Chapter 22 Chapter 18 North and South America and the British Dominions (Part 1)

In the nineteenth century, Europe's influence on North and South America and the British Dominions was much more profound than it was on Asia and Africa.Therefore, the title of this chapter refers not to "influence" but to thorough Europeanization. Europeanization involves more than political domination or cultural penetration.It also includes the actual biological replacement, the physical replacement of one people for another -- something that has happened in less populated parts of the Western Hemisphere and the South Pacific.The sparsely populated aborigines were either wiped out or driven away, and millions of European immigrants flocked in with their political systems, livelihood methods and cultural traditions, occupying the territory of the aborigines.Therefore, along with racial Europeanization in overseas regions, there must be political, economic and cultural Europeanization.

The reasons why Europe was able to supply so many immigrants, and why millions of people were willing to leave their ancestral homelands to risk unknown dangers in distant continents, have been shown in the preceding chapter. The narrow strip of European colonies that had existed since 1763 had expanded by 1914 to cover an entire continent, including Australia and New Zealand, areas that had earlier been untouched. Table 1 Ethnic distribution in North and South America (unit: million) Table 2 Ethnic distribution in Africa *Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Spanish North Africa, Tangier.

+Includes only immigrants of European origin. ≠Angola, South West Africa, Rhodesia, Nyasaland, Bechuana, Basutoland, Swaziland, Mozambique. Table 3 Ethnic distribution in Oceania Table 1-3 shows that the vast majority of European immigrants went to North and South America.This is understandable, since the first European colonies were established in North and South America, and these two continents also provided far more abundant natural resources and enormous economic opportunities.However, since the earliest European colonies appeared in Central and South America, a surprisingly large number of these immigrants settled in North America.

This is illustrated by the very different characteristics of the Spanish and Portuguese colonies from the British colonies.Spaniards and Portuguese colonized areas with higher Indian populations.Although estimates of the number of Native Americans prior to the European invasion vary widely, there is consensus that Indians were concentrated in what is known as Latin America.These native peoples provided all the labor needed, so European settlers were no longer required to perform labor.As a result, most of the immigrants to Spanish and Portuguese American colonies were soldiers, priests, government officials, and a few essential craftsmen.

On the contrary, the Indians north of the Lolande River are relatively rare and cannot provide labor resources.So the British on the Atlantic coast and the French on both sides of the St. Lawrence had to do it themselves, whether they felled forests, cultivated cleared land, or fished coastal waters.Under these circumstances, North America needed all the settlers it could get, and to that end, the British North American colonies were open to immigrants of all races, languages, and creeds.By 1835, there were only 4.8 million European settlers in Central and South America, compared with 13.8 million in North America.

Second half of the 19th century.European immigration continued to increase, reaching its peak between 1900 and 1910; almost 1 million people migrated each year during this decade.This unprecedented influx of people flooded every continent, and as a result Australia, South Africa and South America were also colonized by considerable numbers of Europeans at this time, although North America remained the main recipient of immigrants. As far as the specific sources of immigrants are concerned (see tables in Chapter 11, Section 7), immigrants from Latin American countries mainly came from the Iberian Peninsula, as one would expect, but there were also large numbers of immigrants from Italy and Italy in the late nineteenth century. Germany. Before 1890, the vast majority of immigrants in North America came from Northwest Europe; after 1890, only nearly one-third of immigrants came from Northwest Europe, and the remaining two-thirds came from Eastern and Southern Europe.As for the British Dominions, the source of immigration is restricted, mainly from the British Isles.After World War I, however, the Dominion eased immigration policies in order to allow more people into these vast territories.Australians are particularly sensitive to their own lack of population, given the dense population of nearby Asian countries; similarly, white South Africans are concerned by the overwhelming black population in South Africa.

