THE REFERENDUM.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CVI, Issue 12571, 5 August 1901, Page 4

THE REFERENDUM.

It is not' a . little singular that while* the principle of the referendum finds favour with a majority of the House of Representatives and has been approved by the electors from one end of the colony to- the other, Mr Seddon's Bill obtained but one solitary approving vote in the Legislative Council, and that, the vote, of the Minister of Education. If the measure had been one to provide for .the. of the Legislative Council it cwM not hav'c been quashed with greater Unanimity, and we shall probably not be far wrong if wo ascribe -the adverse vote largely to the fear thai the Bill was a first step towards the ultimate , disappearance of the Upper House. The Hon J. H. Twomcy, indeed, quoted the Constitution Act to show that the Council could not be abolished by "referendum, so thai the fear was manifestly present in his mind. We would not suggest that he is responsible for the- views of the journal with which he is known to b& connected, but the " Temuka ' Leader " has produced such quaint arguments against the principle of the Premier's Bill that it- would be- a- pity to ignore them. Id couples the Referendum with the Elective Executive and. the* Initiative in such ■a way as to suggest- that it really does not know what any one of them means. " We have so frequently discussed the Electors' Executive," it says, "that it is unnecessary to do so now; the Initiative l is not worth troubling about. It means that there are a few things relating to finance which'cannot be introduced except . by Governor's" message, but the subject is really of -verylittle importune?." Here we have absolutely the final word of the colony on two of the great political problem's 'pi the day. As the third is even now within the field of practical politics we have a full column devoted to a lucid and logical denunciation- of the reform. It steins that .the Supreme Courts cf Ohio and New Jerrey have decided that the representatives of the people have no right to delegate their powers to other people, and that therefore referendum is. illegal. The constitution or the American States is " sufficiently analogous to our constitution " to warrant the "Temuka Leader" in saying that." if it is illegal in America -to delegate the legislative power, it must be illegal in this country." That, of course, is absolutely conclusive. The. force of logic can go no farther, and henceforth the - constitutional decisions of the American Supreme Courts must be our guide in' determining what lawa we may or may not pass in New Zealand. It is just possible, of course, that the ."Temuka Leader" may some day.; rind a ; " sufficient analogy" between .tly-, constitution of China and that of New Zealand to warrant it in saying that black is, white, if its prejudices lay that way. Then, to continue this excellent piece of reasoning, this illegal principle, is simply not required. " Every three years th<peuple'fj representative's must go before their constituents and give an account o. their stewardship," and it appeal's to the "Temuka Leader" that, "that referendum is jiUt all'that is wanted at the present tim?.' Thus, we are told, the representatives of the'people "refer everything t. them." Simple-minded people havehitherto supposed that certain members cf Parliament have no constituents, and never give accounts of their stewardship, and a section cf the community has been asking rather persistently at what elections the people approved cf the famous £4O vete, 01 the Public Revenues Act, or,'for that matter, of Mr Twomey's appointment to the Legislative Council. Both Mr Twcrney and the " Temuka Leader " have unbounded admiration for M. Deploige, who once wrote a book to prove the referendum in Switzerland a failure. In that country, we are told, the &?*. • ,-, e d a

hindrance'■ to progressive legislation, isb that it ought to be really acceptable to the New Zealand Legislative Council. If iti came to a contest in Conservatism between the people and the Council, the result would not long be in doubt. The £at|J of the Referendum Bill proves that. The "■■Otago Daily Times" naturally concluded from tile solid opposition of Mr Seddon'o nominees in the Council that the. Government- was not sincere in introducing the measure; but without going quite as far as that, we may urge Mr Seddon to bear their action in mind when they seek reappointment.