HC Deb 16 November 1888 vol 330 cc1386-7
MR. HENNIKER HEATON (Canterbury)

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he is in a position to inform the House of the nature of the reply received front the Acting Governor of Queensland to the telegram despatched on Monday last relative to the appointment of Sir Henry Blake?

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Sir JOHN GORST) (Chatham)

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer this Question in the unavoidable absence of the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies (Baron Henry de Worms). The reply was received last night, and is as follows:— The Officer Administering the Government of Queensland to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, received 15th November, 1888, 6.45 p.m.—Referring to your telegram 12th November my Ministers consider—(1) That Sir Henry Blake is not known in Australia as a gentleman who has administered responsible government with discretion and success; (2) that the importance of the Colony entitles it to a Governor of proved ability and discretion in the administration of responsible government; (3) that his experience in responsible government is considered to be one year's service in Newfoundland; (4) that his previous experience is, in their opinion, a disqualification for the office of Governor of Queensland; (5) that the expressed disapproval of his appointment, when announced, was spontaneous, immediate, and general; (6) that this disapproval was more strongly accentuated because the appointment followed closely upon a constitutional crisis, where the rigid adherence to the exercise of prerogative came in direct antagonism with responsible government, when the former had to give way; (7) that it is impossible to make the appointment from an Imperial point of view alone. A gentleman appointed simply as the conservator of Imperial interests can in no adequate sense be called a Governor. The Governor of a Colony with responsible government must work heartily and loyally for the interests of the Colony. When Imperial and Colonial interests clash the Governor's Ministers have always sought out and advised a course that would harmonize both. (8) The Colonial Legislature votes and the Colony pays the Governor's salary. The amount voted, and the fact of payment, imply approval of the occupant of the office. My Ministers desire me also to point out that their being asked now to give specific reasons against the appointment shows that they were reasonable or right in seeking to express an opinion before the appointment was made.—A. H. PALMER. The answer to this telegram will be communicated to the House as soon as there has been time for its consideration. Perhaps I may be allowed to add, with reference to an answer given last night by the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies to the hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere), that what my hon. Friend intended to convey was that the Governor's salary is "provided"—not "voted"—by the Colony, as it is secured by a permanent law, and is not subject to an annual Vote.

MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)

I should like to ask the hon. Gentleman whether we are to understand that the "previous experience" alluded to by the Ministers of Queensland was that of an Irish Resident Magistrate?

SIR JOHN GORST

I cannot tell. I have only read what the Colonial Ministers say, and the hon. Member is just as well able to interpret it as I am.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL (Kirkcaldy, &c.)

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the communication appeared in the newspapers before he read it; and can he say whether it was sent by a Member of Her Majesty's Government, or by a Representative of the Colonial Government in this country?

SIR JOHN GORST

I must have Notice of this Question.

MR. HENNIKER HEATON

Is it not the fact that the Colonial Government vote the money necessary for the Governor's residence in addition to the sum provided by the Act of Parliament for his salary?

SIR JOHN GORST

I am not answering for my own Department, and I must ask the hon. Gentleman to give me Notice of a Question of that kind.