to conceal their names : and while the only
persons who can reap any immediate benefit from the foundation of another colony, are the small body who may first settle there, several classes have, or suppose themselves to have, an interest in condemning the project. This lust point requires a separate notice.
The directors and shareholders of our Canadian Land Companies imagine, that a new Australian Colony, and more especially if it should be foundel with care and on a great scale, will attract many emigrant capitalists, who, if we had not one civilized colony, might emigrate to Canada, and buy land of the Canadian Companies. We are not sur- prised, therefore, to hear that Mr. ROBINSON intends, as a Member of Parliament, to oppose the South Australian Bill. The more violent opponents of the Poor-Laws Amendment Bill, such as COBRETT and Mr. Wm.rea, imagine, or pretend to have discovered, that the South Australian project has been set on foot by Ministers for the purpose of enabling them to carry the new poor-law into effect. Says " A Country Magistrate," in the Times of Friday week—" Now we see what is meant by Mr. Seaioa's expression above quoted, ' that emigration is not only the sole remedy, but it is a remedy preparatory to the adoption and necessary to the safety of every other.' Extreme pressure is to be created on the poor, and emigration is the safety- -valve." " We publish," says a leading article of the same day, " another letter bearing the signature of 'a Country Magistrate,' which is equally deserving of the consideration of our readers, and which also touches upon the joint-stock juggle for getting British paupers scalped by Bush- men in Southern Australia." CORBETT, in his Register of the next day, says—" When I heard Mr. WIIITMORE detailing the wondrous gains of new settlements all over the world, I could not help wonder- ing what all that had to do with the Poor-Law Bill. I now understand it all. It all had a great deal to do with the Poor-Law Bill."—Now, the fact is, that the mode of colonizing which is to be pursued in South Australia, was first submitted to the public in 1829, by a series of Let- ters in the Morning Chronicle, and republished during the same year as a book, under the title of a Letter from Sydney,—which book was fully reviewed in this journal : that in 1830, the plan was developed in a Sup- plement to the Spectator, taken tip by an association called the " Co- lonization Society ;" and explained at a public meeting of that Society, Mr. WILMOT HORTON being in the chair, in a speech of rare ability and eloquence, by Mr. JOHN STERLING, whose name cannot be un- known either to the Times or, we conjecture, to the "Country Magis- trate : " that the project of trying that plan of colonization at Spencer's Gulf was formed in 18:31 ; steadily pursued for a whole year ; ap- proved, when it was first submitted to him, by Lord GODERICH, and defeated, for a time only, by Mr. HAY, who since a certain powerful article in the Times upon Tory influence in theGovernment offices, has been culled " the Tory Bumburocrat of the Colonial Office : " that part of the correspondence between Mr. HAY and the South Austra- lian Company of 1831-2 was published last year in England and .America,—a work in two volumes, which has been reviewed at great length in the Times, and of which every page and line, it has been truly said, tends co explain and recommend the mode of colonization suggested by that Society of which Mr. Joule STERLING was one of the most able members : that the present South Australian Association, with the same chairman, and many of the same members, and the same objects, as the Company of 1831-2, was formed towards the end of ' last year, that is, some months before the Poor-Law Bill had been heard of : and, lastly, that some members of the Association (amongst whom is Major BEAUCLERK) are decided opponents of the Poor-Law Bill. So much for the pretended connexion between that bill and the New Colony. But the pretence may be turned to account by those who op- pose the Poor-Law Bill: it furnishes another argument against that measure ; it affords a cheap and easy method of abusing that bill,— cheap, because abuse of the Colony cannot injure or give pain to any but the small number who have set their hearts upon settling there,—easy, because, as we observed before, it is very easy to detract from any pro- ject, however good it may be, so long as it is nothing but a project. Cruel though it be to alarm the women who are going to this Colony, by foretelling that they will be " scalped by Bushmen in Australia," still this is a safe and easy, one might say a cowardly method of at- tacking the Poor-Law Bill ; and as men pursue their ends by different means according to differences of character, we are not to be surprised that this should be the method adopted by one class of anonymous de- tractors.