The end result of these migrations was the racial Europeanization of North and South America and the British Dominions.The populations of these areas have become predominantly European, although there are some important exceptions, such as: in Central America, indigenous Indians still predominate (58 percent of the population); in South America, Indians One-third of the total population.The large numbers of blacks brought into the Americas by the slave trade was another exception to racial Europeanization; it is estimated that nearly 10 million slaves survived the transatlantic voyage to the New World.Today, their descendants make up about 10 percent of the population in North America, 30 percent in Central America, and 21 percent in South America.South Africa is the third exception to racial politicization; here, indigenous Africans outnumber whites (whether of Boer or British descent) by more than three to one.

To this day neither Indians nor blacks of the New World have exerted a decisive political influence, even when they constituted the majority of the population - as the Indians of Central America did - because Indians or blacks have never been in any Dominance in a larger country.Wherever they were, they accepted the political dominance and culture of white Europeans.It was only after the Second World War that they began to organize and assert their rights effectively in a worldwide movement of awakening and resistance among the colonial peoples.Black majority has a very different meaning in South Africa.Although this majority did not enjoy equal political and social rights from the outset, their attitudes were very different from those of Indians and blacks in the New World.Black South Africans believe that they are supported by the more than 175 million black compatriots who now live in other parts of the continent; most of these black compatriots have won their independence.In other words, they had faith in blacks by living on a continent where blacks were overwhelmingly dominant.The Negroes and Indians of North and South America had much less self-confidence as they lived in a new world in which the whites far outstripped them in numbers and power.

European colonies have had a variety of political systems since their inception.This variety of political systems arises from the different political backgrounds of the home countries.Spain, for example, was ruled despotically by the court of Madrid, and naturally the Spanish colonies were governed in the same way.Officials sent to the colonies had virtually absolute power, so there was little the colonists could do but take orders.Colonists were rarely given administrative positions. Among the 672 governors, commanders-in-chief and local governors serving in the Latin American colonies, only 18 were long-term residents of the colonies, and the remaining 97.4% were long-term residents of Spain.The French colonies were also subject to despotism, as power there was concentrated in the hands of a governor and magistrates; the governor was responsible for the defense of each colony, and the magistrates dealt with economic affairs.

Instead, each of the British colonies had elected representative bodies, reflecting the thriving parliamentary polity of the mother country.The exact nature of these representative institutions varied somewhat from colony to colony.In Virginia, settlers were allowed to elect local councils as early as 1619.This institution grew in power, and by the time of the American Revolution its influence surpassed that of the royal governor.In New England, instead of individual settlers venturing into the wilderness, groups of people migrated to outlying areas and established new towns.There they developed a kind of municipal council which held regular "town councils" at which decisions were made and officials were elected.Despite these differences in the exact form of regime, the thirteen colonies all had one thing in common: popular participation in public affairs, which led to constant friction between elected members and royal officials. In 1774, an official named William Knox sadly contrasted the unruliness of the British colonies with the good discipline of the French colonies:

