This page has been validated.

96

Governor, but it would show the confidence of the Governor in the people——it would be looked upon as a proof of the strength and vigour of the British constitution, instead of weakness in those that administer the laws under its guidance.

That His Excellency could well afford to be generous.

That, in asking for an amnesty, we were aware it was asking for much, and what a statesman should not do without due deliberation. But at the same time, we submitted we did not ask anything inconsistent with the true interests of the colony, or derogatory to the dignity and honour of the throne itself.

That a general amnesty to the state prisoners would tend much to consolidate the power of the British government in this colony, and show that the representative of Majesty here can afford to be just——to be generous; with the full confidence that such an act would meet with the full concurrence of the Queen of England, and the approbation of the whole British empire. That in this he would act wiser far in listening to the voice of the people than to the short-sighted counsel of the law-advisers of the Crown. Humanity has higher claims than the mere demands and formalities of human law.

We forbear saying all that might be said as to the spies being sent form the Camp to enrol themselves amongst the insurgents, and who, report says, urged them to attack the Camp, which was repudiated by the diggers——they saying they would act upon the defensive.

That we believed the enforcement of the law in this case would have the most pernicious effect, not only upon the commerce of the colony, but would retard, if not prevent, the accomplishment of those schemes of reform that His Excellency had promised.

That if he valued the good opinions of the people——the peace and prosperity of the colony, he would be giving the best evidence of it by granting the amnesty we prayed for; but that, if His Excellency punished these men, it would be calling into existence an agitation which would, we feared, end in civil commotion, if not in the disseverance of the colony from the mother country.

That we thought there were reasons sufficiently important to justify an amnesty, on the grounds of state policy alone.

But even supposing there were no legitimate grounds for an amnesty, and that the government have been right in all that they have done——which would be saying what facts do not warrant——surely the slaughter of some fifty people is blood enough to expiate far greater crimes than the diggers of Ballaarat have been guilty of, without seeking the lives of thirteen more victims. The government would act wisely in not pursuing so suicidal a course.

His Excellency states, in his written reply, that the diggers, notwithstanding his promise of inquiry into all their grievances, had forestalled all inquiry.

On this head, we would wish to remark, that the fault lies at the door of the government, in prostituting the military, by making them tax collectors, and placing them at the disposal of a few vain officials, who were not over-stocked with brains, and ignorant of the functions of constitutional government. But one fact they seemed fully sensible of, viz: That "Othello" occupation" would soon "be gone," and they were determined to "crush the scoundrels" who dared to question the policy, or even justice, or a government keeping up such an expensive army of La Trobian idlers as strut about in borrowed plumes with all the insolence of office; who, in fact, have proved themselves, with a few honourable exceptions, fit for little else than bringing the colony into debt; creating disaffection amongst the people, and stamping indelible disgrace upon any government that would uphold the system that tolerates them. One of these "retiring" gentlemen stated on the morning of the famed "digger-hunt" of the 30th of November, in reply to one of the refractory diggers: "If you do not pay you licences, how are we to be supported at the Camp?" and further, "There are some disaffected scoundrels I am determined to arrest!" To crush! for what? For daring to refuse to pay taxes except they had a voice in the expending of them for