Another class who are really interested in abusing the Colony, because they have a deep personal interest in preventing its success, is a section of our political economists : we mean those professors and writers whom some of the projectors of this colony have accused of profound ignorance with respect to the political economy of "new countries." If, for example, what Mr. M'Cut.i.oen has written concerning the va- lue of land in colonies, the causes of high wages in some few colonies, and the origin of slavery,—if all this be true, then the plan of the New Colony is full of error. If that plan should succeed, then would Mr. M'Cui.Locit have to acknowledge, or his readers, at least, would see, that his writings are full of error. In fact, the plan of the New Colony is founded on several heresies in political economy,—such as that capital may be, and is in England, superabundant ; that superabundance of land is a very great evil, being the cause of slavery ; that, with a proper se- lection of emigrants, there is nothing to fear from the "principle of population," but that, on the contrary, the greater the rate of increase the better, not only for the colonies, but for the mother country ; that the first and greatest improvement in the productive powers of labour consists, not of Division, but of its opposite, Combination ; that emi- gration on an immense scale may be conducted, not only with infinite benefit to the colonies, but without putting the mother country to the expense of a shilling ; and that colonies, instead of having been hurtful to the mother country, have been, notwithstanding gross mismanage- ment, which may be avoided in future, the chief means (by producing new wants at home and opening new markets for selling the products of domestic industry), of raising England to her present state of wealth and civilization, and of more than doubling our home-population since she began to colonize. Such are the new doctrines on which is based the present scheme of colonization. Not a few of the most eminent economists have embraced those new doctrines ; and those who maintain the old ones are further annoyed by the desertion of many gentlemen who, without being professed economists, used to belong to what may Nations, with copious notes, explanatory of the new doctrines ? But it be termed the M4CeLt ocit school. The snappishness of certain articles in the Courier against the New Colony (and of which the authorship has, irritation. What will happen if there should come forth presently, from Mr. KNIGHT'S manufactory, a very cheap edition of the Wealth of matters not . the fate of this Colony will determine which of the two we arc told, been avowed at a certain club), displays a feeling of personal great sects, into which economists are now divided, deserves the public confidence. And this consideration explains why the economist of the Courier should join with Connerr in seeking to stop the experiment. Envy in Conover, and fear in the other writer, have led two men to agree, who never agreed before. If the writer in the Courier were not afraid, he would say, " Try the experiment by all means." Surely we have not wasted time in explaining so strange a coincidence, as perfect agreement between a Professor of Political Economy, COBBETT, and the Times, which seldom speaks of CORBETT but as " the bone-grubber," or of the M4CULLOCH school but as 4, quacks and pedants." The objections of all these writers may be classed under three heads —I. Those which do not apply to any part of the scheme; 2. Those which apply to the mode of colonization to be adopted; 3. Those which apply to the nature of the countryt o be colonized. I. Under the first head comes nearly all that is said in Cobbett'g Register of July 5th. With his usual powers of language and skill in illustration, COBBETT makes an assault upon all existing colonies ; his weapons of attack being graphic descriptions of the hardships endured by backwoodsmen, and of the poor and uncivilized state of new settlers. Little did he imagine that he was thus providing arguments in favour of the South Australian measure. The plan of that measure is founded upon the facts which COBBETT describes ; upon the errors hitherto committed by all the colonizing governments of modern Europe, and the miserable results of those errors. If Canada and the back settle. ments of the United States were highly attractive, — if such men as Mr. BIRKBECK and Mr. FLOWER, on whose losses and miseries COBBLIT dwells with great force, were sure to prosper in such a country as the State of Illinois,—if it were not certain, that no existing new settlement in any part of the world can be a pleasant abode to an Englishman who is used to the enjoyments of society and civilization, — if there were even one British colony to which Englishmen above the working class might resort without a violent shock to their habits,—then might we say I to the South Australian Association, Let well alone; we do not want • a new colony. But what COBBETT asserts of Canada and the new American States is true, more or less, of every British colony. All of them are so different from England—in all of them are the people so much scattered, and the difficulty of obtaining labourers is so great_ thatthe capitalist who settles in any one of them stands a chance of falling into the condition of a workmen, while the labourer has little or no chance of becoming an employer of other labourers. They are places fit for him only who is prepared to work for himself, without assistance, in a state of solitude, and who desires nothing more than plenty of mere animal enjoyments. Cobbett's Register of Saturday week contains a striking picture of the degradation which takes place in the state of a wealthy and refined Englishman, who emigrates to a colony in which there are neither slave-labourers nor convict-labourers. But the various publications of those who are interested about the New Colony contain many such pictures. CORBETT'S statements are true; and it is a conviction of the truth of such statements which has led to an undertaking, hiving for special object to found a colony in which the evils of other colonies could not occur. The gradual extension of an old society—another England, without the evils that arise from want of room—this is the object of the South Australian Association ; and all those who, like COBBETT, dwell on the evils of a new society—of all existing colonies—furnish the best argument in favour of planting a colony for the express purpose of trying whether those evils may be avoided. In so far only do CORBETT'S remarks apply to the South Australian scheme. Without knowing it, he gives valuable assistance to Mr. WHITMORE, Mr. GROTE, and his (COBBETT ,) particular House- of-Commons friend, Mr. Secretary RICE. The other objections, which do not apply to the scheme, since they consist of mere misrepresentations of fact, occur in the Times and the Courier. A few examples must suffice. Times—" That the measure is adopted as a means of carrying the Poor-Law Bill into effect."—Answered already.