Knox's concerns about the "arrogant minds" of the British colonists proved to be entirely justified.These ideas prompted the call to arms in 1776; that call led to the creation of the independent United States of America.In addition, revolutions in the thirteen colonies provoked a succession of similar uprisings; Among the various factors which contributed to the Latin American revolt were the example set by the thirteen colonies, whose successful revolutions were immediately sympathized and imitated.Latin Americans are as familiar with what they call the philosophy of Philadelphia as they are with the teachings of the French philosophers.The so-called "ships of the Enlightenment" sailed across the Atlantic, smuggling the writings of French philosophers into America in droves.According to one historian, Venezuela got so much of Rousseau's that in 1807 stores tore out its pages to use in food packaging.Spanish colonial policies, especially economic exploitation and lack of self-government, were another obvious factor leading to the revolution.Creoles (Spanish people born in the Americas) and mestizos (mixed Spanish and Indians) resented the concentration of power in the hands of officials from Spain.Revolutionary ideas were also promoted by the long years of the French Revolution and the wars waged by Napoleon I, during which Spain in Europe was first occupied, leaving the Spanish colonies to fend for themselves.The Spanish colonies were unwilling to give up the new freedoms they had tasted and enjoyed, and they had the support of foreign powers interested in the dying Spanish colonial empire. The rule of Napoleon Bonaparte in Spain and the ascension of his elder brother Joseph to the throne of Madrid were the immediate causes of the revolutions in Latin America.The Spanish colonists refused to recognize Joseph and declared their allegiance to Ferdinand VII who had been deposed by him.Their pledge of allegiance did not convince the Spanish authorities, and in 1809 all-out war broke out between patriots and loyalists.The War of Independence lasted until 1825; in this war British aid was as decisive to the victory in Latin America as earlier French aid was to the victory of the Thirteen Colonies. Works the same. The great revolutionary hero of northern South America was General Simón Bolívar the "Liberator".This remarkable leader fought tirelessly for 15 years, effectively creating independent nations such as Colombia, Venezuela, Panama, Ecuador and Bolivia; Bolivia is named after him.The prominent leader of southern South America was General José de San Martin.After liberating Argentina in 1816, San Martin crossed the Andes—a historic move—to join in the liberation of Chile and Peru. Mexico's revolution began in 1810, led by the Creole priest Manuel Hidalgo, who was continued after his death by another open-minded curate, José María Morelos.The two leaders attempted to combine Creole ideals of independence with a program of social reform to help the Mestizos and Indians.But conservatives in the Creoles found the plan too radical, and they joined forces with the Royalists to crush the 1815 uprising.Later, fearing that the Spanish Liberal Revolution of 1820 might endanger their privileges, these conservatives campaigned for secession from the mother country.A Creole official, Agustin de Iturbide, worked out a compromise that united the majority.The Baoshi faction was easily defeated, and in September 1822, the National Congress declared Mexico's independence. It turns out that it is possible for Brazil to win independence without bloodshed. After the French army occupied Portugal in 1807-1808, King John VI fled Lisbon and established the Portuguese government-in-exile in Rio de Janeiro. In 1821, John returned to Lisbon, leaving his son, Dom Pedro, temporarily in charge of public affairs in Brazil.Dom Pedro finally decided not to return to Lisbon with his father and declared Brazil independent.Instead of sending troops against his son, John accepted the declaration, and Brazil became an independent nation. In this way, almost all of Latin America won its independence from European rule.The only exceptions are Britain, the Netherlands, French Guiana, north of Brazil, and certain Caribbean islands such as Jamaica, the Virgin Islands, and Cuba; Jamaica was ruled by the United Kingdom until it won independence in 1962; under Danish rule.Cuba was ruled by Spain until 1898. The War of Independence in Latin America ended in 1825, but the revolutions in North and South America did not.More than a decade later, in 1837, uprisings broke out in the two British colonies of Upper and Lower Canada.The roots of this uprising can be traced back to 1763 and 1774; in 1763, the British captured the New French colony on both sides of the St. Frontiersmen crossed the Allegheny Mountains into the Ohio River Valley.We already know that this restriction led to