THE ENGLISH REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS SCHEME.
The tsmdon Hlomlnnl, stealing a march on its rein(«T»tx>mri«m, published what is understood to lie one o! a number of schemes for tho redistribution of seats. This particular one was under tim consideration of the Cabinet at the beginning of last month. The key-note of the whole proposal is tho desire to correct the present striking disparity between the representation of the population in counties and in boroughs. To deal first with England: Under tho existing system the ratio of members to inhabitants in the counties is one to 74,600, while in the boroughs it i* one to 41,000. To remove tills anomaly, the Government pnqjose, os a general rule, in assigning the seats to counties, to regard tho average ratio of population to representation in town and country combined. In other words, tho basis of imputation is roughly assumed as the criterion. But to this rule exceptions ore recognised, Tho more populous centres, lor instance, are to have feus than thoir proportional share of roombots. This is, at any rate, in accordance with one of tho laws which Mr Gladstone indicated os proper to bo observed. Tho anomaly of the Minority vote in counties having three tnemliont is to tie got rid of by breaking up counties which would otherwise have three members into separate division*, with single members for each division, or into two-mem bored divisions. By this arrangement, allowing for seats taken away, there would bo a not increase of 54 scuts, and tho ratio of mombors to population would be otto member to every 60,800 inhabitants, instead of tho one member to every 74,600 inhabitant* which the present order of things allow*. The change* contemplated in boroughs ore even more sweeping, though they do not involve so considerable an increase of representation. Here, also, population serves as the guide. Boroughs with a population of more than 400,000 are henceforth to have six members each, while boroughs with a population of more than 300,000 are to have four. The Minority vote is subjected to the same doom in urban as in rural districts, it being provided that boroughs with the larger complement of seat* shall bo broken up into wards. All boroughs with a population under 10,000 are to lose their right of distinct representation, while those which have a population not amounting to -10,000 are to be restricted to one member. In addition to this borough* of tho Cricktade class are to be incontinently merged in their counties. The constituencies thus condemned, plus the "corrupt” boroughs, which have either boon disfranchised, or are in suspense, place at the disposal of tho Cabinet 110 seat*; but tho gain will not provide adequately for the newly-created scats. The total representation under the operation of the scheme will be—counties, 231 j boroughs, 22®. In other word*, there will be (counting the universities) 460 English members, instead of 451—the present number. So far os the re-arrange-ments suggested in other parts of the United Kingdom are concerned, Wale* gets no increase. But, on the other hand, it escapes a diminution in its representation. Scotland also fares exceedingly well 5 the statistics cited, indeed, shoving a strong pri»a4claim to generous treatment. Between countie* and boroughs tho Northern kingdom gets an increase of 10 members, Glasgow securing three of the new seat*. But it is with Ireland that the Ministers who drew up the draft are prepared to deal with tho most indulgent band. All boroughs with less than 10,000 inhabitants Ate to be merged in counties, and all boroughs with less than 40,000 inhabitant* are toldse one member. Under the application of this rule a host of tiny constituencies disappear, but the seat* thus saved are given to the counties, and no county, however small, is sentenced to have fewer than two representatives in Parliament. Dublin, moreover, is to be treated os graciously as Edinburgh, and to have two additional members. Such is the gist of the new Bill.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LT18841129.2.9
Bibliographic details
Lyttelton Times, Volume LXII, Issue 7411, 29 November 1884, Page 3
Word Count
663THE ENGLISH REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS SCHEME. Lyttelton Times, Volume LXII, Issue 7411, 29 November 1884, Page 3
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.