London Colonies, May 17, 1872

London Colonies

May 17, 1872

View full page Start A Free Trial!

Issue date: Friday, May 17, 1872

Pages available: 16

Previous edition: Wednesday, May 1, 1872

Next edition: Saturday, June 1, 1872 - Used by the World's Finest Libraries and Institutions
About London ColoniesAbout

Publication name: London Colonies

Location: London, Middlesex

Pages available: 2,178

Years available: 1872 - 1876

Learn more about this publication
  • 2.18+ billion articles and growing everyday!
  • More than 400 years of papers. From 1607 to today!
  • Articles covering 50 U.S.States + 22 other countries
  • Powerful, time saving search features!
Start your membership to the world's largest newspaper archive now!
Start your genealogy search now!
See with your own eyes the newspapers your great-great grandparents held.

View sample pages : London Colonies, May 17, 1872

All text in the London Colonies May 17, 1872, Page 1.

Colonies, The (Newspaper) - May 17, 1872, London, Middlesex USTRALIAN ISSUE (17) -"Via Brine!iai [PUBLISHED TWICE A MONTH. 'flJRECISTEREtL FOR TRANSMISSION ABROAP * ^^^s^sS0- ENTERED. AT STAHONERS HALL; No. 111.] LONDON : MAY 17, 1872. [Subscription, 10s. per annum. CONTENTS. page ..............130 PANADA ..................... 130, 133 WEST INDIES................ ..............131 ........... 131 ............ 131 HOME NEWS, Ac- ..............129 page HOME NEWS (Continued):- Imperial Parliament.................135 The Colonial Empire (II).......... 132 The Great Idea .......................133 What is a Bank Note ?...............135 Correspondence...............137 to 139 Telegraphy..........................iw'}^ General Summary...............142, 14s page HOME NEWS (Continued) :- Book Notices ....................> < 140 Societies, Meetings, &c........... 140 Religious Intelligence ..............141 Shipping News........................ 1*1 Home Markets....................... 14* Postal Guide........................... I44 CI s. w. RCULAR NOTES Silver & Co.'s) issued in triplicate, payable all the �world over. CORRESPONDENTS. h EUROPE. OFFICE OF of THE COLONIES,'" May 17, 1872. The respective merits of Monarchial and Eepublican institutions have, within the last few years, been much canvassed and practically tested by mankind , and it would be blind prejudice on the part of advocates of either system to say that much cannot be urged in favour of the other. We believe that the truest Conservatism would recommend each nation to remain content with its own form of constitutional government, and loyally to support it; for it has been clearly proved that freedom and order may well exist under either system. Any people must ill understand the art of government who cannot with either secure these blessings. Monarchy has, within the present century, considerably strengthened its claims to acceptance by nations. As long as our ancient British monarchy was the only one under which free constitutional parliamentary government existed, it might have been said that it was an exception to the rule that despotism and monarchy were inseparable; but since so many monarchies on the Continent have become perfectly free and constitutional, the advocates of that form of government may appeal to experience, and affirm that the system they support is as compatible with the freedom and happiness of nations as any other that exists. To go to the Continent-the royalist, starting with Holland and Belgium, may confidently ask, could these states benefit themselves by changing their form of government ? Turning eastward he may well enquire would such a change be beneficial to the new German empire, although in it there is room for a more complete development of constitutionalism, which