the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War in 1776, however, as a result of this Revolutionary War, French Canada became a British territory.During and after the Revolutionary War, tens of thousands of Tories — Anglophiles known in the British Empire as the United Empire — left where they lived.Some of them returned to England, some fled to the British islands in the Caribbean, but many traveled north into the Maritime provinces (Nova Scotia; New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island) and what is now Ontario wasteland.These pro-British elements were Canada's "Puritan predecessors".Their settlements, together with those of the early French, created the basis for the vast Dominion of Canada. Under the terms of the Quebec Act, those Loyalists living in what is now Ontario were not entitled to the representative type of government that had earlier been enjoyed in the thirteen colonies, so they were dissatisfied.Thus, in 1791, the British Parliament passed the Constitution Act, which divided Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada and created elected parliaments in both regions.But now the same conflict between imperial power and colonial self-government arose again that had rocked the thirteen colonies earlier.in Upper and Lower Canada.There was a constitutional struggle between the Governor-General and the appointed Parliament on the one hand, and the elected Parliament on the other.The struggle centered on the abuse of office appointments, control of taxes, control of the court system, and allotment of public land only to the state church, the Anglican Church, despite claims by Methodists and Presbyterians that they had more members . By 1837, the situation had reached a serious stalemate, and the popular leaders (William Roy Mackenzie of Upper Canada and Louis Joseph Papineau of Lower Canada) decided to use force.Despite the fighting taking place around Montreal and Toronto, much of the population remains negative.The rebels were easily defeated and their leaders fled to America.The British government responded by making the Earl of Durham governor-general of the Canadian provinces, with all powers of administration and investigation vested in him. Durham was only in Canada for five months, but he made the most of that time, taking in views across the provinces.On his return, he submitted a report of historic significance; this report became a milestone in the history of the development of the British Empire.In addition to proposing that the two Canadas should unite again, his great contribution was the major proposal to allow "responsible government" for the colonies: What Durham meant by responsible government, that is, representative government, was to allow the age-old conflict between imperial power and colonial self-government to be resolved in favor of the latter.He was prepared to allow the colonial assemblies to have as much power as the British Parliament had, but with certain limitations, namely that the imperial government would continue to control foreign relations, manage trade, govern public lands, and determine colonial legislation. If this bold and unprecedented proposal had been made and adopted sooner, the American colonies might never have erupted in rebellion.However, even when the report was produced in 1839, it was widely criticized as a utopian document bound to weaken the British Empire.But the pressure of subsequent events soon compelled English statesmen to experiment with Earl Durham's new principles.Although the experiment was done cautiously and tentatively, it was an immediate success in British North America.Accountable government was then extended to other colonies with the same benefits.Thus, Earl Durham's ideas provided the basis for the creation of the Commonwealth of Nations in the decades following the ill-fated Canadian Revolt.Such is the historical significance of those uprisings and of the famous "Durham Report" which arose from them. Once former European colonies achieved independence or self-government, they went on to develop their own political institutions and customs; these varied widely, depending on factors such as geographical background and experiences of the former colony. The Articles of Confederation of 1777 were the first document prepared to govern the new United States of America.It is the masterpiece of liberals; liberals are sure: tyranny and centralization are inseparable together; the freedom of the people can be best maintained through the decentralization of power.Thus, the founders of the Thirteen-State