" That the South Australian Association is a joint-stock company." —It has no stock, and therefore no joint-stock ; it is a private society formed for the temporary purpose of persuading the Government to adopt and conduct a particular plan of colonization. By the passing of the bill now before Parliament, the Association, instead of obtaining extensive powers, as is alleged, will be dissolved.
" That the modest application of the Company to the Government is—Give us certain hundreds of millions of acres, that we may sell them by the thousand, the hundred, &c. !"—No such application has been made or thought of. By no chance, can an acre ever come into the possession of the Society, either by gift or purchase; but, according to the plan which they submitted to Government, every acre is to be sold in public, by servants of the Crown, and with precautions for in- suring perfect impartiality. Courier—" No use whatever for the intervention of a company to
carry the scheme into effect. It had better be managed by agents appointed by, and accountable to, the Colonial Office patrons
of this company scheme."—Answered already. There is no come pany scheme ; but the plan is to be "managed by agents appointed by, and accountable to, the Colonial Office." It is not very long since some of these "patrons" used to swear by a certain Professor: hinc illce lachrymce. The novelty of the plan is an objection with the economist of the Courier. He calls it " the new plan," and says, " Undoubtedly, if we had any intention of emigrating, we should much prefer resorting to a colony managed according to the old plan, than to one subjected to the new regime."—The "old plan" is the system of gratuitous grants by favour, without any provision for the cultivation of the land granted. The "new plan " (we quote from the Courier), "is the fixing a minimum price upon the land, and selling it by public auction at o But much above that price as the competition of buyers will carry it." in what British colony is the " old plan " now pursued ? In none ; abs . none of these cases has it ever been stated that evil arises from the two colonists a year ; and should the Colony prosper at the end of a quer- . plan of selling instead of giving away ; while the fact that the United ter of a century, ten colonists a year may be sent by means of this fund."
must include the Times and the Courier. Coining to facts, we have to state, that in 1832, a part only of the per- Refening once more to England and America, for an elaborate sons who were then desirous to settle in South Australia, offered to statement of the arguments, as well against as in favour of the selling the Government 125,0001. for 500,000 acres of land, which sum would plan, we will here endeavour to correct a misapprehension which has have conveyed 6000 labourers to the settlement ; and that on the pre- arisen from the improper use of two words,—namely, " dispersion " and sent occasion, the first emigrant capitalists will probably invest a much "concentration." The object, it has been said, of the South Austra- larger sum in the purchase of land. If this should excite our corre- Eau measure is to prevent the dispersion and to promote the concen- spondent's wonder, we would remind him that the buyers form part tration of the colonist. This is not the case. All industry being, of a population of 24,000,000; and that by means of employing all creteris paribus, productive in proportion as men help each other—that the purchase-money of land in conducting the emigration of poor is, in proportion to the combination of labour— the great evil of people, the pressure of the overflowing capital and redundant popula- colonies is the separation of labour into single pairs of hands. But tion of Britain is directed upon the New Colony. such separation of labour may take place without dispersion ; it The other " mortal objections " of our correspondent might be an- does actually take place to a great extent amongst the cottiers of swered as satisfactorily as this one ; but we want time and room for Ireland, and the small cultivators of France, who live close to each the purpose. In fact, every one of those objections is completely an-. other. Hence, as is well explained by Mr. 111,Cussocia* that unpro- ticipated and demolished in England and America; not to mention the ductive state of industry in France and Ireland, under which two- published controversy between Mr. HUTT and Mr. JOHN STERLING on thirds of the inhabitants of those countries work to raise food for the one side, and Colonel TORRENS and Mr. WILMOT HORTON on the the whole, while the inhabitants of England are supported by the other,* whereby the honourable Member for Bolton was converted agricultural labour of one-third of the people. Nay, as land in from our correspondent's view of the subject, into one of the warmest France continues to be more and more subdivided, and labour, conse- supporters of the South Australian project. Mr. GROTE and Mr • quently, more and more separated, the population is becoming more 1VARBURTON are other examples of a similar change of opinion ; and and more dense : on a farm which occupied ten people, working to these we may add Mr. BENTHAM, who shortly before his death, as together, and producing food for thirty people, there are now twenty we are informed by the author of England and America, abandoned isolated cottiers, producing no more than enough for themselves ; with all his objections to the plan, and even wrote in favour of it at some twice the number of people on a gi% en space, there is less produce by length.