will, doubtless, at an early period, be effected ? Could the republicans, although they rendered,valuable service in promotingjthe unity and freedom of Italy, have so completely achieved what the constitutional monarchy of King Victor Emmanuel has so happily effected? Sweden and Norway, Denmark, Portugal, Greece, and even Austria, so long and so recently most despotic, might be adduced as examples of countries in which freedom and order are more likely to be secured under a monarchy than under a republic. Then there is Spain, too, whose only escape from the despotic and priestly tyranny of Carlism, on the one hand, and complete anarchy on the tother, is the constitutional sceptre of her gallant young sovereign, Amadeus of Savoy. One of the weakest points of monarchy is, that in Spain and other countries where the principle is held by the majority of the people, -so many claimants for the throne exist; and undoubtedly, the worst enemies that monarchy has ever had have been the advocates of indefeasible hereditary right, and others, who not content with having the form, must have a particular dynasty or man upon the throne, and who are ever ready to overthrow or conspire against any other sovereign. If royalists would agree to stand by their principle and firmly support the de facto sovereign, they would strengthen 1heir own cause, and render it invincible in many countries where it is far from secure. It would be so in France were the monarchists to agree beforehand to accept either Napoleon, or the Comte de Paris, or the Comte deChambord, whichever might be selected, and loyally support him as a constitutional sovereign : and it would be so in Spain were the advocates of monarchy to unite around King Amadeus. In his recent speech at Manchester, Mr. Disraeli has endeavoured to prove from the example of the United States that the expense of republican government is as great, if not greater, than that of monarchical government, but he showed that the cost was occasioned by the remuneration to the members of the Federal and State Legislatures, for their services and for mileage allowance -payments just as likely to be made were the chief ofthe Union an Emperor or King instead of a President. But it certainly would be penny wise and pound foolish in any nation to change a form of Government thoroughly suited to it, for the sake of saving three or four hundred thousand a year. The chief objection that can be raised to monarchy is, that it gives such enormous influence to one individual. All classes look up to him, and from him a tone is given to the whole social and moial life of the community. We know how often that influence has been abused. As long, however, as a nation can have such a sovereign as Queen Yictoria, or, as we may hope, the Prince of Wales will be, such influence is beneficial, and is a strong argument in favour of monarchy. Aberdeen- National Bank Scotland. Altona-Schwerdtmann & C�. Alexandria-Tod,Rathbone& Co. Amsterdam-Peck & Co. Antwerp-W. Kennedy. Berlin-A. Samson. Bristol-J. W.Le Ray .Broad Quay. Calais-A. Martin. Christiania- A. Sharpe & Co. Creuznach, Rhenish Prussia- Beckhard & Son. Dublin-John Quain. Dundee-N itional Bank of Scotland. Edinburgh-National Bank of Scotland. Frankfort S. M.