Confederation allowed the central government jurisdiction over purely national affairs, leaving all other matters to the states.Article II of the Act states: "The States retain their sovereignty, liberty, and independence, and all powers, jurisdictions, and rights vested exclusively in the United States of America by the Confederacy of the Thirteen States at the time of Congress." This arrangement did not give the national government sufficient power to control the states and individuals.This became evident during the Great Depression of 1785-87; at that time, the federal government found it had little to do.In some areas, the unemployed organized and marched on state capitals to obtain relief through violence (as in the Shays uprising in Massachusetts in 1787).In other states, in areas where the underclass controlled state legislatures, laws were passed to ease debtors' burdens.These developments convinced conservative property owners that a strong central government was needed to stop "mob rule".All of this was the backdrop for the Constitutional Convention in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, on May 25, 1787. That document from Constitution Hall was crafted to suppress popular democracy.Its main feature is the establishment of a sound system of checks and balances.Four separate government agencies -- the House of Representatives, the Senate, the President and the Supreme Court -- will be selected through different methods, and they will serve different terms.The popularly elected House of Representatives is subject to several things; restrictions on suffrage, bicameralism, the presidential veto, and the Supreme Court.The bicameral system stipulates that the Senate can check the impulsive House of Representatives; as for the presidential veto, Congress can invalidate it with two-thirds of the negative votes of both houses; and the Supreme Court has judicial review of Congress.When sixteen weeks of debate ended on September 17, 1787, the Framers came to the Municipal Restaurant for their last supper together, with good reason to measure the fruits of their labor with pride .The Constitution united thirteen states into the first lasting federal government in world history. The framers stipulated that the new constitution would come into effect immediately once the special representatives of the nine states agreed to implement it.The selection of delegates to these meetings gave rise to the first national political movement in American history.On one side were the so-called Federalists: wealthy businessmen, lawyers, and landowners; they could gain the most from the new political structure.On the other side were the opponents of the Constitution: small farmers, workers, and artisans; they simply didn't need a document that gave them little political power.Although the latter constituted the majority of the population, they failed because they were scattered, unorganized, and unprepared.After intense debate, the Constitution was ratified; in the fall of 1788, the first president and first Congress were elected. It wasn't until April 30, 1789, that enough members of Congress arrived in New York one after another to inaugurate the first President of the United States, George Washington, who was unanimously elected by the Electoral College.These first officials faced staggering problems; there was no bureaucracy, no funding and taxation system, no precedents upon which the new government could draw.However, it took surprisingly short time for stability to be restored, and the federal government was quick to act.The strong leadership of President Washington, the recovery of the sluggish economy that had plagued the United States in the postwar years, and the Constitution itself all helped make the system work.While the Constitution provides for strong national leadership, at the same time, it is resilient and fully adaptable to changing times and circumstances. The Bill of Rights is an earlier example; it was accepted in 1791 despite the opposition of most wealthy people.The Act articulated a number of rights for citizens, including freedom of speech, religion and assembly, freedom of the press, and the rights of advocates. A unique contribution of the founders was to solve the difficult problem of federalism.They carefully distribute political power between national and state governments by minimizing competition for power.Should any dispute arise, an independent court system takes steps to decide it.In fact, one of the earliest resolutions of Congress under the new Constitution was the adoption