THE DEBATE ON THE REGULATIONS OF ELECTIONS BILL.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue 87, 1 July 1881, Page 2

THE DEBATE ON THE REGULATIONS OF ELECTIONS BILL.

» (From the N. Z. Times.) The Postmaster-General in moving the second reading of the Bill remarked that it embodied the amendments moved when the Bill was before the House on previous occasions. The Bill would extend the hours of polling from ten till six o'clock and would abolish the show of hands at nominations. A clause was also inserted providing for the representation of minorities. jft-. Dr Wallis spoke to the motion. f r Mr George fully agreed with the extension of the hours of polling, while he con* tended that the showing of hands at hustings should be abolished, as it interfered with voting by ballot. Mr Seymour expressed himself as being in favor of the clause doing away with show of hands at the time of the nomination of candidates, but he failed to see where the machinery was to come from. He should like to ask the Government if in the event of a candidate withdrawing was he to lose his deposit, or if a candidate died before the polling day was his deposit to be forfeited? If these questions were answered satisfactorily he uw no reason to oppose the motion, though he candidly oonfeMed

he Bgyno valid redsdil whjr the exluMni Actfwild be amended. .. Mrnlurray objected to " plumping " fo candidates. He generally supported th second reading, but hoped the leasehol< qualification would be introduced ia th< Bill. Mr Oliver was pleased to learn tho Go vernment had seen fit to modify their view of last year. He was against the cutting up of cities into wards and making then different constituencies. He would vot< for the second reading. Mr Shephard objected to the inconven ience the House and the country would b( put to in the House bein* ad journed in tht event of a Ministry being turned out oi office, rendering it necessary for the new Ministry to go for re-election to their constituents. The time had arrived, _he believed, when a uniform qualification for electors should be established. The clause referring, to the forfeiture of deposits oc the part of candidates before the poll took place, might advantageously be struck out. He was averse to cutting up the cities into wards. The Bill, as a whole, was satisfactory, and he trusted that the Government would from day to day push it through committee as rapidly as possible. Mr Montgomery was in favor of an elector possessing only the privilege of voting for one district at a general election, and therefore he had prepared an amendment with that object in view, which he would introduce when the Bill was in committee. He should vote for the motion for the second reading. Sir W. Fox would like to see voting reduced to more a matter of business than it was at present. The show of hands meant nothing, and was really an open defiance of the ballotliox. He would go further, and would like to see it made penal for a candidate to canvass for votes, for at present the rolls could be, and were frequently pricked off, and hours before the poll closed the votes could be totted up, and the numbers of the votes polled given pretty accurately. He could see no injustice in allowing the majority to rule, and to introduce the system of minorities reminded him of hitching on a horse behind a cart which was going up hill and pulling it down again. Mr Stevens did not agree with the hon. member for Rangitikei, who desired to abolish canvassing. That idea was impracticable. He was glad to see that the Bill extended the hours of polling. Personally, he would like to see the polling hours extended to 8 p.m. He quite believed in the large cities not being divided, but he did object to the suburbs of their cities being tied hand and foot to the cities. He did not favor the minorities ruling, and would do all he could to oppose the clause providing for it, as he considered that minorities should put themselves into majorities. He conld not support the amendment as tabled by the hon. member for Akaroa, as he did not think that the Bill was the proper measure in which it should be inserted. Mr Speight, thinking that all opinions should be represented even if they were in a minority, would support the Bill. The fact was, that the privilege of recording their votes was not exercised as it should be. He considered that unless a person gave some sufficient reason why he did not exercise his privilege, his name should be struck off the rolls. The fact was, that at ffie^resent time the minorities did rule the country, inasmuch as in many constituencies the majority of the voters did not exercise the duty of voting, which was a duty they owed both to themselves and the State. Mr Moss believed that the struggle of he minority was an ennobling struggle, nd did incalculable good, both to themelves and the majorities. He quite supported the clause providing for the 'extension of the hours of polling, and as he thought that the minorities had no right to cometothat House and express their views, he should support the measure. Mr Harathouso desired to place on record his opinion that he liked the old homely system of showing hands at the hustings, for he had always looked upon voting by ballot as something like offering a premium to perjury, and be would prefer seeing the ballot-box abolished rather than that the showing of hands should fall into disuse. He did not think that employers influenced their men in which way they should record their votes and that being so he thought that it was superfluous to extend the hours of polling. He thought that the Bill was needless, and this being so he considered that the House would have been better employed if the Government had introduced some more needed measure in its Btead. Mr Turnbull expressed the opinion that the Bill was premature, as it might have been embodied in the Local Government Bill. The question of plural votinsr was a most important one, and individually he considered that no man had a right to more than one vote, for every man had the same and equal right to exercise his voice in managing the State and making laws for the State, no matter whether he owned estates or not. He felt sure the Bill would not become law as the whole question was hanging up till that of local government had been considered. Mr Reader Wood saw no occasion for the Bill at aIL The present law worked pretty well, as the people understood it. The process of nomination at present was very easy and simple. People conld attend or stay away. The candidate attended and answered all questions put to him. The Bill provided that a man may nominate himself by writing, or he may get two persons to nominate him, and thus he would never be before his constituents at all. Then, again, a candidate must deposit £10. Whj ? This was something like bribery. Why should a man be fined because he could not obtain the required number of votes ? Snrely every person should possess the right of offering himself to his countrymen without standing the risk of losing his £10 for merely expressing his opinions. He thought that it was a great mistake to hold the elections on one day, as be did not believe that sufficient men could be obtained to act satisfactorily as deputy Returning Officers. There had been many little fancy things introduced into the speeches. Mr Saundere expressed himself as being utterly opposed to the close nomination, the clause referring to which, he hoped, would be struck out when the Bill was in Committee. Mr Bunny trusted that the Government would adhere to this Bill, as he believed that open nomination was calculated to handover the whole of the representation oFEEeWony to the wealthy classes. He hoped tjiat the Bill would pass, and that the House would do all in their power to decrease the cost of elections. He was in favor of a man having only one vote, no matter how many lie possessed at the present time. _ He also trusted the Government would in the Corrupt Practices Bill provide for the closing of public-houses on election days, and the doing away of coaches and fours, and bands of music at election ■times." Mr Levestam remarked that the difficulty with regard to the objection of open nomination might be obviated by the returning office«Ltaking the nomination of candidates without calling for « show of hands. Mr Swmmob expressed himself m being

ia favour of ♦he representation of the minorities: He failed to see the ttso of inserting the silent notfilnfttibti System; as it could not put a stop to candidates making ppeeches all over the electorates. A show of hands was the true im lex of the feeling of a constituency, and he should like to see an election decided at the nomination, as a great expense would thereby be saved ; but he considered it only right that persons, both candidates and electors, should exercise the right to express their opinions in public, more especially as the country had never been asked to express their opinion upon the matter. He therefore trusted the people would be appealed to before the Bill went any further. He was opposed to the Bill. Mr Reeves looked upon the Bill as something for hon. members to worry. Something had been said about the election of three hon. members having cost them £1300. He should.be ashamed if he had to say that his election cost him £50. The Postmaster-general briefly replied and the motion for the second reading was agreed to.