Political Parties in New Zealand (Oxford, 1966), pp. 28-29. Also K. Sinclair, 'The Significance of "the Scarecrow Ministry" 1887-1891 in New Zealand', in R. Chapman and K. Sinclair (eds.), Studies of a Small Democracy (Auckland, 1963) , pp. 102-126.
by Kingston in South Australia, and Turner in Victoria, were in office.^ The apparent development of political maturity came at a time when Governors, chosen more for their
possession of a title than for administrative ability or colonial experience, were less qualified to interfere in the
2
domestic self-government of the colonies. These developments meant that it was unrealistic for radicals and other critics to claim that Governors or, in the proposed Commonwealth, the Governor-General, would exercise excessive influence.
By 1897 the few complaints still voiced concerning the danger of vice-regal interference in domestic affairs were
3
without any real conviction. Colonial politicians
recognized that the acceptance by Joseph Chamberlain of the Colonial Secretaryship in 1895 was a sign of that official British interest in the colonies for which they had long been hoping. To criticize the link with the newly prestigious Colonial Office would be foolish. Moreover, the financial crises had made more abundantly clear the importance of
British capital to Australian development and the fostering of sympathetic influence in London was therefore widely recognized as being in Australia's material interest.
1. Note the similar lengthy ministries of Nelson in
Queensland, Braddon in Tasmania and Forrest in Western Australia.
2. The old New South Wales politician, Sir John Robertson, is said to have remarked 'They send out boys now'. See B.R. Wise, The Making of the Australian Commonwealth 1889-1900: A Stage in the Growth of the Empire (London, 1913), p. 46.
The British Socialist Ben Tillett and the Victorian Labor journal Tocsin voiced an isolated warning. See Tocsin,7 April 1898.
In these circumstances radicalism and republicanism were no longer the forces they had been in 1887-1890. Most of the radical members who had been elected to the New South Wales Assembly in 1891, and had spoken so vigorously against the Imperial nature of the office of Governor-General, were not re-elected in 1894. There was an element of radicalism in the Labor Party, but, motivated by the need for internal cohesion, a moderate platform had been adopted on the
principle of 'the highest common factor'.'*" Article XII of its Manifesto, published in 1891, advocating 'the federation of the Colonies of Australia on a national as opposed to an
2
imperialistic basis' was the furthest that the party was
3
officially prepared to go in opposing the British connection. The Bulletin, too, was less republican by 1897 and did not question the role of the Governor-General in the proposed new Commonwealth as it had in 1891. With the more extreme
radical publications, such as the Republican and Boomerang no longer in existence, the republican movement had lost its
4 significance in Australia by the mid eighteen nineties.
1. L.F. Crisp's description of the 1900 federal Labor platform in The Australian Federal Labor Party (London, 1955), p. 261.
2. Quoted in T.A. Coghlan and T.T. Ewing, The Progress of Australasia in the Nineteenth Century (Toronto, 1903) ,
_ _
3. Charles Grimshaw, 'Australian Nationalism and the
Imperial Connection 1900-1914' in Australian Journal of Politics and History, III, no. 2 (May 1958) , pT 162. 4. Nor did any reference to the abolition of Imperial
Governors appear in the platforms of any other State Labor party until after federation. See W.G. Spence, Australia's Awakening: Thirty Years in the Life of an Australian Agitator (Sydney, 190 9) appendix p p . 597-628 .
But, just as republicanism had waned, so also had the Imperial Federation movement declined in strength, both in Britain and Australia.^" This did not indicate any decline in enthusiasm for the British connection. Rather was it a recognition that the Colonial Conference system of Imperial management went the practical part of the way towards
attaining its aims. In Australia, Imperial Federationists were prepared, during the late 'nineties, to foster
2 Australian federation first.
In the light of the new emphases in colonial politics, opponents of federation who had utilized the vague, anti imperial attitudes of the early 'nineties as a stick with which to beat the 1891 Draft Bill, shifted their aim in the
late 'nineties from the formalities to the financial realities of federation. Griffith noted in 1897 that,
provisions of the Bill of 1891 which aroused fierce denunciation as indicating what was called an
'Imperialistic tendency' have withstood the ^ criticism of six years and remained unaltered.
In discussion of the proposals concerning the Governor-General during 1897-1898 earlier attacks on the Draft Constitution for
1. The British Imperial Federation League was dissolved on 31 December 1893. Lord Brassey, Papers and Addresses: Imperial Federation and Colonisation from 1880-1894
(London, 1895) , p~! 23 4 . For decline of the movement in Australia see Blackton, 'Australian Nationality'.