of the Judicial Ordinance, which spelled out the duties and powers of the federal courts. The Northwest Statute of 1787 established that the new states should be established north of the Ohio River; they would be legally identical to the old states except that they would not adopt slavery.This ensured that all parts of the West would join the Union under the same principles and conditions when they were eligible to become states.Under these circumstances, the United States continued to expand its territory westward, from the Allegheny Mountains to the Pacific Ocean.It acquired large tracts of territory through various means: the Mississippi River Basin by purchasing the "Louisiana Purchase" from France; the Southwest Territory from Mexico through seizure and purchase; the Northwest Territory through negotiations with Britain; Acquire Alaska from Russia by purchase.A succession of states was established in these new areas, eventually increasing to 50 states to form what is today the United States of America. Political developments in Latin America during the National period were very different from those in the United States.The trend in Latin America is one of political fragmentation rather than political unity.Barriers such as mountains and dense forests separated one region from another, and a lack of transportation meant that these regions were often more connected to Europe than they were to each other.Centuries of isolation under Spanish rule fostered division by fueling separatist tendencies.The personal ambitions of individual leaders who would rather be famous in a small state than in a large federation must also be taken into account.Thus, the original eight colonies of Spain have now become at least 18 independent countries: the former Federal Governor of La Plata has become the independent republics of Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia and Uruguay; the former New Granada The Viceroyalty became the states of Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela, and Panama, and the Metropolitanate of Guatemala was divided into the independent states of Guatemala, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua. Chronic instability was another feature of Latin American politics during the National period, manifested in the frequent overthrow of governments by military coups.On the contrary, the United States still retains the Constitution of 1787, although this Constitution has been amended many times.In addition, the political situation in most of the history of the United States has been relatively stable; two political parties usually take turns to govern on the basis of being elected through regular elections.In Latin America, however, 20 republics have adopted a total of 186 constitutions since independence, an average of 9.3 per country.The rise and fall of governments is more frequent.Indeed, the Brazilian Emperor Dom Pedro II (reigned 1831-1889) is said to have said when he visited the Philadelphia Exposition in 1876 that although there were many new machines on display here, revolutions were taking place in Latin America every minute. More new machines than he's seen here. Almost all of these Latin American "revolutions" were revolutions in name only, though.A real revolution is one that brings about a fundamental change in institutions, a radical reconstruction of social and political order.Most of the so-called "revolutions" in Latin America were nothing more than the replacement of one military dictator by another, without fundamentally altering the existing order.This military interference in political affairs, which arises in part from the sharp class distinctions and popular apathy or resistance to politics that exist in many Latin American countries, has left a small number of wealthy landowners and high-ranking military officers Can manipulate the political world like a game.A succession of military and civilian leaders came to power with little regard for the aspirations of the people or the needs of the state.Not surprisingly, therefore, more than 80% of Peru's presidents are military, and Ecuador's military academies teach students: "The final step in a military career is the attainment of the presidency of the republic" In stark contrast to Latin America and the United States, British colonies gradually gained self-government while maintaining their relationship with the Empire during the 19th century.As mentioned earlier, the basis of this unique development is the principle of responsible government proposed by Earl Durham in 1839.The idea was