Hawke's Bay Herald. TUESDAY, MAY 27, 1879. THE READJUSTMENT OF REPRESENTATION.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 5392, 27 May 1879, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Herald. TUESDAY, MAY 27, 1879. THE READJUSTMENT OF REPRESENTATION.

Before the next general election there is one subject which must claim some share of attention from Parliament, and that is the redistribution of the eighty-seven seats in the House of Representatives. It is admitted on all hands that the present representation is very unfair to many parts of the colony, and more especially to those towns which have made such enormous strides of late years, doubling or trebling their population even within the existence of the present Parliament. On the other hand the West Coast and Nelson, as well as many thinly settled country districts, have more than their due proportion of' representatives. This is eminently unsatisfactory, and is anything but an aid to just legislation, which should have for its aim the securing of " the greatest possible good to the greatest possible number." When we consider the composition of the House, it is not difficult to understand how petty districts, going backwards instead of progressing, receive so much more than their due share of public money — political railways no longer excite wonder — log-rolling is admitted to be almost inevitable. It is also a noticeable fact that these districts as a rule send the worst class of representatives to the House. Our larger cities aud growing country electorates return many men who would do no dishonor to the Imperial Parliament — a few would even make their mark in that Assembly of the thought and talent of England. It is these men who have gained for the New Zealand Legislature the name of the highest among the numerous colonies of Great Britain. It is not they who encourage log-rolling and political corruption — it is generally the men who are the chosen of petty electorates, where local feeling absorbs or drowns every other consideration. In a thickly populated electoi*ate there are sure to be men of larger thought — true leaders of the people — and the larger number of the voters is in itself a great safeguard against wholesale coi'ruption. Any scheme of electoral reform must include the redistribution of representation on something approaching to a population basis. Theoretically the country could easily be divided into districts with the same number of voters in each, but in practice this would be more than difficult — it would be impossible. The first difficulty which would present itself would be the ever-shifting population. The districts which were even this year would be very uneven next, for one might, from the failure of goklfields or other local causes, be almost depopulated, whilst another would largely add to its population. No workable system could be devised to meet this natural change in the electorates. An equally strong reason against such a proposal is that all natural boundaries would be totally disregarded. Town and country would be mixed together in strange confusion, and that healthy local feeling which makes electors look upon the member for their town or district as their personal representative, and thus causes them to take a deeper interest in politics, would receive a death-blow. There must be some discrepancies, but there is no reason why a nearer approach to a perfect system should not be attempted, It is not always the party which has the country at its back which is returned to power under an unequal representation. Witness the last general election in England, where a large Conservative majority was returned, while the votes given for Liberal candidates were largely in excess. We can readily understand the Government shrinking from the task before them, for it is a difficult one, and will ci-eate many enemies but the good of the colony as a whole demands that the reform shall be made, and if Sir George Grey and his colleagues do not attempt to oarry it out others will be found more ready to do the work. The bill will cause a great deal of talking, and it is a moral certainty that numerous and vexatious amendments will be proposed with the object of retarding its progress, and, if possible, forcing the Government to withdraw it, so that the measure, if it is to be passed, must be introduced to Parliament when it meets, and not -when the session is half over.