ABSTRACT
This scheme of Molesworth's and the Australian Colonies Bill which gave rise to it absorbed most of the energies of the Colonial Reformers in the session of 1850; and on the whole the Government, who carried the Bill with the loss of the federal clauses, held the advantage over their critics. In 1851 the Reformers wisely decided to shift their ground, not to attack all along the line but at particular points where they could reasonably hope for outside support. One of the weak spots of the Government was Ceylon. The Committee, which had finished its investigations in 1850, refused to condemn Lord Torrington but issued an inconclusive report which undoubtedly gave a handle to his critics. Despite an effective speech by Torrington himself in the House of Lords on I April 1851, a motion of censure was moved in the House of Commons. It was defeated by 282 to 202, after a powerful speech in its support by Gladstone, notably free from the partisanship and personality by which most of the Ceylon debates had been disfigured.. This motion was not unembarrassing, but it was only of secondary importance. The opportune outbreak of the Kaffir war enabled the Colonial Reformers to concentrate with effect on their old topic of 'colonial expenditure' and self-government as a means to its reduction. Wakefield submitted to Gladstone a memorandum purporting to show from the examples of Canada, New Zealand, and the Cape-
The Government, to be sure, had not been inactive. A fresh remonstrance from New South Wales against the reduction