too new and radical to be immediately accepted, but the British government did quickly implement his proposal to reunite the two Canadas. The "Canada Act" that came into effect in 1841 stipulates that the Canadian Union Parliament is composed of an upper house and a lower house; the upper house is appointed by the governor-general for life, and the lower house is elected on the basis of a wide range of suffrage.The Executive Minister will be selected by the Governor-General, which enables the Governor-General to appoint those who belong to the majority party in the House of Commons, thereby creating accountable government. For several years, the British government was reluctant to take the risk. In 1839, Colonial Secretary John Earl Russell pointed out why he believed responsible government impossible: "It is probable that the Governor-General, while receiving the Queen's order, is advised by his Executive Council, and The two are quite at odds. If he obeys orders from England, constitutional duties and the like fail utterly; but if he obeys the advice of his Parliament, he ceases to be a subordinate officer, Rather, an independent monarch. . . . I have thus learned of the insurmountable obstacles to the adoption of the principles (of responsible government)." Earl Russell said that the way out of this impasse was for both parties "to adopt an attitude of sensible moderation. Governor-General Only those claims of Parliament which greatly affect the honor or the interests of the Empire must be opposed; and for the sake of harmony, and for the pious adherence to the power of Great Britain, Parliament must be prepared to modify some of its measures." This compromise approach proved impracticable in practice, and governor after governor failed to prevent the demand for full accountability. In 1846, a new colonial secretary, Lord Gray, found it impossible to stop the accountable government advocated by Durham.In his order to the Governor of Nova Scotia he boldly declared: "...it is impossible for the House of Lords to long block the passage of certain measures which public opinion demands and which are proposed by the popular section of Parliament. . . . It cannot be too expressly admitted that a colony should continue to maintain a government contrary to the opinions of its inhabitants, which is neither possible nor desirable." Thus, responsible government was implemented first in Nova Scotia and then in Canada, thus successfully demonstrating Earl Durham's foresight.After a few years of responsible government, the Governor-General of Canada concluded: "I have had the idea that, on this continent of North America, before the Republic of the United States, it is possible to maintain relations with England and the British system, provided that Your words, which you have bestowed upon the institutions of England with generosity and trust. When faith is sincere, it is always contagious.  …” William Roy Mackenzie, leader of the 1837 Revolt, gave the most astonishing eulogy .On his return home after ten years of exile under amnesty, he said: "If I had seen in 1837 what I saw in 1848, whatever mistakes we might have made, I would have thought of that rebellion The thought shudders." Thus began a complete revolution in the relations between Great Britain and its North American colonies.As the principles of responsible government were extended to the other colonies, the British Empire transformed into the enduring Commonwealth of Nations that is still prosperous today. Since the Maritime Provinces, and indeed the United Provinces of Canada, were too small in population to effectively isolate themselves, further developments in Canadian politics—the formation of the Canadian Confederation in 1867—were necessary.In addition, the vast area of ​​western Canada with its unexplored resources is yet to be developed, which is Canada's responsibility.With the end of the American Civil War came the rhetoric of a great-power chauvinist American patriot, who set his sights greedily on the British colonies to the north, so that unification guaranteed not only economic but also military Safety.After a very short period of discussion, Canadian politicians unanimously reached a joint agreement, and the "British North America Act" was passed on July 1, 1867, establishing the Dominion of Canada.Over the next few decades, the Dominion expanded its territory westward into the Pacific Ocean, as the United States had done.Manitoba, British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan became provinces of the Dominion in 1870, 1871 