The Daily Telegraph. SATURDAY, JULY 13, 1889.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 5576, 13 July 1889, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph. SATURDAY, JULY 13, 1889.

Although the speeches on the Representation Bill by Mr. Saunders and Sir Johu Hall have not boon reported in full, we learn from our Wellington contemporaries that they fully explained tho Haro system and put it in bitch a light that if rnudo public its adoption would be insisted upon. Tho Wellington Post of last Wednesday says :—" Tho admirable speech made last night by Mr Saunders in favor of tho system of proportional voting deserves tho widest Eossible circulation. Wβ rugret that we aye not space to give anything like v full report. It was a remarkably clear oxpositiou of tho system, and it showed how exceedingly weak nro all the objections which aye urged. If Mr Saunders , speech were circulated broadcast over the colony we believe that at tho next election an overwhelming majority would declare in favor of tho syetem, and it would be made a test question. The public would find no difficulty, under the guidance of tho member for Lincoln, in thoroughly understanding the system and recognising its immense superiority to that now inoperation." Turning to the Post's report of Mr. Saunders' speech we find that " Referringto the alleged complicated nature of the Hare system, ho pointed out that it was no more necessary for a voter to understand the machinery for the electoral calculations in order to onable him to vote than it wus for a nian to understand all tho anatomical relations of tho arm to the brain in order to enable him to raise his hand. After twitting Mr Ballanee with the bantering tone of his epeech in opposition to tho Bill, Mr Saunders passed on to the argument that tho Haro system would couduco to tho waste of votes, contending that it would not do so, as the number of electors who did not vote for elected candidates would be_ less than the quota required to elect a candidate. Another admirable feature of the Bill was that it would abolish 'ocaliwii, and enable members todeal with really large and important questions, instead of coining as mere pariah rcprcsentiitivcH, seeking to carry home parish plunder. The synteru would send to the llouso mem bers supported by a large majority instead of a minority, aa wus often tho caso at present. Thero were twtiity-ono members now in the House who had not uven received a majority in their own constituencies. Members would, under the proposed system, have to declaro themselves on either one side or the other —thero would be no moderate men on any question, and no tmch thiog as trimming, while the dejjrading , system of canvassing , would be abolished. It was objected that no unknown men could get elected, but what right had they to expect it ? Men must make themselves known before they could come to Parliament. In conclusion, he deprecated the condemnation of the Hare system by members who had not studied it, and urged that tho matter should bo kept boforo tlio public until they wore induced to send men to tho House to really represent them." T'io Now Zealand Timesgivosa more extended report of Sir John Hall's Mpecch. Kit- John expressed approval of tho Haro sybtem, but did not approve tho largu constituencies proposed in tho Bill. That was a committee objection; but ho did not think the Haro. system would evor becomo law unless that point was conceded and the made smaller. One of his reasons for objecting to large districts was that they would not give country districts that amount of representation which it was necessary they should have. If v concession was not imido in this way he should vote against tho Bill. Keferriug to the growth of popularity of the Hare system, he pointed to the fact that a proposal to elect some members of theOounty Councils under the English Local Government Bill on the proportional system was only lost by 11 votes. Ho submitted that under tho present system Parliament did not accurately reflect the mind of the people, but that the Hare system would do co. Hβ admitted that the present single

seat system, which he had himself introduced, had not been a success, and had many evils which he had not foreseen. Single seats undoubtedly dwarfed the thoughts of electors and elected, as fostering localism. He contended that it was perfectly right that one-seventieth of the population should have its representative in the next Parliament (in which there would only be 70 members), and pointed out that if the prohibitionists chose to elect Sir Wm. Fox for instance, they could do so. Dealing with objections to the Bill, he said they had in New Zealand a much more comp'icated system than Hare's, namely, the cumulative voting for School Committees. No difficulty had beon found in working that system. The objection that the Bill was a leap in the dark was a good old Tory nrgument, and came strangely from young Liberal members. He ridiculed the idea that we in New Zealand were to wait for Great Britain to give us a lead in this matter, and pointed out that the colony had led tho way for the Mother Country in many things. He maintained that the element of chance in the Hare system was infinitesimal, and absolutely nothing as compared with the chances of the present system. Aβ evidencing the latter, he said that in Auckland at the last general election there were 19 contested seats, and 12,801 votes were polled for tho present Government. The total number of members they would therefore bo entitled to on proportional representation was ten ; and they got 17 ! For the Opposition 10,855 votes wero polled, entitling them to 9 members, whereas they only got 2. In Canterbury (20 contested seats) 10,305 votes were polled for the Government, entitling them to 8J members, and they only got 4. For the Opposition 13,880 votes were polled, which entitled them to members, whereas they got 16. And these defects wero excused by tho theory that on the doctrino of chances the irregularities in one district would be counterbalanced by the irregularities in anothor. In conclusion, Sir John Hall expressed a hope that those who agreed with him in objecting to tho large districts would not allow that to induce them to oppose the system itself.