-Feist Bros. & Sons, 40, Neue NainzerStrasse. Genoa-Granet, Brown & Co. Gibraltar-Gabazon & Co Glasgow-National Bank of Scotland. Greenock-National Bank of Scotland. Hamburgh-A. Barber & Co. Havre-E. Wanner fils Inverness-National Bank of Scotland. Liverpool-T. Nickels and Co. Malta-E. J. Gingell & Co. Marseilles-Gower & Co. Naples-Holme & Co. Oporto-Robert Reid. Palermo-Ingham and Whitaker Paris-H. Schenck, 41, Rue de l'Kchiquier. Wm. Sisley, 1, Passage Violet-Rue Hauteville. Plymouth-Willcocks & Weeks. Portsmouth-Garratt and Co, Rotterdam-Turing & Co. Scilly Isles-F. Banfield & Sons. Stockholm-Henry Tottie & Co. Trieste-Smreker & Co. ASIA. Aden-Luke Thomas & Co. Batavia-Borneo Co. Bombay-Framiee & Co. , Grindlay, Groom & Co. Calcutta-Colvin, Cowie & Co. Calicut (MalabarCoast)-James Andrew & Co. Colombo-Durham, Gnndrod, & Foo Chow-Hedge & Co. [Co. Galle-Scheffer. Junsz & Co. Hiogo-Osaka-Alt & Co. Hong Kong-Pustau & Co. Kandy-Gordon, Masaey, & Co., Kurrachee-Mclver /t Co. Madras - Bainbridge, Byard, Gair, & Co-Nagasaki-Walsh, Hall & Co. Philippine Islands (Ylo IIo.)-Loney & Co. , , (Manilla), Halli- dny,Wise &Co. Shanghai-G. Cowie & Co. , -Pustau* Co. [Co. Singapore-Paterson, Simons & Umritzur - Davee, S^hii, and Chumba Mull. Yokohama-Walsh. Hall & C <. AFRICA. Beaufort West-Barry and Nephews. Bloemfontein-W. L. Piucu*. Cairo-R. Borg. Gape Town-James Bruce * Co. , King & Son, , Thomson.Watson.&Co Cradock-Rev.R. B. Taylor. Durban-Couper & Co. , -H. & W. H. Savory. Graham's Town - Heideman, Hay ton, & Co. , , Anderson and Kennelly. Hope Town-Lilienfeld Bros. King William's Town - May-nard. Walker & Co. [Lucas. Ladysmitb (Natal)-Capt. G. A. Lagos-C. D. Turton. Mauritius-Blyth Bros. * Co. , Ireland, Frnser& Co i Madagascar-Dr. A. Davidson, 1 , (Tamatave)-ProctorBros. Mossel Bay-Harry & Nephews. Pietermaritzburgh---P. Davis & Sons. [Co. Port Elizabeth-W. Anderson ^ , A Moseuthal & Co. H. Uutherforii. Port Said (Egypt)-Dr. J, Zwl, H.B.M. Vice-ConsulT Potchefstroom-A. Forsmainn. Pretoria-A. Broderick. Sierra Leone- J. Ezzidio. Winburg-T. Waters, AMERICA. Barbados-T. N. Atkins & Co. , -A. Wortley. Berbice-S. Davson & Co. Bermuda-N.T.Butterfield & S on BuenosAyre? -C.T.Getting&Co. , W.R.Thomas & Co Callao-T.J.Hutchinson,H.B.M Consul, Cincinnati-Ed. B. Hale & Co. Chicaero-Hv. Greenebaum & Co, Demefara-Davson Bros. & Co. Falmouth (Jamaica) - Robert Nunes Galveston-W. B. Sorley and Co , -C. H. Pix. Grenada-A. Hubbard & Co. Halifax-J E. Cabot Honolulu-Theo. H. Davies. Kingston (Jamaica)-E.Lyons & Son. Lima-J de Dios Calderon. Milwauke-Candee, Ambler,&Co. Montevideo-Getting Bros.&Co. Mobile-T. S. Miller and Co. Montreal-Evans, Son & Co , -E. A. Prentice. -Thomas Samuel. Nashville-T. S. Marr. New York-James Brand. , -Burdett & Pond. , -Fras .Moran. New Orleans-Payne, Dameron & Co. Panama-Lyons & Co. [Co. Para-TanDenbeclr. Brambur, & E. L. Layard, H.B.M.JConsul Portland- (Oregon), Janion and Rhodes. Quebec-J. Bell,Forsyth & Co. Rio de Janeiro-J. Moore & Co. Richmond-P.Campbell and Co Rosario-John Thompson & Co, St. Louis-L. A. Benoist and Co Santa Martha- F.Stacey, British Vice-Consul. San Francisco-Alf. Borel & Co , , Parrot t & Co. Savannah-David R. Dillon. St. Thomas-Cameron, & Co. ., Robert D'Meza, Trinidad-Croil, Marshall, & Co , -A.Bernard. Tumaco (New Grenada)-Grin-dale and Co Valparaiso-Hainsworth & Co. Yictoria (V.I.)-Janion, Rhodes and Co. AUSTRALASIA. Adelaide -Henry ricoit. R. B.Colley, J.P. Auckland-Cruickshank, Smart and Co. -Owen & Graham. Brisbane-J. & G. Harris Christclmrch-George Gould Dunedin-Cargills&Maclean. , -Dalgety.Nicholls &Co. Geelong-Dalgety, Ibbotson Co. , G. F. Belcher. [Co. Hobarfc Town-T. D. Chapman & , , -Knight & Co. , , -R. Lewis & Son Invercargill-Dalgety, Rattray & Co. Launceston-Dnlgety.Moore&Co Maitland-Benjamin Lee. (.Co. Melbourne � Croaker. Scott, & , Dalgety, Blackwood and Co. Napier-Kinross & Co. , -Stuart & Co. Nelson-Buxton and Co. , Morrison, Schlanders and Co. Picton-A. Beauchamp. PortLyttleton,-J. M.Heywood & Co. Portland-Lord, Croaker, & Co. Sydney -Beilby & Co , -A. McArthur & Co , - MonteUore.JopephifcG'o. Toowoomba-J. C. Whue. Wellington-Levin and Co. , A. P. Stuart & Co. Weste ni Australia}Freeman tie) Lionel Sumacm (Toodyay) W. J. Clifton,J.P ;