and 1905, respectively. At the time, similar developments were taking place in other parts of the empire settled by Europeans.Colonization of Australia began in 1787 when an expedition of 750 convicts and 250 wardens arrived from England.With the loss of thirteen colonies, Australia was chosen as the new dumping ground for criminals.By 1793, free immigrants began to arrive here and established colonies in present-day Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania and even distant Western Australia. At the same time, groups of whalers, sealers and traders set out for the more distant New Zealand islands, and by 1792 they had repeatedly arrived there, although the local Maori or Polynesians were more advanced than the Australian aborigines. , Much more belligerent.By 1839, New Zealand had 2,000 immigrants, so London officially declared it a British territory.Over the ensuing decades there was a steady stream of colonists from Great Britain, largely due to the activities of Edward Gibbon Wakefield, an energetic promoter who founded a land development company to bring Australia and New Zealand send a considerable number of immigrants. By the mid-nineteenth century a series of colonies had taken root along most of the coasts of Australia and New Zealand, and, as their populations and stability grew, they began to demand the management of their own affairs.Turmoil for self-government was growing, as had been the case in Canada earlier, but Canadian precedent was now setting the pattern for the easy victory of the Pacific colonies. In 1850, the British Parliament passed the "Australian Colonial Government Act", which authorized the colonies to form their own parliaments, determine the right to vote, amend their constitutions, and set their own customs duties, etc., but all of these must be approved by the Queen before they can take effect.However, Queen's assent is readily available, following procedures that have been tested and proven in Canada.Similarly, in New Zealand, a statute was passed in 1852: the creation of six provinces with greater local governance and a grand assembly for local purposes.Four years later, Accountable Government was officially ratified in New Zealand. The ultimate task of uniting Australia's six discrete colonial territories into a federation was easier in Australia than in Canada, where there was no pressure from expansionist neighbours.But by the end of the 19th century, even isolated Australia was feeling the pull of outside influence.Foreign nations were annexing the Pacific islands that Australians believed were within their protective sphere.Also, the issue of Asian immigration was perceived as a threat to white supremacy in Australia; thus, a referendum in 1899 showed that the colonies were overwhelmingly in favor of federation. 190O年，英国议会通过一个法案，1901年1 月1回澳大利亚联邦正式出现在多民族大家庭中。 如前所述，南非殖民地是荷兰人建立的，但到1814 年时却归英国人统治。荷兰的农场主，即他们自称的布尔人，是一批顽强的、难以对付的家伙，他们要求的仅仅是听任他们在辽阔的内地牧放牲畜，象过去的族长那样统治他们的家族和土著奴隶。当英国人干涉布尔人对土著的所作所为时，布尔人便开始了1836年的大迁徙。一些人移居奥兰治河那边的地区，另外一些人则越过瓦尔河继续向前推进。但英国人继续要求对布尔人的统治权，并在东海岸的纳塔尔建立了一个由英国移民拓展的殖民地。 1853 年，开普殖民地获得了代议制机构，不过，责任政府制直到1872年才得到采纳；而纳塔尔到1893年时才达到相同的阶段。这两个地区之所以被耽误下来，很大程度上由于土著的人口优势；土著的待遇是帝国政府所关心的事情。此外，两个白人民族即布尔人和英国人之间的摩擦继续存在。从某一点上说，问题似乎已通过。布隆方丹协议，（1854）得到解决；在此协议中，英国人接受奥兰治河为他们的北面边界，并承认奥兰治自由邦和德兰士瓦这两个布尔人共和国的独立。但是，1871年，在奥兰治河北面的金伯利发现金刚石矿；到1890年时，大约开采了六吨金刚石，价值3，900万英镑。同样重要的是，1886年在德兰士瓦南部发现金矿。4年内，45O家公司相继成立，资本总额为110万英镑。 如此巨大的财富自然吸引采矿者从世界各地蜂拥而来，这转而又导致了使《布隆方丹协议》过时的纠纷。一方面，布尔人憎恨入侵者，企图限制他们的特权，而另一方面，英国政府正遭受着不顾《布隆丹协议》中所承担的义务、去吞并矿藏丰富的地区的强大压力。扩张主义最有力的鼓吹者是传奇人物塞西尔·罗得斯；他的一生从当一个身体虚弱的移民开始，以帝国主义的大富翁代表者的身份而告终。同早些时候的征服者一样，他以极端残忍的手段，首先在金刚石产地，然后在金矿矿山中积聚起巨大的财富。但是，对罗得斯来说，财富本身并不是目的，而是达到更大目标——扩大英帝国统治——的手段。“那就是我的梦想——全归英国所有”，当他在金伯利还是个小伙子时常向北朝着辽阔的非洲内地挥舞着手这样说道。 发财之后，他进入政界，成为开普殖民地的总理，然后，开始为实现他的梦想而制订计划并采取行动。由于伦敦政府犹豫不决，有些人接受罗得斯的计划，有些人则予以强烈的反对，罗得斯决定用暴力手段强行解决争端。1895年，他为一场反对德兰士瓦总统保尔·克留格尔的革命提供资金，并在他的朋友L·S·詹姆森博士的指导下，组织了对德兰士瓦的袭击。但革命和袭击都失败了，罗得斯不得不辞去总理职务。然而，这些事件进一步恶化英国人和布尔人之间的关系，直到最后即1899年使全面战争爆发。 布尔人凭借游击战术使战争拖延了三年，并迫使英国人调动了30 万军队来对付60 000至75 000布尔人。最后，布尔人不得不签订了承认英国的宗主权的《弗里尼欣和约》（1902年），但作为回报，他们也得到许诺，一旦情况允许，即可成立代议制机构。起初，英国人不愿让一个最近一直在为完全独立而斗争的民族实行全商责任政府制，但1905年执政的自由党新政府决定采取安抚与平等的政策。因此， 1907年，德兰士瓦和奥兰治河殖民地都获准实行全面责任政府制。次年，这两个殖民地同开普殖民地和纳塔尔一起为成立联邦开始谈判。一个宪法草案得到一致同意，英国议会将其编入1909年的《南非法案》。第二年，《法案》开始生效，南非联邦成为英国自治社区的成员。 显而易见，欧洲人在其海外殖民地中发展了各种各样的政治制度和习俗。这些制度和习俗的差异非常明显，因而，如果一位加拿大、澳大利亚或新西兰的政治领导人发觉自己在领导一个其派系利益、民族集团及大城市领导机关的平衡颇不稳定的美国政党，他会全然不知所措。如果他面对拉丁美洲的政治及其接连不断地出现的种种宪法和形形色色的军事首脑，他会更为手足无措。然而，在这些明显的差别之下，由于所有这些政治制度都源于欧洲这一共同发源地，产生了某些潜在的类似点。这一共同起源解释了各种法典——美国和英国自治领的盎格鲁-撒克逊法典，拉丁美洲和魁北克的罗马法典——的相似之处；它还解释了信奉立宪制度这一点，尽管严格信奉或避免信奉的方法各不相同。