readiness to sink all minor differences in order to build up one great nationality, it is disappointing to find among Scandinavians so little of the political wisdom which has made Piedmont, Lombardy, Tuscany, Romagna, and the Two Sicilies into the kingdom of Italy, and has welded so many petty principalities into the mighty German Empire. The last scene has just been played in that tragic farce, whereby an integral portion of Scandinavian territory has been annexed to Germany, and it is to be feared that the Danes of North Slesvig must now finally reconcile themselves to be Danes no longer. Such has been the result of the policy pursued by successive Danish rulers, who persisted in separating the Duchy of Slesvig from the Danish monarchy and uniting it by dynastic ties with the German province of Holstein: the greater body has attracted the lesser. Holstein, once a State of the German Confederation, is now a province of the German Empire, and Slesvig has shared her fate.

To a sympathetic foreigner it seems as if nothing can save the Danes of the kingdom from being drawn in the same direction as the Slesvigers, except union with their Scandinavian brethren on the other side of the Sound. When we are told of jealousies subsisting between Denmark and Sweden, or between Copenhagen and Stockholm, or of dynastic difficulties being insuperable, we cannot help feeling that Scandinavians either do not realise the perils of the situation, or that they are indifferent as to the continued existence of their own noble nationality. Unless Sweden is contented to become even as Finland, and unless Jutland wishes to follow Slesvig, the three Northern crowns must be again united upon one head, as they were upon that of Margaret, Kong Volmers Datter prud.'

6

The Italians were in earnest about an independent Italy, and the Houses of Bourbon, Este, and Lorraine were obliged to retire in favour of the House of Savoy, nor were the differences of dialect in the various provinces regarded as any valid impediment to union. The Germans were also in earnest when the Empire was consolidated, and the dynastic claims of royal and serene personages in Hanover, Nassau and Hesse were not allowed to stand in the way of a change essential to the greatness, if not to the security, of the German people. It is difficult to believe that Scandinavians can be in earnest as to maintaining their own independence when they urge the existence of a modern Swedish law (excluding females from the throne) as a serious objection to the ultimate union of the three crowns upon the head of the young prince whose parents are the Crown Prince of Denmark and the only daughter of the late King of Sweden and Norway. If the heirs male of Bernadotte, the Béarnais, are to be regarded as having a divine right of succession, and if a rivalry between Copenhagen and Stockholm is sufficient to prevent Sweden from being united to Denmark, as she is already united to Norway, there is a serious danger lest Scandinavia should become what Italy

once was—'a mere geographical expression.' Such a consummation would be a cause of sincere regret to the people of Great Britain, who are justly proud of their Scandinavian ancestry, and who claim to have inherited their naval supremacy from the hardy Sea-kings of the North.

The establishment of a united Scandinavian nation, a free maritime, Protestant people, of our own kindred, would seem to be a political event in all respects desirable from an English point of view, and calculated to frustrate territorial aggressions on the part of the two great military empires by which the existence of the Scandinavian kingdoms is now menaced.

The Northern question as well as the Eastern affects British interests; the Sound is a channel of commerce not less important than the Bosphorus; and a free Copenhagen is as essential to Europe as a free Constantinople.

The dynastic union of Sweden and Norway was accomplished by force, against the wishes of the Norwegian people; but both countries are now prosperous and contented, each enjoying self-government within its own borders, and being united for all purposes of external defence. It is difficult to discover any valid reason why the United Kingdoms' should not be three, instead of two, and why Denmark should not aspire to be the third kingdom of the league, which would unite all Scandinavians, 8,000,000 in number-a nation strong enough, with Western alliances, to defend itself against its formidable neighbours on the east and on the south.

DAVID WEDDerburn.

REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT IN

THE COLONIES.

RECENT events in more than one of our most important colonies have revived the apprehensions of those who have anticipated at former periods the failure of the system called 'Responsible Government' in communities unadapted, as they conceived, for its successful development. The dead lock of 1878 in the colony of Victoria, and the almost simultaneous ministerial crisis at the Cape, and the disputes of last year in New South Wales, present conspicuous examples of these embarrassments.

We are also frequently reminded, as an element of difficulty, of the vast numerical disproportion in our Asiatic and African dependencies between the dominant and subject races, the latter outnumbering the former by more than thirty to one. Nor can it be denied that this disproportion, aggravated as it is by the infinite diversities in race, language, and religion of the native populations, presents political difficulties sufficiently formidable.

To retain under a common dominion

The thousand tribes nourished on strange religions,
And lawless slaveries,

which we have gradually gathered under our rule, to apportion equitably as between ourselves and our dependencies the powers to be exercised and the burdens to be borne by each :-all these were tasks hard enough for autocrats unfettered by Parliaments. Problems such as these perplex even now our Indian Administration.

But the case of our self-governing colonies of which we now speak is far more complicated. For when not only full powers were conceded to colonial assemblies over their territorial revenues, but they were enabled to displace by their votes the Ministry by whose aid the representative of the Crown was carrying out his Imperial instructions, it became obvious that the last-named functionary might be called upon at any time to choose which of his two masters he was to obey.