one-third. Hence it will be seen, that the object in putting a price III. All the objections to the country are mixed up with objections upon the waste land of a colony, is not to prevent the dispersion of the to the plan of colonization, and are directed not against the new pro-.
settlers, but to prevent them from cutting up their labour into separate wince in particular, but against Australia generally. That vast region, fractions. Keep them as close together as the cottiers of Ireland or say the Courier and our " mortal-objection " correspondent, is fit for small cultivators in France, still if each man cultivate his own piece of nothing but sheep-farming ; and in such a country combination of la- land without help from his neigh bturs, they will be a poor and uncivilized hour is out of the question. But what proof have we that Australia is community. Let them spread in patches as wide us they please, still fit for nothing but sheep-farming? The fact, our objectors would say, if they settle down in bodies and preserve combination of labour, each that no other mode of production has been very successful there. If patch of colony will have a surplus produce for exchange with the other so, then the fact that on the fat, rich, teeming soil of the plains of patches, or with distant countries • they will be a wealthy and civilized Buenos Ayres, little else has been produced than herds of cattle, would community. The object, then, of putting a price upon waste land, is to establish that those plains are fit for producing nothing but herds of preserve combination of labour, which has little or nothing to do with cattle. Those rich plains have never been turned to agricultural pur- concentration. If the price of land be sufficiently high, labourers will poses ; nor have the people of New South Wales been successful in Work for hire ; if labourers work for hire, they will work in combine- growing corn, wine, cotton, tobacco, and other products of agriculture. tion ; if they work in combination, their labour will be very productive ; But why? on account of the nature of the country, or on account of if their labour is very productive, their wages will be high in amount, the manner in which that country has been settled ? All we can be notwithstanding the high profits of their employer. But with high • Appendix to a Lettcr to Sir George Murray on Systematic Colonization. By • "Division of Property by Will." Note in his edition of The Wealth of .Vation4 Charles Tennant, Esq., M.Y. Ridjira,y. Ealutely in none. In. what British colony is the " new plan " pursued ? wages they would soon acqnire the means to purchase land ; and then, In all. Years have elapsed since this " new plan," which le attributed when each of them had become an isolated landowner, the colony would to the South Australian Association, was adopted by our Government degenerate into that unproductive state of industry—into that half-savage for all the Colonies; and this is the plan which the United States have condition of "newness" which is so much admired by the Courier. pursued, all over the Union, during one third of a century. For a par- How is such a loss of productive power, such a social degradation, to be nettles account of the plan, we refer the Courier to M'Cussocies Dic. prevented? It has usually been prevented to some extent by the intro- tionoraqf Commerce, under the head of " Colonies." duction of slaves, who could he made to work in combination notwith- The Courier further objects, and in very strong terms, to the plan of standing the cheapness of land. In the present case, it will be pre- selling by auctim:. Here .,ve entirely agree with him. But is the land of vented by employing all the purchase-money of waste laud in fetching this Colony to he sold by auction ? He takes for granted that it is : we other labourers from England. If the price of land be high enough are informed that the King's Commissioners will be at liberty to adopt (and all turns upon that point), this Colony will never want labour for whatever mode of sale they may think .best. The mode of auction is hire, though the persons composing such labour will be frequently open to numerous objections, which have not occurred to the Courier. changed ; the New Colony will be " rendered as like an old country as But if such objections could be multiplied without end, none of them possible" in respect to the skilful application of labour, but not in re- would apply to the measure in its present state. If the Commissioners spect to low wages ; and instead of "obstacles being thrown in the way should, as we think is highly improbable, adopt the auction plan, then of the poor man's acquiring land and becoming independent," as the will objections to that plan apply to the South Australian Colony, but Courier asserts, the poor man who shall be commonly industrious and
not before. prudent, will become not only a landowner, but a master. The wide
