THE THEORY OF COLONISATION.*
THE three writers whose works are before us approach the question of Colonial theory from different sides. Mr. Hertz gives us an elaborate historical study of the old Colonial system which disappeared with the American Revolution; H. Speyer analyses the existing practice of the British Empire, and attempts to deduce from it certain principles and ideals; while Professor Reinsch is concerned with the motives and methods of colonisation in general. The two latter works are excellent examples of the .1 priori and a posteriori types of argument, and Mr. Hertz's study provides, so far as Britain is concerned, the necessary historical prolegomena. Before we can understand modern theories of colonisation we must realise the imperfections of the old, on the wreckage of which they have been built, and it is the understanding of such imperfections which can alone save us from a feolish reaction. Mr. Hertz traces at length the circumstances which led to the Navigation Acts, and the Colonial methods which grew out of them, explaining the hardships they created, the slowly kindling Colonial revolt against them, and their final debdcle in the American War. He shows a remarkable knowledge of contemporary literature, and his book may claim to be a true history of popular opinion. He does not, as is too common with writers on the subject, adopt a partisan attitude, and declaim against George ILL and his Ministers, or against the ingratitude and parochialism of the revolutionaries. The English attitude, as he shows, sprang from a perfectly logical adherence to a policy which had outgrown its value and become dangerous. He says truly of Chatham that one secret of his success was that be was barely ahead of his age, and after the conquests of the * (1) The Old Colonial. System. By G. B. Hertz. Manchester : at the University Press. Vs. 6d. net —(2) La Constitution Juridique de ['Empire Colonial Britannique. Par H. Speyer. Paris: A. itowiseau. [6 francs.]— (3) Colonial Administration. By Paul S. Beinsch. London : Macmillan and Co. (5s. net.]
Seven Years' War he did not see the necessity for a new con- structive policy. The old Colonial theory was primarily politicaL It was based upon "the very sensible ideal of a self-sufficing Empire." We sought to retain a monopoly in Colonial markets, and buy wholly in turn from our Colonists, without thinking where the economic advantage might lie. By stringent laws we tried to compel our settle- ments to produce articles they were physically incapable of producing, and to coerce our home industries into taking materials which they could get twice as cheaply else- where. Hence arose between Mother-country and Colonies a gradual exasperation and loss of sympathy. Any system which for political ends exacts a heavy economic sacrifice from one of the parties is doomed in the long run to failure. As to direct taxation, the question actually at issue, Mr. Hertz sums up very fairly and fully. England was, of course, legally and constitutionally in the right, and she might well urge her claim to be recouped in some measure for the vast sacrifices she had made in the Seven Years' War. The trouble was that the problem was not one of legal rights, but of political wisdom. The fault lay with the old mercantilist system, which by placing economic restrictions on Colonial development brought about a false, mechanical relationship. In a very interesting chapter Mr. Hertz does justice to the schemes of Imperial federation proposed by the "United Empire loyalists" like Galloway and Pownall, which, in spite of certain crudities, are curiously far-sighted and modern. The situation, however, had become too strained to admit of any alternative to separation, and with the loss of America went the doctrine which bad caused it. Thereafter came a reversion to extreme
laissez-faire views, and, what was less desirable, a period of com- plete apathy toward Colonial interests. Happily, the grant to
the Colonies of self-government, the logical outcome of the new doctrine, provided the corrective to its faults. With the growth of Colonial nationalism there came a truer conception of the Imperial relationship, remote alike from the old mer- cantilism and from callous indifference. We have travelled far from the doctrine in which Chatham believed, but, in view of recent propaganda, the lesson of its failure is still vital. No Colonial system which exacts either from Mother- country or Colonies too heavy a material sacrifice, and attempts on political grounds to tamper with economic free- dom, can be expected to endure.
M. Speyer's La Constitution Turidique de l'Empire Colonial Britannique is a work to which we know no English parallel.
The author—a distinguished Belgian jurist—has reviewed the whole field of our Colonial administration, and has endeavoured to get at the foundation of its legal and consti- tutional structure. His survey is so up to date that it includes the South African Inter-Colonial Council, and so accurate that the only slip we can detect is the assumption that the authority of a Colonial Governor represents that of the English Cabinet. In some admieably lucid chapters he discusses Colonial modifications of the English common law, and the extraordinary way in which the English system has incorporated and interpreted minor codes. It is often forgotten how many legal survivals exist within the Empire. We have the Roman-Dutch law in South Africa, in Ceylon, in British Guiana, and substantially in Malta ; fragments of old Spanish law in Trinidad ; a French code in Canada, Mauritius, the Seychelles, and Cyprus ; while the codes of British India have been extended to the Straits Settlements, East Africa,
and in part to the Soudan. M. Speyer has many acute remarks to make about the old Colonial system and the theory which superseded it. In the word " Imperialism " he finds a paradox :—
" Par une curieuse deformation du sons veritable des mots, tel eat le nom quo Pon donne sax tendances qui out pour objet, non pas un mouvement d'expansion et de conquete, mais l'unification do ces parties-lb du domain° colonial de l'Angleterre, oà sa souverainete n'a precisement aucun caractere imperial."
His discussion of the problem of Imperial organisation is to be recommended to all who desire a statement of the cakes for and against fiscal union and other federal devices from the
standpoint of an unbiassed and friendly observer. "In the middle of the nineteenth century," so he puts the problem, "England sacrificed the interests of her Colonies to her own economic development, and gave them as compensation self-government. Is she now, in the twentieth century, to sacrifice the freedom of her own trade to the material
- prosperity of her Colonies in the hope of attaching -them to her by stronger political ties P " As a member • 'of a Protectionist nation, he is favourably inclined to Mr.
• :Chamberlain's scheme in theory, but as a student of Colonial policy he points out very clearly the enormous difficulty of finding any machinery to ensure its smooth working. As for other proposals, he is against any attempt at legislative federa- tion, and he is not enthusiastic about the policy which seeks to create a federal nucleus out of the periodical Conferences of Colonial Premiers. On the other hand, he is anxious to see the de facto federal elements developed, such as the Army and Navy, and he finds considerable value in the new Defence
'Committee. External events, he thinks—some, great war or economic crisis—may force the units o the Empire together, and 'open up some means of closer organisation. M. Speyer is so well informed and shrewd a critic that his book 'deserves to be widely- studied by all interested in Imperial questions, and it might well be made accessible to the ordinary reader in an English translation, for we know no more useful handbook.
Professor Reinseh's work is one of the volumes of that useful American series, "The Citizen's Library." It is a valuable epitome of the administrative methods of the great colonising Powers as they exist to-day, and it contains also Some interesting. speculations upon the ethical basis of the activity. Colonisation, as he points out, is not exploitation of fresh sources of wealth, or, if it is, its moral justification is gone. It is to be justified only by the need for expansion felt in all high civilisations, and the responsibility voluntarily assumed in the satisfaction of such a need. There must be no attempt to impose our own civilisation en bloc under unsuitable conditions, or the result will be disaster. The Colonial administrator needs above all things imagina- tion,—" the reconstructive imagination which is able to -understand the social conditions of an alien population." The common mistake is to regard natives as individuals, who can be civilised as individuals, while the vital thing, their social structure, is neglected. The motto of an intelligent Colonial policy, as Professor Reinsch well says, must be "From the ground up." We catulot modify societies by giving them the accessories of a higher civilisation, but only by influencing structural development. This is a true axiom of colonisation, and It is in the fact that Britain has on the whole been faithful to it that the secret of her success is to be found.
Previous page
