The Lyttelton Times.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XII, Issue 703, 3 August 1859, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times.

C .J Wednesday, August 3. We publish in another column an article from the ' Hawkes Bay Herald' of the 18th ult. on the subjects considered in Mr. FitzGerald's letter of the 12th of March last. The question of, the ' New Provinces Act' is one which immediately affects Hawkes B,ay, and it is natural that the people of that district should' defend the act whereby they sprang into political existence as a province. But while we fully agree with the c Herald' as to the necessity which would under any circumstances have made Hawkes Bay a separate province, we need not by such agreement be led into an approval of the principle on which the New Provinces Act was framed. It does not at all follow that, because' the Canterbury members in tlie House of Representatives opposed the passing of that,' Act, they would have opposed, after good cause shown, the creation of Hawkes Bay into a separate province. These are two distinct questions. ■ We agree with Mr. Fitz Gerald when he calls the New Provinces Act an uneonstitu- | tional measure —taking the word ' constitu- I tional' in its -broadest sense—but we dissent altogether from .the ' six colonies', theory. If we understand rightly the feelings of Canterbury men, they are honest and uncompromising believers in local self-government as to local--matters. So long as the existing provincial centres can administer local affairs without detriment to outlying' districts, so long let the present division of provinces stand. Under such circumstances it will be cheaper and better to leave the strength of the provinces undivided for the. purposes of immigration and large public works. But , so soon as there is a just ground of complaint that the principle of centralism is in the ascendant —so soon as a district which has become wealthy and populous finds that itsinterests are neglected and its money spent by a Council in which it is not fairly repr'e-1 sented—so soon that district, should have a i separate local administration!; At first, while 'tlie divisions are large they will be called, provinces; but by and bye, as the' country becomes populous -and' communication 'improves, the division by provinces will become "as obsolete as the division of England at the; time of the Heptarchy. Gradually tlie country, will be covered with municipalities, which i wilb keep alive amongst the people the old; English localising influences, whilst the power' of the stato as a whole is forced round by the consciousness oi every community in New Zealand thai it possesses in itself the essence of real self-government. But we are looking some distance into the futuiv. For many years there need not probably be many changes. And while com-

munication is comparatively so infwquent, and the population so sparse, it is for the interests of self-govern merit that the provinces should have a large share of power. _ We differ from the ' Herald' in its view of the intention of the Constitution in this respect. The text of the act itself is better authority than Sir John Pakington's despatch; and there is no denying the fact that powers fire given to the provinces by that act far exceeding* tliose of any municipality. It is true that by law the executive ■ functions of the Superintendents were left undetermined ; but .it was found that, in order to give effect to jtlie evident intention of the constitution, large executive powers had to be vested in the Superintendents by local acts. And it is true that some of the provinces went too far in their Empowering Ordinances; but, generally speaking, the large powers exercised by the Provincial. Governments could not have been otherwise vested without great detriment to public interests. New Zealand is still in the provincial stage of its history. This is necessarily an undeveloped stage. As the colony progresses, and new, settlements spring up, it does not become the older provinces to stand in the way of a more and more perfect development of the resources of these islands. But there is a riglrt and a wrong* way of doing everything. We believe with Mr. FitzGerald that every new division of the colony ought to be considered on its own merits in the General Assembly of New Zealand. It is true that abuses may arise in this, as in every other ■human arrangement; but we are confident 'that: the' abuses would toe .less than those likely to arise out of the system legalised by the New Provinces Act. Any division which i would really be for the good of the country I and of the district petitioning for separation would in the end be carried against interested opposition'; while petitions got tip on a sudden cry and without sufficient cause would be deservedly dismissed. Put by the present act the power is not even left, as'the ' Herald' assumes, in the hands of the Governor in Council —then, at least, some one would be responsible—for the Governor in Caun-; cil is compelled to endorse the orders of a certain majority of electors of a district under certain circumstances. We do agr.ee . with Mr. FitzGerald when he calls the principle of this act most unconstitutional. • With respect. to the province of Hawkes Bay; it has been long evident that .its separation was only a question of time, and it is almost certain that had sucli separation been discussed on its own merits last session it would have been carried. Had the establishment of the new province beon thus effected, Wellington would probably have taken the matter with more equanimity. No disinter- ! ested person can read the * Herald,' or hear of what is going on at Hawkes Bay, without congratulating the new province on the energy and new life springing from the possession of self-government. But a disinterested^observer would be better pleased did he know that, with that power of self-government and at the time of obtaining it, a settlement of accounts with the parent province had been insisted on. We are very sure that Hawkes Bay means fairly by Wellington, arid that no difficulty will be thrown in the way of such a settlement. But this question ought not to have been left as a bone of contention. Its solution shonld- not have been abandoned, by the General Assembly. We should be very soiry to see the New Provinces .Act disallowed now, after it has been acted on ; because a disallowance.would create great inconvenience without commensurate advantage. No one believes that Hawkes Bay can be made to retrace its steps; and the most serious injury would be done to that active young community by throwing its affairs into temporary confusion. Let the young province stand and flourish; it is a necessary and healthy, consequence of our provincial system of Government; but let us find for the future a better machinery for erecting new settlements, as from time to time ,it may become necessary, into independent provinces.