NOMINEEISM.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume XII, Issue 602, 17 September 1853, Page 3

NOMINEEISM.

(From tho Sydney Empirt.) *

Tho following letter from Mr. Robert Lowe will be regarded as containing a timely expression of opinion on the right side of a question of paramount interest to the people of this colony. The colonists will be glad to find the name of Mr. Lowe classed with tbe powerful array of distinguished authorities which we published in our issue of the 14th ultimo, against the nominee principle in the construction of an Upper House of Legislature. Mr. Lowe, however, adverts to tbe practical grounds of objection in this colony, which will enlarge upon suggestion, to the minds of our readers. 34, Lowndes Square, London, April 6, 1853My Dear Sir— l am very grateful to you for your kind congratulations, and hope my future career may justify them. Of one thing you may be sure, that I never have lost, and never will lose my interest in Australia, and that I am happy to have been the means of serving her, if not prominently at least effectually. I very much disapprove of the provision in the proposed Constitution, which appoints an Upper Chamber for life out of the existing members of Council. Such a proposal lowers the colony very much in the opinion of people here. Your present public men are not, as a body, worthy of so marked a distinction, or rather so close a monopoly ; and lam quite sure that if they are appointed for life, in a few years you will be heartily ashamed of them, and find that you have anticipated your resources by putting worse men in a place which might have been occupied by better. The scheme appears to me to be designed to retain power in the hands of the present public men and to exclude, or at any rate to render helpless for your good, the talent and respectability which every ship is carrying to you. A nation ought no more to squander its moral and intellectual than its physical resources.

You are about to re-create in Australia the family compact which, for so many years, oppressed Canada. If you must have a nominated Council, at any rate throw it open to every one, and limit the term of office to a few years, so that any evil you do may not be without remedy. But why have a nominated Council atf all? Opinion in this - country is in favour of two elective Councils, the upper one to be for a longer period, of more mature age, chosen from larger districts; and going out one-third at once so as to have a more permanent element in it.

I trust that before you receive this letter, the colony will have shewn that, having shaken off the interference of the Colonial Office in its affairs, it is not going to load itself with fetters of its own forging. If you wish to be hampered with a nominee Council, it is no part of my duty as a member of Parliament to con* travene you, but you will not, if I can help it, allow the present generation to sacrifice the hopes of their children by fixing them with a Council for life, chosen exclusively from your present public men. If you think the making these views known would do good, you are quite at liberty to do so. I ought to mention that on giving me the office I now hold, Government intimated to me that it was partly in consideration of my public services in Australia ; a fact which I trust will prove that an independent course is not always impolitic. Believe me. Very truly yours, Robert Lowe. ! Henry Parkes, Esq., Sydney.