The Press. MONDAY, JANUARY 6, 1879.

Press, Volume XXXI, Issue 4194, 6 January 1879, Page 2

The Press. MONDAY, JANUARY 6, 1879.

The frequency with which the Disqualification Act has been amended, would imply that it is one of the most important .measures whichvoccupy a place"on our Statute Book. As we have shown, scarcely a session passes without an alteration * t>f some ; * kind or * other being effected. In four years we have had five Acts, and next session will in all probability not be allowed to come to an end without' an attempt .being made to amend the law now in force. The question, naturally arises whence the necessity for these frequent changes? Is it not possible, in fact, to secure the object aimed at, in an entirely! different and fat more satisfactory manner P u •'

The trnth_ is, we .are working at the wrong end altogether. It has often been Said that people cannot he made sober by Acts o_ Parliament. It is quite as true that a Legislature cannot be made pure by legal enaotment. If a .Government is , ready itfjbribfe, and members Are ready to be corrupted, all the enactments in the world will not suffice to preserve the purity of Parliament Our representatives, will be exactly what their constituents make them, li the electors send tip only honest men they wilt have an honest Parliament. If they choose to return members on whose political integrity they feel that, they cannot place reliance, they must expect to have a Parliamentof corrupt men. It is not by stringent legislation, it is by the exercise of prudence and common sense in our elections that we shall secure the continuance of those qualities which have hitherto placed the General Assembly of New Zealand in the first rank of colonial Parliaments. How is it that thje House of Commons enjoys the respect cif the country and an absolute freedom from any suspicion of the purity of its motives j? That it has not always been so is a matter of history, but nnder the increased liberality of the franchise, the great body of the people has learned to recognise that on the wisdom and character of the House of Commons the safety of the country depends. It must be admitted that thp constituencies in England have certainly at their command great numbers of men of independence of character and good rephtation from'whom to choose their, representatives. It is not hnfrequently • alleged that in thisrcolony similar oppdr. ~'ia_r_es' : -o". not exist.'"• But it isfdifficuljb tp ijbe_eve ; ttat a were our electors thoroughly in earnest in raising and maintaining'the tone of the legislature,, any, such "want of suitable iCa»<_dates would be found to exist.' .'-> j We do not say that the Disqualification Act can Be got rid - of —{together. - 1 li? i& undoubtedly an, eyiL but perhaps a necest sary one. "We do maintain, however, that it is hopeless to keep amending it witn the object of preventing the possibility of : corrnptibn. We -regret that our Legisj laturo felt called npbn to meddle with the Act of 1858- - According to that ! measure the cause of disqualification was "confined to _je class of persons who were in the actual service of the Goyernment of the coloay.: Thus confined, the law emliwf_.e_ might assent without feeling that we were casting _tty'-re_sc—on -on the character of our public men. .It was obvionsly proper, on the one hand, that a, Ministry depend Jor their retention of power upon the approval of their own subordinates, and, on the other, that thejir officers should not be placed in a position in which their most powerful interests might easily be iq conflict with their duty. As i'egards the Civil Service,; the idea of any member of it occnpying a seat in either House of parliament is; on the facs of it, not to be thought of. But when we once go out-; side of this limit we have not-bijg *tq guide us. All are liable to be tempted. An invitation ■ to the Premier's dinners, or some other equally potent influences, may often 'Seryej to avert a defeat or g_ia ; a victory, 1 when the offer of anadvantageotts ; c<m-i, ■tract would hay& exactly - tfce oppb-> site effect. .-.But who «ea_; forbid the exercise of social influence? And even in the matter of eonta_cts ; . it is soon found to be possible to go fob far. In! order that iha law should not"? be evaded, it is necessary to attach the disqualification to the indirect, as well as to the 1 direct, receipt of the benefits derivable. If tins principle has to be carried to its logical conclusion, the smallest shareholder in a large company holding -_ contract frrim .Government, would be disqualified. Ifeverthelesa, it has long been admitted that contracts with joint-stock companies should be excluded from the disqnaUfying effect attaching to contracts generally. Advantage"*could, in many cases, be easily taken of this exemption to effect a transformation jacder the facile clauses of the Jointitook Act, of what are effll, pi aII «%»*£ and purposes, trading 1 partnerships. It is to say that #mstransformed their j&iits*sferH are #ot legally exempt from'dhsq-SB-cation,, _Mi 4 _wa the rjght to be a member of I Parliament, w.hse folding Governmeat contracts, is made to not upon the-store of the being! | snoh as to preclude the liability to corrupt t influence, but upon the technical legal. fi«_t -in- which the mei-bar of F-riia-ment shares the profits resulting from it. Sp£oe A rfß 'Dee- Jjt«t.»l;;

has nothing substantial to support it, and in consequence whenever a now Disqualification Act comes before the Legislature this parricular provision is the unfailing subject of discussion. It is curious to observe that in 1870 when this disqualification was first introduced into New Zealand legislation, the reason given for it was not, as mightbave been expected, tho undue influence which the Government might exert over the contractors, but the reverse. " Whereas," says the Act, "it is expedient to prevent " persons concerned or interested in con- " tracts affecting the public service.-of " the colony from the of " w exercising undue influence wit_ or on " the Government of the colony,'&«." This is certainly the first time we" have heard of Ministers being prohibited from giving' contracts to members of -Parliament in order to save, themselves from the pressure of u_due influenced Thus nine years ago it appears to have been thought neceso saty to rput * bar to toe bribery of Ministers by contractors: Now _ what seems to be necessary is to discourage, the corruption of membeß? of Parliament by Ministers. ... . ~ It must -now, we feat, be taken for granted that the holding of Government! contracts by members of the Legislature is a possible proceeding. Any members desiring to retain their seats and yet to preserve to themselves tho advantages of Government contracts have but to arrange with their partners to conduct the busi- , ness for them. All they have to dois to form their business into joint-stock com- ! panics. It is only a question of the amount of the contracts being sufficient to make it worth their while. Thus armed against personal danger, they are free to act as they please in the House. They can even, if they choose, exhibit the greatest possible interest in the purity ofParliament by airing their pharasaic purism and taking a prominent part in ensuring that no other class of membersj shall, if possible, obtain a shilling from the public purse. But we have said enough to show hdw J easy it is to evade the spirit, if not the letter, of the 'kw which disqualifies the .< holders of contracts from seats in the Legislature*,, j ;

We do not really believe that our reTjresentatiyes a,re all looking after profitable contracts, or mug appointments'in the Civil Service, but this is really what we- make our Disqualification 'Acts say for us. Were ■we to interpret the character of- our legislators by those Acts we should naturally infer that the Parliament of New Zealand had found it needful to engage itself in an unrelenting struggle against the very demon of corruption, that it was found almost impossible* toframe language which would pot be evaded, and that every succeeding session served only to furnish fresh evidence of thftiapparent hopelessness of the task. It is to be hoped that the series of Disqualification Acts may now come to an end, and that for the future the people themselves will take care to preserve the purity, of Parliament by returning only those members to it who can be trusted to act as honorable men should do.