Page:The three colonies of Australia.djvu/125

 occasionally dissent from the views of the home government or its representative. But Governor Bourke took a colonial view of colonial subjects; he did not hesitate to dissent from the views of a Secretary of State; he treated the opinions of his council with deliberate consideration and respect, even where he came to a contrary conclusion. Sir George Gipps adopted an opposite course. Nothing could equal the contempt with which he treated colonial opinions, except the zeal with which he echoed and carried out the instructions issued by the Secretary of State.

The following were among the more prominent political questions which formed the subject of contention and agitation on the part of the colonists against the governor:—

1st. The appropriation of the revenue of the colony.

2nd. The extent to which the colonists were taxed for gaols, police, &c., rendered necessary by the transportation system.

3rd. The manner in which the home government exercised the patronage of the crown, passing over colonial claims, and appointing unfit persons, at high salaries paid by the colonists.

4th. The price of land, and the arbitrary manner in which it was raised, lowered, and raised again, at the will of the governor.

These four grievances were discussed in one or more distinct cases. On each the governor took up the position of "high prerogative" in the most offensive manner, and found his policy approved by the home government.

It is very odd that, whether Whigs or Tories hold office, the most obnoxious regulations issued, the most discreditable rights of patronage exercised, have been defended under the plea of asserting "the sacred rights of the crown" in the colonies. Thus ignorant bushmen were taught, when a few acres of waste land were not granted, as the Legislative Council prayed, to the worthy captain who had saved a shipwrecked crew; or when a worn-out attorney was sent out to fill a useless office at an extravagant salary, that the ungracious refusal and disgraceful job were both the effect of the "Queen's Prerogative."

Such are the modes in which Downing-street, before the days of unrestricted political competition, used to drag the sacred name of the sovereign through the dirt.

No sooner had Sir George Gipps commenced his government than he became involved in discussions involving very important principles, which were carried on with such feeble means of attack as the colonists possessed, until, in 1842, an act of the Imperial Parliament bestowed