Other formats

    TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

A selection from the writings and speeches of John Robert Godley

[newspaper correspondence]

A good deal of newspaper correspondence took place arising out of this meeting. We print the two following: the first is an instance of the extreme scrupulousness of his mind in defining exactly the position in which he wished to stand; the second as an instance of the thorough manner in which he pursued a subject to its conclusion.

[To the Editor of the 'Wellington Independent.']

Sir,

I am anxious to guard myself against a misconstruction which may possibly arise as to the significancy of my presence at the meeting of the Settlers' Constitutional Association on Monday evening last; and I trust that the flattering prominence given by you to the part which I took in the proceedings on that occasion may exculpate me from the charge of presumption if I trespass, very briefly, on the attention of your readers for that purpose.

Many of the resolutions which are described as passed "unanimously," have reference to local questions, which I have not had an opportunity of considering, and on which I do not wish to express any opinion. I beg, therefore, to Say, that my object in desiring to become a member of the Association, and in attending the meeting of Monday, was simply to identify myself in the most complete manner with those page 69among my fellow colonists who are seeking to obtain, by legitimate and constitutional means, the inestimable benefits of political freedom, and that I wish to be understood as assenting only to the first five of the resolutions passed on Monday, as being those in which the principle above referred to is affirmed and illustrated. I have no idea of objecting to, or dissenting from, the resolutions passed subsequently to the first five: I merely abstain from identifying myself with them.

I have again to apologise for intruding upon you with a matter personal to myself; but I hold that every person who takes part in the proceedings of a public meeting, becomes responsible for the whole of its formal results, unless he expressly guards himself against such an inference.

Wellington, August 23, 1850.

[To D. Monro, Esq., Nelson.]

Sir,

No apology was necessary for addressing me on the subject of your letter; on the contrary, I consider it as a compliment, inasmuch as it shews that you are kind enough to set a high value on my opinion. I am very sorry that the censure on your political conduct, in which I joined, has given you pain; I cannot, however, admit that I joined in it without consideration or inquiry, or without having satisfied myself that there were good grounds for such censure. My conviction was, and is, that by accepting a seat at Sir George Grey's Council Board, you contributed towards the infliction of a most serious and irreparable injury upon the colonists of New Zealand. Through your means Sir George was enabled to carry out his anti-colonial policy; no language, therefore, on the part of the colonists can, in my opinion, too strongly express their reprobation of conduct by which they have so grievously suffered. But you complain of certain assertions contained in the fifth resolution, passed at the meeting of the 19th August, in the spirit of which I entirely concur. Those assertions are—first, that Lord Grey's despatch places the nominees in a humiliating but just light; and, second, that they are undoubtedly the puppets and obedient servants of the Governor.

page 70

Now, by both of the foregoing statements I am prepared to abide, and I think the proof of them will not be difficult. You argue that Lord Grey was wrong in denying your independence, because you took your office unfettered by any pledge of obedience or conformity; and, in fact, considering yourself independent, acted accordingly. I answer, that the circumstances under which you took office virtually rendered independence impossible. In the first place, Lord Grey, the representative of the authority from which you derived, interpreted your adhesion as an abdication of independence, and was prepared, of course, to act in conformity with that interpretation. He knows that nominees, accepting office in despite of, and in opposition to, the great body of their fellow citizens, cannot be independent: their position is too false and too weak. The idea of their standing up for the rights of a community which rejects and repudiates them, against a Government whose partizans they have declared themselves, is an anomaly and an absurdity; they would have no moral support in doing so; they could not stand for a moment, isolated and unaided, in the character of an "opposition;" the Government could do as it liked with them, and the worse and more contemptuously it treated them the better would the real "opposition"—that is, the great body of the community—be pleased. All this Lord Grey, a statesman of great official experience, knows well; and he knows also that as in theory it is to be expected, so in practice it is invariably found, that an Assembly of nominees is an Assembly of "puppets and obedient servants." With the very best intentions they cannot be otherwise; they are the slaves of their position.

But perhaps the best proof I can give of the substantial truth of the statements you impugn, is to be found in the occurrences which have given rise to this correspondence. If you were so free and independent (as you assert), if your position as a nominee was so good a one, allow me to ask—why you resigned it? According to my view, the whole affair was quite simple and natural. Sir George Grey, evidently considering you as "puppets and obedient servants," treated you with the scanty ceremony proper to such a relation; after page 71you had served his turn by constituting yourselves a "Legislature," there was no further need of you; accordingly, as he thought the exhibition made by the Council neither useful nor creditable, he determined to forego the empty form of assembling and consulting it, and to govern openly, as he had before done virtually, with and by his own will and pleasure alone. You rebelled against so distinct and irrefragable an averment of your political nullity, and did the only independent thing which it was possible for a nominee to do—that is you resigned. But, if you could have done anything better; if you could have altered your independence by effective political action, again, I ask,—why did you resign? The fact is, that your moral instinct revolted against the degradation of the position which you theoretically defended. You might argue as you pleased about your independence, but you felt that you were a "puppet and obedient servant;" that is to say, that it was only on the condition of being so that you were allowed to have any political existence at all. Your conduct is quite inconsistent with your arguments, and I honour you because it is so.

I trust that you will pardon my expressing myself with so much freedom, and (what you will call) severity. Tou have invited me to do so by accusing me of inconsiderately censuring the nominees. I trust I have shown that at least I had reasons for my censure—reasons which fully satisfy my own mind, though I can hardly hope that they will appear equally cogent to you.

Wellington, October 2, 1850.