THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 14285, 1 February 1907, Page 4

THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

TO the: £1)1X011. Sir,—Would you allow me to remind tho Trades and Labour Council that tliere is no power in Mew Zealand that can abolish the Legislative Council? Tliere is a feeling abroad that it could be done by mailing no .more appointments and letting it die a natural death. This is a mistake. By the Constitution Act power to make law in Mew Zealand is vested in tho Governor, the Legislative Council and tho House of Representatives, and no law is valid until it is concurred in by all three. That being so it can easily bo «een that if one of the three docs not exist no law can be made. Supposing the Lower House passed an Act and sent it to the Governor for his signature, ho could not sign it until it had passed the Legislative Council, and if the Legislative Council were dead no law could under any circumstances be made. It is, therefore, absolutely useless for anyone to look to letting the Council die a natural death by making no more appointments as a means of getting rid of it. Nothing on earth can abolish the Council except an Act of the Imperial Parliament so long as wo remain a part of the British Empire. But, though you cannot end the Council, you can mend it. Under the Constitution Act we must have a Governor, a Legislative Council, and a House of Representatives. We could not make a law without a Council, bux it docs not matter whether it is nominated or elected so long as we have it. Yon therefore, can mend - it by making it elective, but you cannot end it by abolishing it witnout an Act of the ! Imperial Parliament. Would the British House of Lords pass such an act? That is the question. Now, why I write is to ask the Trades and Labour Council this : Would it not bo better for them to turn their attention to what can be done than waste their energies on what is next door to impossible. The Council can. be mace elective, but the question ‘is how? There are two proposals before the public at present—one election by the House of Representatives, and the other election by the people themselves, f will take tho latter proposal, because I think I can suggest an improvement on it. If every two constituencies are put together as an electorate for an Upper House member it would be so largo that it would be impossible for any poor man to contest it. Tliat, in my opinion, is a great objection to the proposal, and my suggestion is to make members of me Legislative Council elective by members of the local bodies. Divide the colony into as many electorates as there are members, and lot the members of the local bodies _ be tho electors therein. By adopting this course you put an election contest within the reach of the poor man, and you remove the objection that popular election means, a duplication of the Lower House. Now, after yon have sent to Parliament a majority in favour of this and w.-e Lower House passes it, will the Council pass it. It will if you appoint the present councillors for life, on condition that they will do so. Mew, mark, I have ,recommended nothing. I have simply shown what cannot and what can be done, and how to do it so that the Trades and Labour Council may adopt practical, instead of impracticable means of gaining what they want. It would, I think, be better for the Trades and Labour Council to try to understand what the Land Bill means than bother about the Council, and if yon will allow me 1 will explain that measure in a future issue. One . word more, Mr Lee Smith was the

greatest friend and advocate the workers had in the Council. "Would it not ho a 'practical thing for the Trades and Labour Council to'ask why he has been excluded from it —I am, etc., J. M. TWOMEY. Temuka, January 81, 1907. TO THE EDITOR. , Sir, —In your issue of January 30 your correspondent “ A.C.W.” claims that the political parson,- the crank and the faddist hold sway in New Zealand. It is somewhat difficult to see how he arrives at this conclusion. T.io 1 Bible-in-SchooLs party were utterly routed at the last general election, the ! prohibitionists suffered a severe reverse j which would have spelt annihilation had not that great boon to mankind, the women’s franchise, operated in their favour, and the totalizator abolitionists are not any nearer the goal of their ambition tuen they wore before the election took place. Having disposed of the three chief schools of cranks and faddists, the electors cl the cclony may feel tolerably secure against the others, which are too insignificant and small in numbers to begwortfiy of mention. Either the peopleware capa- j ble of controlling their own affairs cr , they are not. If they are capable the ! House of Representatives is ail the governing machinery they need, and if they are not capable botli Legislative Houses want abolishing when New Zealand would be converted into n Crown colony under the central of a Governor. To pay one group of legislators to make laws for us and then to give another group power to undo everything the first group have done is simply throwing money away and making a mockery of our system of representative government, especially when the second Chamber is not elected by the people of the colony but by the Premier. Sir Joseph "Ward’s action in making fourteen appointments to Ihc Lcgis’ativo Council in the face of the well-known fact that a majority of the people are demanding its abolition is another ilhi;trat’on of the folly of working peoolo putting their fahSi in the Liocral party and depending upon an undemo-

cratie Premier to carry out reforms that lie is not in sympathy wi h. As to the Hon John Barr’s app.intment. the only thing ho h?s done to distinguish him-elf during his brief political carter in Now Zealand was to nrtemnt to wreck the Tnd'pmdeut P litical L hour League, which represents the aspirations of the brainy and intelligent portion of the workers.—l am, etc.. . January 30, 1907. I\YM.