II. The chief objections, both of the Times and the Courier, which difference between concentration and combination, and between diaper- do apply to the measure, consist of an assertion, repeated in different sion and separation, and the advantage to poor emigrants of bringing shapes, that it is aSsurd to sell the waste land of a colony, instead of other poor emigrants with the purchase-money of land, are well ex- giving it away, and i npossible to obtain any such price as the inininumn plained in The New British Province of South Australia, which we re- for South Australia, viz. twelve shillings per acre. These objections, viewed last week. we say, consist of mere assertion ; for not a single fact is mentioned A correspondent, for whose opinions in general we feel much respect, in support of them. Our answer to those objections is an appeal to is quite furious against the Colony. Ile says—" The whole affair is a facts. With the exception of an occasional grant by Congress, all complete hallucination, and will prove as great a delusion as any one of waste land in the United States that becomes private property, is sold the worst projects of the year 18_n5; it has not a leg to stand upon. Be- by the Government to individuals ; and for a price exceeding, we sides the objections which I have sketched, there are at least a dozen believe, on the average, twelve shillings per acre. Twelve shillings others, every one of them mortal." One of these mortal objections per acre is about the average price which the Canada Company of Lon- is stated as follows— don obtain for their land ; laud which was most improvidently sold to " I shall suppose that the sales of land are, in proportion to population,. them by the Government for about two shillings per acre. The great as productive to the State as those of America. The latter, in 1832-3, American Land Companies, who purchase immense tracts on the brought in 000,000/ for a population of, say, 13,000,000. At this rate, Western frontier, and never for less than 5 s . 7;(1. per acre, usually sell the Australian Colony, with 5000 settlers, will bring an annual sum of their land, still in a state of nature, for from fifteen to thirty shillings little more than 231. 10,000 inhabitants will bring 461. ; and when the per acre. The average price which our Government have obtained New Colony is entitled to a constitution, with 50,000 inhabitants, its for land in New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land, since they income from the sale of lands will be 230/. The two first sums (with adopted the plan of selling, has exceeded twelve shillings per acre. In great economy) will be sufficient to convey respectively one colonist and States obtain nearly 700,0001. a year by the sale of waste land, shows Now, on the same assumption that the " sales of land are in propor- the possibility, to say the least, of finding purchasers at a considerable tion to population," it will be easy to prove that the United States ob- price. Dr. LANG, in his recently publi:died History of New South tail) by such sales, not 600,000/., but 13,000,0001. The population of Wass, estimates the selling value of some land in the immediate Van Diemen's Land being 14,000, the sales of land produce about neighbourhood of Sydney, which is still public property and in a state 14,000/. ; by the above rule, the population of the United States being of nature, at 200,000/. For a collection of facts which prove that, 13,000,000, the sales of land in America must produce 13,000,000/. a wherever people congregate in new settlements, waste land is usually year. But we know that it is not so : where, then, is our correspon- worth a great deal more, on the average, than twelve shillings per acre, dent's error? It consists in reckoning the whole population of the we must refer to England and America, Appendix No. '2; and the United States with reference to their land fond, and leaving out the same work contains a still longer list, supported throughout by facts, whole population of the United Kingdom with reference to our land of the evils which arise from disposing of waste land in any other way fund. In order to reason correctly from our correspondent's assump- than by public sale at a considerable price. And why, we venture to tion, either we must count the whole population of the United King- ask of the Times and the Courier, has the plan of giving been aban- don, or we must count only that portion of the American population doned, and the plan of selling adopted, in all our Colonies ? Why did which consists of new colony. Our correspondent takes all be not those who object to the plan of sellingas respects South Australia, can for his own side of the question, and drops all he can that would object to it some years ago, when it was adopted for the Canadas, New make for the other side. What will he say to our comparison between South Wales, and Van Diemen's Land? The answer to these ques- Van Diemen's Land and the United States, which makes the American tions is, that the Colonization Society of 1830 made our Government land fund 13,000,0001? He will say that it is unfair, because we have aware of the evils which arise from any other mode of disposing of not reckoned the effect of emigration to Van Diemen's Land from waste land than by sale ; and that those evils have yet to be discovered Britain, where the population is 24,000,000. Truly—but, in this most by all who have not carefully examined the subject, amongst whom we fallacious course of reasoning, we have may followed his example. must include the Times and the Courier. Coining to facts, we have to state, that in 1832, a part only of the per- Refening once more to England and America, for an elaborate sons who were then desirous to settle in South Australia, offered to statement of the arguments, as well against as in favour of the selling the Government 125,0001. for 500,000 acres of land, which sum would plan, we will here endeavour to correct a misapprehension which has have conveyed 6000 labourers to the