THE COUNCIL DISCUSSING THEIR CONSTITUTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVIII, Issue 6164, 19 August 1881, Page 5

THE COUNCIL DISCUSSING THEIR CONSTITUTION.

[BY TELEGRAPH.—OWN CORRESPONDENT.] Wellington, Thursday. As bearing on your recent article on the inequality of representation of the various districts in the Legislative Council, there was to-day a short debate on tne matter at the instance of Mr. Reynolds. The number of members who expressed themselves as convinced of the desirability of a change in the constitution in the Upper Chamber are somewhat surprising, and though Mr. Reynolds' motion was lost by one in what was for the Council a full House, the result adds further proof to the conviction that an early change is inevitable. - Those voting with Mr. Reynolds may be regarded as voting rather in favour of some change in the constitution of the Chamber than in favour of Mr. Reynolds' particular motion. The following is an epitome of the debate

Mr. Reynolds moved, "That in the opinion of the Council the number of its members should bear some proportion to the number of representatives of the various provincial districts of the colony." He said very little judgment had hitherto been shown in appointing members of tho Council. (Hear, hear,-, and much laughter.) The members from the different districts now compared as follows with the proportion they should be in. Auckland had 7, but ought to have 9 ; Taranaki had 1, ought to have 1J ; Hawkes' Bay had 3, ought to have 1J ; Wellington had 11, ought to have only 5 one-fifth ; Marlborough 1; Nelson 2, ought to have 2s; Canterbury 7, ought to have 10 ; Otago 9, ought to have 11 J. While members could not bear an exact proportion, it was possible to distribute them more evenly than this. . Mr. Whitaker said that to pass tho motion would place the Council in a false position, by interfering with the prerogative of the Crown, which by the Constitution Act, could appoint whom it pleased. It was quite impossible that the motion could bo literally carried out, though it was reasonable some proportion should be observed. The Council could not dictate to the Crown. There were no reasons why an exact proportion could not be maintained.

Mr. Mantel said if some impartial tribunal could measure the mental capacities of the various members, the absolute inequality of power in the Council would be seen to be not large, Otago would be found to be fully represented. Mr. Reynolds himself was quite equal to three members and onethird, so where was the injustice? Auckland, too, was very well represented in the Council. What was wanted — evidently to satisfy Mr. Reynolds—was that some of the members should change their residence to the under-represented districts. He was embarrassed which way to vote, and, to relieve both himself and others from that embarrassment, he moved the previous question.

Dr. Me.yzies said there was a great deal of dissatisfaction at the present constitution of the Council. (Hear, hear.) It might well be discussed whether the tenure of appointment was not too Ions; in a country with a democratic institution. (Hear, hear.) A tenure for life was ineonsisteut with the general institutions of the country, and the Council would never possess the influence it should until it harmonised with all other institutions. There would be no change, however, unless it began with the Council. This aspect of the question might fairly engage their attention.

Captain Fraser said it was undoubted there was a feeling throughout the country, in which he shared, that some change was required. (Hear, hear).

Mr. Reynolds said the prerogative of the Crown was the prerogative of the Ministers of the day, who were to obey the wishes of the country. To talk of interfering with the prerogatives of the Crown was all moonshine. Ministers must carry out the will of the people; that was tho prerogative. He never expected to carry his motion, but con-, sidered he had done his duty in giving members an opportunity of discussing it. A change soon was inevitable, and therefore it was well Councillors should express them-, selves.

On a division, 14 voted for tho motion, and 15 for the previous question.