The system of 'responsible government' began in our colonies about forty years ago. After the lapse of so long a period it may not be uninteresting briefly to revert to the circumstances under which it was first inaugurated.

In 1838 an attempt was made in Canada to place the Executive

Council on the same tenure of responsibility to the Assembly of that province as that now held by the British Ministry in reference to the House of Commons-removeable, that is to say, by vote of censure. In a despatch addressed to Lord Sydenham, and dated the 14th of October, 1839, Lord J. Russell, then Secretary of State for the Colonies, thus expressed himself on the subject:—

It appears from Sir George Arthur's despatches that you may encounter much difficulty in subduing the excitement which prevails on the question of what is called responsible government. I have to instruct you, however, to refuse any explanation which may be construed to imply an acquiescence in the petitions and addresses on this subject. The power for which a Minister is responsible in England is not his own power, but the power of the Crown, of which he is for the time the organ. It is obvious that the executive councillor of a colony is in a situation totally different.

The Governor under whom he serves receives his orders from the Crown of England. But can the Colonial Council be the advisers of the Crown of England? Evidently not, for the Crown has other advisers for the same functions, and with superior authority. It may happen, therefore, that the Governor receives at one and the same time instructions from the Queen and advice from his Executive Council totally at variance with each other. If he is to obey his instructions from England, the parallel of Constitutional responsibility entirely fails. If, on the other hand, he is to follow the advice of his Council, he is no longer a subordinate officer but an independent Sovereign.

This despatch was immediately followed by another, bearing date the 16th of October in the same year, the object of which is stated to be to lay down certain rules in Canada respecting the tenure by which offices in the gift of the Crown were then held throughout the British colonies. In this second despatch Lord John Russell instructs Lord Sydenham that hereafter the tenure of certain enumerated functionaries being members of council and heads of departments holding office during Her Majesty's pleasure would not be regarded as equivalent to a tenure during good behaviour, but that such officers would be called upon to retire from the public service as often as any sufficient motives of public policy might suggest the expediency of that measure.' This despatch has been interpreted to sanction the removal, by vote of censure or otherwise, of the members of executive councils whenever unable to command majorities in the representative assemblies; and has been thus regarded as the charter of 'responsible government,' in respect of which Lord John Russell had two days previously forbidden Lord Sydenham to grant any explanation which might imply acquiescence.

The principles involved in responsible government are nowhere more plainly defined than in the following resolutions passed by the House of Assembly of Canada in September 1841:

I. That the head of the executive Government of the province being within the limits of his Government the Representative of the Sovereign, is responsible to the Imperial authority alone, but that nevertheless the management of our local affairs can only be conducted by him, by and with the assistance, counsel, and information of subordinate officers in the province.

II. That in order to insure between the different branches of the provincial Parliaments that harmony which is essential to the peace, welfare, and good government of the province, the chief advisers of the Representative of the Sovereign constituting a provincial Administration under him ought to be men possessed of the confidence of the Representatives of the people. Thus affording a guarantee that the well-understood wishes and interests of the people, which our gracious Sovereign has declared shall be the rule of the Provincial Government, will on all occasions be faithfully represented and advocated,

The principle involved in these resolutions is now established and acknowledged in five of the provinces confederated with Canada in 1867, in Newfoundland, the Cape Colony, New Zealand, Tasmania, and the four chief colonies of the Australian group.'

The formal step by which responsible government is usually established in a colony is the insertion in the Governor's instructions of an unlimited power to appoint new councillors, subject to the Crown's confirmation, it being understood that councillors who have lost the confidence of the local legislature will tender their resignation to the Governor.

But responsible government, like all other critically devised political machines, has been often out of repair, and has undergone considerable changes since its first invention. We sometimes hear of 'judge-made law.' Responsible government having been manufactured by Lord John Russell and Lord Sydenham, has been since tinkered by successive Colonial Secretaries and Governors. For instance, the Duke of Newcastle, writing in 1862 to the Governor of Queensland, says that

The general principle by which the Governor of a Colony possessing responsible Government is to be guided is this, that when Imperial interests are concerned he is to consider himself the guardian of those interests, but in matters of purely local politics he is bound, except in extreme cases, to follow the advice of a Ministry which appears to possess the confidence of the Legislature.

But extreme cases are those which cannot be reduced to any recognised principle, arising in circumstances which it is impossible or unwise to anticipate, and of which the full force can in general be estimated only by persons in immediate contact with them.

In plainer words, the Duke might have said to the Governor: When you get into a scrape with your Parliament, get out of it as best you can, but don't look to the Secretary of State.'

Again, in 1868, the Duke of Buckingham, in attempting to deal with a dispute which had then arisen between the two branches of the Legislature in the colony of Victoria, in respect of a proposed grant of 20,000l. to Lady Darling, imitates the example above quoted of Lord John Russell, and perplexes the then Governor of Victoria, Lord Canterbury, with instructions, following each other at the brief interval of a month, which it is difficult to reconcile.

1 Besides the thirteen colonies possessing responsible government, there are nine others in which a representative element exists.