The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, AUGUST 9, 1878.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5419, 9 August 1878, Page 2

The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, AUGUST 9, 1878.

Tan startling difference which was disclosed by the speech of the Hon. Mr. Ballanue at Marlon between the policy of the Government as stated by that honorable gentleman and the policy of the Government as stated by its chief, the Premier, in Parliament and on the stump, was noted at the time by our contemporary the “Timaru Herald ” in its usual clear, nervous, and concise stylo. “ Wo will take, said our contemporary, “ as best illustrative 'of the wide divor“gcuco of opinion between Mr. Bal- “ LANCE and his chief, the passage which “ deals with the question of manhood “ suffrage. That is the article with “which Sir George Grey begins, con- “ tinues, and ends his political creed. “Again and again he comes back to it, whenever he addresses the people. He “ wants a land tax, but the only way to “ get it is by manhood suffrage; ho wants “ to destroy ‘ the power of the run- “ holders,’ but the only way to do it is by “ manhood suffrage ; ho wants to reform “ the Civil Service, but ho cannot do so “ until ho is supported by a House elected “ by manhood suffrage ; ho bewails the “ abolition of the provinces, and declares “ that no appeal to the people was made “on the subject, because there was-no “ manhood suffrage. Everything with “ him turns on manhood suffrage, and

“ when he speaks of manhood suffrage, “ he means it and nothing else. Manhood' suffrage, with vote for each individual and one vote only, was part of the electoral reform which bir George Grey promised to the people of this colony. The iniquity of the existing, system was always illustrated by him in a description of the power which a man of the “ privileged class” might exercise in a county having nine ridings, in which ho might, if ho had sufficient property,; be able to exorcise 45 votes, whilst the “poor man” could only have one vote. Under the new electoral Bill, as under that which exists at present, a man of the “privileged class,” if ho have property, in every electoral district in the colony, might secure the right to cast 71 votes in tho choice of the members of the House of Representatives. Thenewßill, we repeat, can hardly be said to have more than the fnintest trace of tho great principle of the great “ stump ” policy of the Premier, and wo are glad tobe able to indicate and preserve that trace. We discover, or think we discover it, in the clause 21 of the Bill now before the House, which runs as follows It is hereby expressly declared “ that no person possessing more than “ one qualification in the same electoral “ district shall possess or exercise any “ greater or other number of votes “ within such electoral district than he “.would if he had possessed only one “ qualification.” There is already express legal provision to prevent any man exercising more than one vote in any electoral division. There is, indeed, on this point a prescribed question that may be put to the intending voter in the polling-booth, and he must answer it in the negative at his peril if he bo allowed to record his vote. It happens, of oom’se, occasionally that the same person finds his name twice, or more often, recorded on the roll of an electoral district. Sometimes, if he be an enthusiast, he will visit two or more polling-booths, and vote' at each, or he may be polled, without being present, by a Constitutional Association or other electioneering body seeking to preserve popular rights for all time, as has happened very lately in the North. The practice is not, however, defensible, except on the ground that it is necessary to support the Government, and is indeed generally admitted to be naughty as well as dangerous. The insertion of this clause in the Bill may be a solace to the Premier ; just the fragment of a “plank” of tho groat platform which his colleagues have ruthlessly smashed up before his face. It, however, asserts a principle, which is, perhaps, something ; but the fundamental principle of tho true democracy, that all should be represented in tho Assembly of the people, and not the voting majority alone, has, neither in the stump policy of the Premier nor in the electoral policy of, his colleagues as it is embodied in their Bill, received any recognition whatever. Supposing the Government Bill to he passed to-morrow, and a dissolution to take place as soon as the electoral rolls wore made up, and supposing that the Tadpoles and Tapers of office raised the cry of “Greyism” on the one side, whilst the friends of fairness of representation and of progress should raise the cry, shall we say, of “ Vogolism” on the other; and supposing that in many electoral districts “ Greyism” were victorious by’very small majorities, as has recently happened in Hokitika and Waipa, would it be fair to the “ Yogelites” if they happened to bo in a minority of one, of the voters in every electoral division, that they should be deprived of all voice in the Councils of the colony, and of all shave in making the laws or imposing tho burdens to which they must be subject. It has been shown that at the general election in Victoria last year, during a time of great political excitement, less than sixty-threa , per cent, of ‘ the registered electors recorded their votes. More than thirty-three per cent, abstained altogether from voting. The political apathy in this colony, except under the stimulus of tho Government whip, is notorious. At a general election here, under tho new rolls, noUmore than two-thirds of the whole number of electors on the roll would probably go to the poll, and a. House of Representatives absolutely Greyite or absolutely Vogelite might be returned by one-third of the eleotors j the majority of two-thirds would thus be left wholly unrepresented in the Parliament. The right of representation, says- Mr. Sterne, an American writer upon this subject, “is based upon the assumed right on tho part of tiro citizen to take part in the business of making the laws which are ■to govern him ; but as there are practical difficulties in the way of his doing so he must apper by deputy ; each elector is thus entitled to appear by deputy. Tho present machinery of representation, of voting, and of election, is devised to accomplish this end. It does not accomplish it ; it wastes from : onefourth to one-half of the votes of a community; to the extent that it does so, it as effectually disfranchises the citizen as if a positive law disqualified him from going to the polls ; it gives him the semblance, but deprives him of the substance of his right.” _ Our existing system has all these defects. The stump scheme of the Premier—manhood suffrage with one vote, and one vote only—would “enormously” intensify this injustice and unfairness; and, in so far as Mr. Stout’s Bill widens the suffrage by tho residential qualification, the existing evils .would be extended and fixed. Under these circumstances it is fortunate, wo think, that Mr. Whitaker has obtained leave to introduce his Parliamentary Representation Bill. It attempts to provide, by the application of Hare’s system, for tho direct, equal, and personal representation in Parliament of every elector, and not of the majority alone. Both projects, that of the Government and that of the honorable member for Waikato, being Before the House and the people, good must come of the discussion and ventilation of a question which is second in importance to nono as affecting the general weal. Wa have on a former occasion given an outline of the chief provisions of this Bill, and will reprint it as soon as possible. There is no pressing need to come to a decision on the question of electoral reform now; it may fairly bo left for tho consideration of tho whole people during the recess. It wo cannot improve tho existing system it is inexcusable to disturb it. The Government Bill is a transparent sham.