The Press. TUESDAY, JUNE 25, 1889.

Press, Volume XLVI, Issue 7345, 25 June 1889, Page 4

The Press. TUESDAY, JUNE 25, 1889.

A-THot/qh the Electoral Bill is a measure which Ministers would hardly be justified in treating as a party question, it is to be hoped that every effort will be made to have it carried this session. When Bills dealing with the representation come before the House all party lines are necessarily broken up. It was the case in 1881, and in 1887, and the same result may be expected again when the ElectorsBill, about to be introduced by the Colonial Secretary, comes on for discussion.

There are many reasons, it appears to ujs, why the queetic- of reform should be dealt with at the present time, and why the main principles of the government measure should be accepted by the Legislature. When the single member principle was adopted in 1881, there were many, ourselves amongßt the number, who regarded the change as likely to prove highly beneficial. It was hoped that the standard of the House of Representatives would be raised; that many qualified men, who had hitherto abstained from seeking a seat in Parliament, would be encouraged to offer themselves. But no such result has followed. There are many bright exceptions to the general rule we are glad to say, but it is an acknowledged fact that there are far too many who have found themselves within the

walls of Earliament House who cannot by any stretch of imagination he regarded as fairly representative of the average intelligence of the constituencies. Petty local considerations have in many instances led to the return of men who'have neither the knowledge, capacity, nor experience to deal intelligently with public affairs, and in these instances when really creditable representatives have been elected, they have not —-frequently only secured their seats by very narrow majorities. Now we have a higher opinion of the intelligence of the bulk of the electors than to conclude that the members to whom we refer fairly represent the districts for which they sit. The splitting up of votes and similar causes have brought this result about. A system which at the last general election brought about the exclusion of Sir Robert Stout, Mr. John Brtcb and Mr. Rolleston can hardly be regarded as perfect, and any proposal which aims at doing away with such anomalies should have the support of all well-wishers of the colony.

The modified Hare system, a sketch of which appears in another column, is eminently calculated to do away with the anomalies to which we have just referred. It would widen the field of selection, and make it almost a certainty that the best men would be elected, apart altogether from their political opinions. In Otago and Southland, for example, there would always be a sufficient number of voters who would take care that Sir Robert Stout had a seat in the House if he were a candidate, and the same remark would apply to the rest of our most prominent men in other parts of the colony. And it is eminently desirable that such should be the case. Although at a general election the victorious party naturally rejoice over the defeat of their prominent opponents, and during the contest strain every nerve to win the battle, it is not a good thing in the long run that our leadingmen should find themselves excluded from the councils of the nation through some local and temporary cause, while inferior men on their own side are returned. Assuming that after any general election the House selected" is fairly representative of public opinion—a rash assumption tc make, we may add—the present system does not give us the best men on each side. The votes may be there, but the best representatives are not. The great merit of the Hare system is that it would not only ensure, in the House, a fair representation of the different shades of opinion in the country, but it would result in those different shades of opinion being represented by the ablest men on both sides to be found in the colony. It is urged againsc the system that it would tend to exolude poor men, and give over the representation exclusively to the rich. How this can be reasonably maintained we are quite unable to understand. The system may exclude an inferior man, and one who has no business to be in the House at all. But that it would give wealth, as wealth, a preponderating influence is ridiculous. One of the great evils of the present system is the trouble connected with canvassing. As long as wehave single electorates itis possible and practicable to canvass the whole of the electors, and the mere fact that it can be done is an advantage to the rich man rather than the poor one. The rich can give then* whole time and attention to a minute canvass of an electoral district, whereas a candidate whose time is otherwise engaged is precluded from doing so. The latter has to depend mainly on his platform utterances. Under the Hare system both would, in this respect, be placed on the same footing. Candidates would have to resort to public speaking for success with the electors. Canvassing would be practically impossible. If the proposed ohange brought about -, this result alone the amendment -J n the l aw would be well worth effecting. It is also contended that the proposed system would exclude practically unknown men frjm the House for ever. The young and rising colonists, it is said, would havenochanoe of a seat.because they would be unknown, in connection with politics, outside their owtr neighborhood. This contention, it appears to ns, is easily disposed of. Under the Hare system a capable man would have even a better chance than at present of securing a seat. Under the existing law new men have to make themselves known to a constituency before they can be returned, and in the act of doing so necessarily bring themselves before a wider area. Many a new candidate, who has made a brilliant first appearance before a constituency, earns for himself the reputation of being a rising man in many other electoral districts. Under the Hare system the votes he would obtain in his. own neighborhood and those that would be given to him at a distance, would be amply sufficient to secure, for him the *'quotas" sufficient to make his return safe, whereas, under the present system, he might actually be defeated. Instead of being a drawback to new and capable men the Hare system wohld be exactly the reverse. But it would give the deathblow to parish politicians and all those representatives who devote their time to cultivating a purely local support. Whether tha House will consent to give the system a trial is a different matter. Its opponents, unfortunately, are not likely to be confined to those who may be expected to vote against it for selfish reasons. There are others who will resist it on the ground tbat it is an experiment, and as they object to experiments of any kind, they will vote against it. We think those gentlemen are mistaken, and that they are standing, in the way of what would be one of the most important reforms which could possibly be effected. To our mind there is rjo experiment about it. Its results" aire so self-evident that it puzzles us to know why this attitude has been taken up. The other kind of opposition to the scheme, to which we have already referred, is natural enough, but without the aid of what may be called the conservative element in the House they would be in a minority. We hope when the measure comes on for debate* that it* will be eonaidered ia & perfectly impartial spirit, and with an earnest desire to elevate the standard of Parliamentary life in the colony.