3 
rs 
> 
g 
cHAP. II] CONTROL OVER INTERNAL AFFAIRS 1043 
St. John’s criticizing the terms of the contract from a legal 
point of view. 
3. Sir Francis Evans also, as representative in this country 
of the Citizens’ Committee of St. John’s, and on behalf of the 
holders in this country of Newfoundland Government Bonds, 
has addressed to me two letters on the subject of the con- 
tract, copies of which and of my reply are enclosed. 
4. I have not yet, as you are aware, been furnished with 
an authenticated copy of the Act, and am not, therefore, in 
a position to advise Her Majesty in regard to it, and as 
I have not been furnished with the report of your Ministers on 
the statements and charges contained in the petitions and 
other documents forwarded to me, it would be more in 
accordance with the usual practice for me to defer dealing 
with the Petition until they have had an opportunity of 
replying to the allegations of the opponents of the Act. 
5. As, however, most of the points raised have been fully 
discussed in the minute of Council of the 30th of April last, 
and as the main facts are already before me, it does not 
appear to me desirable, in the present position of affairs in 
the Colony, to delay my reply to the memorial. 
6. The step, which I am urged to take, is one for which 
there is no precedent in the history of colonial administra- 
tion. The measure the disallowance of which is sought is 
not only one of purely local concern, but one the provisions 
of which are almost exclusively of a financial and administra- 
tive character. 
7. The right to complete and unfettered control over 
financial policy and arrangements is essential to self-govern- 
ment, and has been invariably acknowledged and respected 
by Her Majesty’s Government and jealously guarded by the 
Colonies. The Colonial Government and Legislature are 
solely responsible for the management of its finances to the 
people of the Colony, and unless Imperial interests of grave 
importance were imperilled, the intervention of Her Majesty’s 
Government in such matters would be an unwarrantable 
intrusion and a breach of the Charter of the Colony. 
8. It is nowhere alleged that the interests of any other 
part of the Empire are involved, or that the Act is in 
any way repugnant to Imperial legislation. It is asserted, 
indeed, that the Contract disposes of assets of the Colony 
over which its creditors in this country have an equitable, 
if not a legal, claim, but, apart from the fact that the assets 
in question are mainly potential, and that the security for 
* Parl. Pap., C. 8867, pp. 37 seq. 
112