(Evening Post. SATURDAY, JUNE 25, 1881. THE COMING REPRESENTATION BILL.

Evening Post, Volume XXI, Issue 147, 25 June 1881, Page 2

(Evening Po st. SATURDAY, JUNE 25, 1881. THE COMING REPRESENTATION BILL.

? In referring to the programme of Parliamentary business for the next week or two, we mentioned yesterday that it was understood the new Eepresentation Bill would not be introduced until after the Financial Statement and Local Government proposals have been brought down. That is to say, not before the week after next. Although nothing is yet defini'ely known as to the details of tho coming bill, it may be possible to form a fairly correct idea of its general provisions. It will, wo believe, proceed on much the same line 3as the bill of last year, adhering to the number of Enropean members for the House of Representatives then adopted, namely, ninety, and to the general plan of distribution than laid down. The census just takon will affect the schedules rather indirectly than dirootly. Of course the " unit of representation " will bo a higher figure than betore, owing to tha increase of population. In other words, the -number to bo divided by 90 is 489,000, instead of 414,000, but this leaves unchanged the main principle that tho SO members shall be

divided among the whole population as nearly equally as may be, having due regard to particular local circumstances and community of interest in the electoral district as constituted. The increase of population has a3 a rule, been tolerably even throughout the Colony. In the North Island it is about 20 per cent, for the provinces of Auckland and Hawke'o Bay, and nearly 25 per cent, for Wellington. In tho South Island, Marlborough, Canterbury, and Otago show a similar increase. In Canterbury it i 3 a little more, and in Otago a little less than 20 per cent. It will be Been that this leaves unaccounted for the provinces of Taranaki, Nelson, and Westland. It is in tho3o districts that tho principal alteration, so far a3 the bill is concerned, has taken placo. A calculation made for last year's bill on the old basis of population demonstrated that Nelson is now over-repre-sented to tho extent of 2"8 members— or let us say nearly three, to avoid cutting up hon. members into either vulgar or decimal fractions. Now the increase of population in Nelson has been very small, only about 6 per cent., and bo the case of Nelson is made rather worse than before, as against the other provinces, lhe majority of which have an increase of 20 per cent. The result is that the over-representation of Nelson becomes aggravated, and the proportionate excess may be set down at a little more than three members. Much worse is the case of Westlind, which while last year having only about a quarter of a member too much, this year has a materially decreased population, tho falling off being nearly 15 per cent. This places Westland in the position of having fnlly one member too much. Lastly, we find that Taranaki, which last year was ever represented to the extent of about one member, has since had an increase in population of more than 50 per cent. — namely, from 9450 to 14,3G9 — which considerably reduces the present discrepancy between population and representation. Thia will probably lead to some revision of the proposed boundaries, so as to equalise the new districts, but the relative positions of the North and South Island remain practically unaltered. In the North, Taranaki occupies a greatly improved position, and her excess of representation to a great extent disappears. In the South Island, Nelson and Westland are in materially worse case than before, and probably will have between them to lose another member in addition to those proposed to be taken away under the former bill. However unwelcome this may be to those localities, it is inevitable if the principle of adjusting representation to population be honestly adhered to. Wellington remains entitled, as before, to an extra member. There was one very objectionable feature in tho old bill on which we animadverted strongly at the time — we refer to the exception made in the case of Wanganui to the otherwise unvaried rule of single-seated constituencies. Wanganui alone was to return two members, notwithstanding that the population of that electoral district was considerably less than that of other districts which were only to have one member — Te Aro, for instance. We have reason to believe that this anomaly will not re-appear in the new bill now under preparation, but that the boundaries of that district and of those adjacent to it will be re-arranged, so as to give districts of approximately equal population, ¦with ono member to each. This will be a manifest improvement, and will remove one very marked anomaly which disfigured the former measure. At tho same time, while we decidedly objected to an exception being made in the case of Wanganui alone, and to that place receiving double tho representatives to which it was entitled on the snore of population as compared with Wellington, wo are still of opinion that the hard and fast rule of single seats is a mistake, notably so in the case of this city. We are only to have three, instead of four, to which our population entitles us, and we are prepared to be content with that instalment of justice. But we strongly disapprove the plan of subdividing this city into thioe districts, instead of giving us three members for Wellington, and so preserving its natural community of interest. Wo can readily believe that a similar drawback exists in other places, whose community of interest would be lost by the proposed subdivis ; on, and we hope that this aspect of the Ministerial proposals will receive very careful consideration at the hands of Parliament before the Representation Bill is allowed to pass into law.