2. The Imperial Federation League sent a representative, H.D'E. Taylor to the Corowa Federation Conference in 1893 where he read a resolution according the movement active support and hearty sympathy. See Official Report of the Federation Conference held in the Court House, Corowa, on Monday, 31st July and Tuesday, 1st August,' 1893 (Corowa, 1893) , pp. 25-26.
Sir S.W. Griffith, Notes on the Draft Federal Constitution Framed by the Adelaide Convention of 1897 (Brisbane, 1897) ,
p. 2.
its monarchism and Imperialism were not revived. Debates in the Constitutional Conventions and the colonial
Parliaments found few who pursued the criticisms of 1891- 1892 when discussing the role of Governor-General, unless it were related to practical matters, such as salary, or a question of wider controversy, such as the preservation of States' rights.
The provision of a salary for the Governor-General had been the occasion of mild disaccord during 1891 in the Sydney Convention and the various Assemblies and Councils; a pale reflection of earlier, more bitter disputes concerning
colonial Governors' salaries. At the Adelaide Convention of 1897 Reid expressed the hope that they would lift the
question of salary
above that incessant nagging and criticism which has given rise to some of the most discreditable episodes in our political life.-^-
He emphasized that the Governor-General was the only constitutional link with the mother country and as such
should be placed above 'any trafficking ... about the question of salary'. The plea fell upon stony ground.
For the next five years the question of the salaries of the Queen's Representatives in colonies, Commonwealth and
2
States was the source of considerable 'trafficking'. In accordance with the general desire that federal government
1. Con. Deb. Adel. 1897, pp. 629-630.
2. From 1899 to 1903 there was a constant exchange of correspondence between the Colonial Office and the Australian colonies concerning the salaries of State Governors. See C.O. Confidential Print, Australian no. 172, 'Correspondence-relating to the Salaries
and Position of the Governors of the Australian States after the Establishment of the Commonwealth', C.O. 881/10/172.
should be cheap, some colonial politicians suggested that the Governor-General's salary should be less than the
£10,000 proposed in the 1891 Draft Bill. In South Australia amendments were passed recommending such a reduction,'*'
though when put to the Convention in Sydney they were 2
defeated. The majority view was that the salary of the Governor-General should be sufficient to attract
distinguished Imperial statesmen.
3
There remained, however, a persistent anxiety about the extent to which this well-paid Imperial official should act on the advice of his Executive Council. Reid had asked that they
put in black and white the principle of executive action, which always is that the Governor shall act with the advice of the Executive Council.4
Later, at Melbourne, Deakin expressed similar concern and recommended that in exercising the role of Commander-in- chief the Governor-General be required to act 'under the
5
advice of the Executive Council'. But the Convention was
1. The Legislative Assembly recommended £7,000 per year, S.A,P.D. (House of Assembly) 1897 , columns 355-357 . The Upper House favoured £8,000, S.A.P.D. (Legislative Council) 1897, columns 74-75.
2. On the motion that the salary remain at £10,000: ayes 38, noes 7. Con. Deb. Syd. 18 97, p. 254 .
3. See above, p. 36 for Deakin's suggestion in Sydney,
during the 1891 Convention that express provision be made that the Governor 'invariably act on the advice of his ministers' and p. 42 for Reid's complaint that there was no provision in the Draft Constitution requiring the Governor-General to act only on the advice of his Executive Council.
4. Con. Deb. Adel. 1897, p . 910. 5. Con. Deb. Melb. 1898 , M H ts •
unconvinced of the danger. Douglas, of Tasmania, was more suspicious of Deakin's motives than of a Governor-General's opportunism. He felt that the discussion only showed that
'some honorable members are trying to get all the power'.^ The reluctance of the majority of delegates to heed Reid's and Deakin’s request that all action of the Queen's
Representative be upon the advice of his Australian Ministers, revealed a prevailing opinion that the role of the Governor- General should not be altogether ceremonial or nominal.
In Downing Street, however, officials were disturbed that provisions in the 1897 Draft already allowed the
Commonwealth Executive to encroach too much upon the Imperial functions of the Queen's Representative. When the 1897
Draft Bill reached London the position of the Governor- General in the Commonwealth was the subject of a worried exchange of opinion.
Six years earlier there had been a brief discussion in the Colonial Office on the Draft Constitution of 1891
largely concerning the title 'Commonwealth' and provisions restricting appeal to the Queen in Council. In 1889 John Bramston had mentioned the need 'to bring the Imperial factor
2
into play' but more detailed comment was postponed until federation came closer to fruition. In 1897 the postponed