Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896935052

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-238139

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 2

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XI Seiten, Seiten 570-1100

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part IV. The federations and the union // Chapter II. The commonwealth of Australia

Collection:: Economics Books

cuap, mi] THE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA 941 to South Africa and the unexpected appearance of Lord Carnarvon’s proposal for federation in 1875.1 It is clear that the whole procedure in 1875 was from first to last unfortunate. In any case, it is probable that an attempt at union was premature. The Orange Free State and the Transvaal were by no means prepared to surrender so much of their independence as would have been involved in the acceptance of federation. The Cape of Good Hope, which had but recently obtained self-government, could not reasonably be expected to surrender the autonomy which it had so recently secured. Natal was not yet in possession of responsible government, and there was naturally feeling in the Cape against being put on a level with Natal. But the fatal mistake which was made by Lord Carnarvon was in attempting to ignore the Cape Government. Appar- ently Mr. Froude, who had visited South Africa as a pre- liminary to the confederation dispatch of 1875, had realized that the Cape was likely to cause difficulty, and, at any rate in his dispatch of May 4, 1875,2 Lord Carnarvon committed the fatal error of suggesting that the Cape should be repre- sented by Mr. Molteno, acting for the western province, and by Mr. Paterson for the eastern province. The Government of the Cape could not be expected to feel other than indignant at this step, which seemed to perpetuate the differentiation between the two parts of the Cape, and to hold out a prospect of the carrying out of the step refused in 1872, when the Imperial Government had definitely declined to accede to the petition of the eastern province of the Cape for separation from the western province. To add to the indignation on this head there was also the consideration that Natal and Griqualand West, both under the control of the Imperial Government, were to be represented at the Conference, thus reducing the position of Mr. Molteno to that of marked in- feriority. The Cape Ministry at once showed their indignation. ! Bee Parl. Pap., C. 1244 (1875); C. 1399 (1876); H. L. 40, C. 1632 (1877); C. 1980 (1878). Froude discussed the question at length in his book on his visit, and alludes to it in Oceana. For the other side, see P. A. Molteno, Sir John Molteno, i. 329 seq. ; ii. 1 seq. tC. 1244, p. 2.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation