Evening Post. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1878.

Evening Post, Volume XVI, Issue 283, 29 November 1878, Page 2

Evening Post. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1878.

While the growing antagonism of a very large section, of the communities in these Colonies to the Chinese and to their increase in our population is finding expression in various ways, in refusals of Europeans to work with, them and otherwise, public meetings are also being held strongly opposing the incursions of these Asiatics. In Australia the working-classes fear that if some prompt method of prevention is not resorted to the teeming millions of China will ere long push the people of European blood from their stools. There are some politicians in Australia who take np this question with the view of making out of it a political cry ; to gain favor with the multitude. It is a handy weapon useful for clamorous politicians, for it touches keenly the sympathies of the people. Such a subject should not become a tennis-ball of party warfare. It is too important ; for, much and quickly as we see it affects the present condition and status, of many thousands of white men (as witness the Chinese in California and in some parts of Queensland), yet, as bearing on the future of these colonies, the effect of a Chinese "invasion " would be a disaster for onr race. They do not become citizens, they are simply hordes of semi-slaves, subject to a headman, bound' by cerfcjjin laws which are alien to our own, and holding our Jaw in contempt. They are, and continue, an alien people in the midst of up, following alien customs, practising revolting immoralities, disregarding the laws of health, introducing evil habits and strange and foul diseases, for which all their manual dexterity and industry cannot possibly compensate. Then there arises the question. Is it right, for the so-called advantage of securing at a cheap rate the labor of a cheap race, to supplant the higher race of workers, people of our own blood ? Is it sound political economy to people I these islands and that Australian continent with a race of aliens, whose swarming numbers, crowded and pig-stye style of dwelling, witfr low class ot diet, enable them to underwork and outnumber the men of pur own. race? It cannot be. There is surely something higher to live for, and to strive to aobieve in these colonies, than that the power of capital and the combination of capital shonld be used as a lever to elevate aliens of this kind, and depress, the British workman. That is what is being accomplished in California, where, for example, Chinese headman employ a large number of Chinese coolies in the manufacture of boots and shoes, paying them very low wages, and pocketing themselves very large profits, while the difference in. the price of the manufactured article i* all bub infinitesimal as comp*red with the white maa's product by the time it reaches the public. A new reading requires to be given to Goldsmith's couplet : — 111 fares the land, to hastening ills a prey, Where Chinese swarms drive Britain's sons away.

j It would be amusing were it not raelanchojy to observe the miraculous ignorance of law and

common sense which some excited people are displaying regarding the fact that certain police constables had voted in the Mayoral Election of Wednesday last. These wonderful amateur lawyers build their house of refuge on a quicksand, which speedily 'wallows them up We say " amateur " lawyers, for we cannot conceive it possible for any lawyer who has passed even a preliminary examination on statute law risking what reputation he may have on such a thin foundation. It is with all apparent seriousness contended that the election can be upset, because three or four police constables voted for Mr. Drans field. From a clause in the Armed Constabulary Act we take the following extract, on which this absurd expectation is founded :—.: — . " It shall not be lawful for any commandant, inspector, sub-inspector, or other officer, or for any constable during" the time he shall continue in the Armed Constabulary to vote for !the election of a member of the* General Assembly or any Provincial Council, nor shall by word, message, or writing, or in auv other manner, endeavor to persuade any elector to Rive, or dlssutde any elector from giving his vote for the choice of any person to be a member to serve in the General Assembly or any Proeineial Council. And if any inspector, sulj-iuppector. or any other officer, or any constable shall offiind therein he shall forfet and pay the sum of £50, to be recovered by any person who will sue for the same by action of debt, to be commenced within six calendar months after the commission of the offdnce." The marginal note of reference (or "rubric," as it was technically termed, as in old times su<-b references used to be printed or written in red) is as follows :—: — "No member of the Armed Constabulary shall vote for or take any part (except in his official capacity) in the election of members of General Assembly, or of any Provincial or ¦ Municipal Council." It is argued that because the words " Municipal Council" appear in the margin, although not appearing in the text, which is the actual body of the law, therefore the law prevents constables from voting at municipal elections. Nothing could be more fallacious ; the text, the actual "word" of the law, cannot be altered or vitiated, and most certainly cannot be added to, because of any redundancy or omission in what is merely intended as a title or heading, for the sake of convenience of reference. The text alone is that which makes the law. To those who possess even an inkling of the first principles of jurisprudence, it is simply laughable to find men arguing that a statute, said to infer not only political disabilities, but actually involving a heavy pecuniary fine for a merely technical offence, shall be interpreted not according to the real written law, as laid down in the body of the act, but by some chance heading, or title, or note, wh'ch names a new offence unknown to the law itself. The thing is preposterous, and a small modicum of judgment should have caused the objectors to have preserved a discreet silence. Twice in the text occur the words "General Assembly" and "Provincial Council;" while no mention is made at all of " Municipal Council, " which has clearly no right in the margin, and its occurrence there cannot, under any pretext, be wrested into an alteration of the written law. It may be that the words were actually struck out of the bill in passing through Parliament, and by mistake retained in tbe margin. Would the margin in that case make the law? Is any man so far blinded as to imagine that any court of law would, on such a ridiculous reading, inflict a fine on any constable who voted on Wednesday ? If there be any such credulous person, let him sue one of these voters, and he will have costs and charges to defray, and got a little ridicule for his pains. On the particular point of the right of constables to vote at municipal elections, there can, therefore, be no doubt at all. If it is claimed, as it may be, that the Governor has made any regulations under the Armed Constabulary Acts, which orders that no constable shall vote at any municipal election, then we say that regulation is of none effect. All regulations of the Governor in Council must be in strict accordance with the Act. The Amending Act of 1869, which empowers his Excellency to make regulations, specifically states* that the " Regulations so to be made shall not be in any way repugnant to the provisions of the said Act: (of 1867), as amended by this Act, or of this Act." No regulation can take away a right or privilege which the law retains. Mr. Dransfield and his friends may sleep securely on their victory if this is the strongest battery that can be brought against his position. Since the preceding article was in type we have made further examination of the Parliamentary documents, and find that our conjecture is correct. The words "-Municipal Council" did appear in the oiiginal hill of 1867, as submitted to Parliament, but were struck out in committee, on the motion of Major Atkinson. - A similar deletion was omitted in the marginal note. This fact, however, in no way affects the absurd position of those wonderful interpreters of the law, who would choose the margin rathor than the text of an act. At a still later hour we received the following note from Mr. Dransfield, being a reply to a letter sent by him te the Clerk of Parliaments, Major Campbell :— To his Worship the Mayor of Wellington. Dbau Sir — In reply to your, -note of this morning, I beg to say that a reference to the journals of the House of Representatives will show that in Committee on the Armed Constabulary Act, 1867, on the 17th September, the 26th clause was amended by omitting the worrfs or municipal, clearly showing that tbe Legislature did not intend to incapacitate them from voting at such elections. The fact of the marginal note not having- been altered to conform to the clause i 3 a clerical error, and I imagine a matter of no consequence. — I am, &c, F. E. Campbell, Clerk of H. of R. 29 th November, 1878. This should convince the most sceptical, if any doubt was really entertained.