settlement ; and that on the pre- arisen from the improper use of two words,—namely, " dispersion " and sent occasion, the first emigrant capitalists will probably invest a much "concentration." The object, it has been said, of the South Austra- larger sum in the purchase of land. If this should excite our corre- Eau measure is to prevent the dispersion and to promote the concen- spondent's wonder, we would remind him that the buyers form part tration of the colonist. This is not the case. All industry being, of a population of 24,000,000; and that by means of employing all creteris paribus, productive in proportion as men help each other—that the purchase-money of land in conducting the emigration of poor is, in proportion to the combination of labour— the great evil of people, the pressure of the overflowing capital and redundant popula- colonies is the separation of labour into single pairs of hands. But tion of Britain is directed upon the New Colony. such separation of labour may take place without dispersion ; it The other " mortal objections " of our correspondent might be an- does actually take place to a great extent amongst the cottiers of swered as satisfactorily as this one ; but we want time and room for Ireland, and the small cultivators of France, who live close to each the purpose. In fact, every one of those objections is completely an-. other. Hence, as is well explained by Mr. 111,Cussocia* that unpro- ticipated and demolished in England and America; not to mention the ductive state of industry in France and Ireland, under which two- published controversy between Mr. HUTT and Mr. JOHN STERLING on thirds of the inhabitants of those countries work to raise food for the one side, and Colonel TORRENS and Mr. WILMOT HORTON on the the whole, while the inhabitants of England are supported by the other,* whereby the honourable Member for Bolton was converted agricultural labour of one-third of the people. Nay, as land in from our correspondent's view of the subject, into one of the warmest France continues to be more and more subdivided, and labour, conse- supporters of the South Australian project. Mr. GROTE and Mr
one-third. Hence it will be seen, that the object in putting a price III. All the objections to the country are mixed up with objections upon the waste land of a colony, is not to prevent the dispersion of the to the plan of colonization, and are directed not against the new pro-.
sure of is, that in every modern colony which was clear of saber, how- ever rich the soil, the people have wandered, and separate/ nemselves each from the other. to such a degree that it was more easy? or them to follow the pastoral than the agricultural life. But which was cause, and which effect? Did the separation of the colonists lead to a pastoral life? or did the state of the country, renderings pastoral life preferable, lead to the separation of the colonists ? These questions are carefully examined by the author of The New British Province of South Aus- .tralia ; and be establishes, to our satisfaction at least, not only that the agricultural capacity of Australia has never been tried, but that as the country was clear by nature, the experiment could not be tried under -so defective a mode of colonization as has been pursued there. Does the general practice in America of exhausting the natural fertility of land, prove that the soil of America is unfit for that agricultural pro- cess by which natural fertility is preserved ? or does it only prove, that under a system of colonization which separates and weakens labour, the easiest, not the most productive mode of cultivation, becomes a neces- sity? Our correspondent refers to South Africa, where, says he, it would have been impossible, by reason of the unproductiveness of the soil, to colonize on the South Australian plan. But which has been unproductive in South Africa—the soil, or man's labour? which has been to blame—Nature, or the mode of colonization ? Who can decide, when all we know is, that if the soil had been as rich as that of Buenos Ayres, the colony must have been poor and barbarous in consequence of the manner in which it was settled ? The curious means adopted by the Dutch Government of the Cape of Good Hope, to spread the .first settlers over the colony, and to separate them all from each other, by a distance of several miles, arc fully described in England and America ; where it will be seen also, by a quotation from the South African Advertiser, that one of the best-informed and most able men in the colony, attributes the unproductiveness of the soil much less to nature, than to a mode of colonization the very reverse of that which is to be pursued in South Australia. From the fact that, under one system of colonization, Australia has been fit only for the pastoral life, the conclusion is drawn, that the country is unfit for a totally dif- ferent arid a diametrically opposite system of colonization. That con- clusion appears to us to be most illogical and unsatisfactory. What Australia is ft for, will be seen when agricultural capital and labour shall be there employed in the most productive manner, but not before, —when a colony shall be planted there, with precautions from the very beginning for preventing capital and labour from being cut up into small and unproductive fractions. This seems to be a conclusive argument in favour of trying the experiment, and upon a scale sufficiently large to give it the best chance of success.
Previous page
