TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE COLONIZATION INQUIRY.
THE debate on Lord Lincoln's motion has exhibited the actual position of what may be called distinctively, from its mate- rials, the Colonization Government, in respect of practical colonization. To say nothing of Lord John Russell, who distinguished himself by some bold acts during his Colonial Secretaryship, the Government comprises Earl Grey, a noted leader in the new school of colonization • Mr. Hawes, sometime a missionary of the new lights; Mr. Ward, Chairman of the Committee of 1830; and Mr. Charles Buller, joint author of the Durham Report. The position of these statesmen, collectively and officially, is peculiar. There seems to be no settled under- standing either between them or in the individual minds. Mr. Hawes comes out as the avowed apologist of the Anti-Colonial Office for neglecting colonization, and the eulogist of mere emi- gration as it is at present. Lord John disagrees with Mr. Hawes —he doubts the merits of emigration; and what Mr. Hawes opposes he adopts. And he quotes a despatch by Lord Grey dis- playing a third difference : Lord John slights, Lord Grey invites schemes of colonization. Mr. Ward has not disavowed the views which he so ably promoted in 1836. The opinions which Lord John Russell and Mr. Hawes and Lord Grey resist, are elo- quently supported by Mr. Charles Buller—in his total silence. The " apostles of colonization," it appears, have got into power, together, in order that they may agree to differ and cooperate in doing, nothing. The arguments by which they support the status quo are di- verting. The admiring Fitzgerald of the Rjectecl Addresses could notbe more universal in his eulogy than Mr. Hawes was in singing the praises of all past Administrations back to 1826. He even vaunted for them the measures which had been forced upon them—such as the recognition of the Wakefield principle in the Australasian Colonies. It is curious that the progress which Earl Grey, Mr. Hawes Mr. Ward, and Mr. Charles Buller, helped to force upon Governments in Colonial affairs, should cease as soon as those gentlemen are themselves in office: it seems to have much the same effect as if you were to make a coachman and his horses exchange places. Being furnished with an opportunity for putting the doctrines they have preached into practice, they turn round and require proof of their own pre- mises; the apostles demand to be converted to their own creed I Lord John Russell is lavish of arguments in the subjunctive mood ; presuming freely what " would be" or would not in di- vers cases. He Shows an innocent trustingness in authority. For instance, he says that Mr. Charles Buller made a most ad- mirable speech when be was in Opposition ; but when his plan was submitted to Lord Metcalfe, that functionary gave "reasons which satisfied Lord Stanley and his colleagues" that such a plan ought not to be adopted. Do the present Ministers swear by Lord Stanley And Lord John did not explain how Lord Met- calfe had acquired a more thorough knowledge of Canada, in re- spect of colonization, than Mr. Buller himself; nor what aptitude —what qualification, what training—Lord Metcalfe had ever ex- hibited for judging of scientific colonization. We are not aware of any. As an authority in that line, his name certainly cannot compare with Mr. Buller, s. But, to Lord John Russell, an au- thority is an authority ; and because Lord Metcalfe was a Gover- nor-General, there is to be no faith in Mr. Buller, who was only a Governor-General's Secretary. Being compelled to act, or at least to inquire, Lord John Rus- sell takes security for the result. Lord Lincoln wanted an inde- pendent inquiry into the best means of making colonization subsidiary to other measures for the improvement of Ireland, and a bona.fide answer, in the shape of a measure or proof of its im- practicability. He proposed a Commission. Lord John will not trust to a process of which the result is so independent of calcu- lation. Lord Lincoln suggested inquiry as a step towards the real object—a measure : Lord John talks of inquiry as a thing to delay or excuse from action. He names his own ma- chinery. Sir Robert Peel had complimented the Emigration Commissioners, and had quoted their report ; he also spoke of "men like Colonel Torrens and Mr. Hutt," who had watched the progress of colonization : Lord John seized these separate remarks, put them together, said that the inquiry should be conducted by the ordinary machinery of the Executive, and alluded to "three gentlemen" as being those who had "watched colonization" and whom Sir Robert Peel had complimented—the Emigration Com- missioners! Now, who are those three gentlemen ? Of one, Mr. Frederick Elliot, the terms might be employed without glaring impropriety : although not inexperienced in the work- manship of colonizing reforms he is publicly known as the minister of official routine rather than as a scientific inquirer. But who are the other two ? One is Mr. Rogers, a gentle- man originally appointed to a post in the Colonial Office, on grounds, we believe, of his legal attainments ; but his ser- vices did not prove to be necessary there' and he was pro- vided for by a seat at the Emigration Board. The other, Mr. Wood, is a barrister, not eminent in his profession, and totally unknown among students of colonization, practical or theoretical. Lord John cannot mean to transfer the task intended by Lord Lincolit for a Commission of eminent and independent men to a Board comprising these elements. Indeed, the very position of the Board unfits at for the duty. It is, if not subordinate to the Colonial Office, at least subject to the Colonial Secretary; it is a staff at his command. If not under the control of questionable influence in the Colonial Office, it has no independent means of action, so as to perform its functions without regard to that in- fluence. The Colonial Office has notoriously obstructed coloniza- tion as an active process ; it is notorious that the chief permanent officer has manifested dislike to the founding of new colonies ; and the extension of our settlements has in fact been retarded by the Colonial Office on all signal occasions within the last fifteen years at least. How is it possible that an inquiry of the nature proposed by Lord Lincoln can be turned over to a subordinate branch of that office We say that such a duty would be most unfairly thrust- upon the Emigration Commissioners. It would impose responsi- bilities without power, and would exact a service that could not be performed by them to the satisfaction of the public. However con- scientiously executed, a blue book compiled by the Commission- ers at the order of the Colonial Secretary, revised perhaps, and corrected, in the recesses of the Colonial Office, could not have the slightest weight with the public ; could in no respect settle the great question mooted by Lord Lincoln ; and could only re- sult in bringing upon those who should utter it in Parliament that kind of discredit which attaches to the contractor who sup-
plies false goods. • By whatsoever mode—whether they reject the plain mode of a Commission, like the English and Irish Poor-law Commissions, or not—Ministers must see that the inquiry be a real inquiry, and the return made to it above suspicion. Any other course would entail a very painful amount of disgrace.
The friends of colonization may take another caution. Lord Grey has the credit of sometimes mistaking other people's plans, even after he has opposed them, for his own ; and of treating them as gipsies treat kidnapped children, disguising them by dis- figurement. It would be very unfortunate it Lord Grey were to bring upon colonization measures the semblance of a defeat due to his own rash haste and capricious retractations. We do not presume that he means ill now—that he will be governed by a perverse spite ; he might most usefully contribute the aid of his critical abilities ; but it should not be forgotten that even his concurrence may be untoward. However, the subject is now too much under public attention, too much under the special notice of commanding minds, to be in so much danger from that cause as it might once have been. Inquiry cannot be stifled, action can no longer be hindered, except momentarily at the expense of something like self-destruction.
Previous page
