The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) TUESDAY, JANUARY 7, 1879.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5546, 7 January 1879, Page 2

The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) TUESDAY, JANUARY 7, 1879.

Sir George Grey can lay the flattering unction to his soul that there arc Colonies besides New Zealand in which the political high priests occasionally play the fool. The deputation, embassy, commission, or whatever it should be properly entitled, from the Government of Victoria to the Imperial Government is on its way home in the mail steamer. Because Mr. Graham Berry could not succeed in forcing his veiy peculiar scheme of reform on the Upper House of the Victorian Legislature, he determined on the altogether unprecedented course of going to England, and laying his grievance at the foot of the throne. In other words, he would ask the Imperial Parliament, through her Majesty’s advisers, to make certain alterations in the Victorian Constitution which the Victorian Legislature or some branch of it —had declined to entertain. The history of this apparently big, but in reality very little, move on the part of the Victorian Premier is of interest to the people in New Zealand, on account of the avowed intention of Sir George Grey to pick out some convenient opportunity during the next session to fight a pitched battle with the Legislative Council. Ha will, we suppose, choose both time and subject, and then—we shall see what we shall see. The constitutions of New Zealandand Victoria differ in many respects from each other ; but, perhaps, the greatest divergence of plan is to be found in the methods whereby seats are filled in the respective Upper Houses of the two Colonies. With us the Upper House is a nominee body, each member being appointed by the Crown for life ; in Victoria the Upper House is an elected body, each member holding his seat for a term of years. Both in Now. Zealand and Victoria the Upper House has oh innumerable occasions served admirably the main purpose for which it was in each case created. It has checked hasty and crude legislation, and, with deference to Sir George Grey and Mr. Graham Berry, we take leave to think that long after their course has been run the bicameral system, the greatest, perhaps the only safeguard democracy has, will be maintained in these Colonies, and the second chamber will continue to be a power in the State, not the contemptible figment these gentlemen are for party and personal purposes seeking to make it. So far as this particular mission is concerned, it is hard to see what good it can achieve, or what reasonable prospect of sucoesaJMessrs. Berey and Pearson have, especially after the decided manner in which the Secretary for the Colonics, Sir Michabl-Hicks Beach, has expressed his opinion. Sir Michael says :—“ Such “ a step, however justifiable in the last “ resort, as the only remaining means of “ carrying into effect the deliberately ex- “ pressed will of the people of Victoria “ upon an issue plainly presented to ‘ ‘ them, does not appear to me to be war- “ ranted by the circumstances contem‘c plated by your Ministers as likely to “ occur in the present case. However “ urgent may be the necessity for a re- “ form in the constitution of the Parlia- “ ment of Victoria, the history of the “question shows the variety of opinion “ in the Colony as to the principles upon “ which that reform should be based. You ‘ ‘ inform me that during some years past “ several schemes have been projected “ for the purpose, and you describe “ certain proposals brought forward by “ Mr, Francis and passed by the Legis- “ lative Assembly in 1874, and others “ which were originally entertained by “Mr. Berry during the recent crisis. “ But I observe tha t both of these differ “entirely from the two measures now “ under discussion in the Council and “ Assembly; and that the particular “ scheme which your Ministers have in- “ trod need is altogether new, includes “ chifiges—such as the plebiscite —of a “graver character than any that have “ been hitherto suggested, and has never “ been directly s brought before the con- “ stituencies at a general election. I 1 ‘ cannot therefore think, so far as the “ information now at my command “ enables me, to .judge, that the rejection “by the Legislative Council of this “scheme, on the first occasion of its ‘ 1 introduction, and under the circnm- “ stances surrounding the whole case, “ would justify so ‘ exceptional a proceeding,’ as your Ministers rightly “ term it, as an application to the Im- ‘ ‘ perial Parliament to alter, without the “ previous assent of the Victorian Legis- “ lature, that Constitution Act which was “ originally framed in the colony, and “ merely confirmed and made operative “ by an Imperial statute.”

These are words which to us seem to have irresistible force. Those who are in the slighest degree acquainted with the

history of Victorian politics must be aware that ever since the protection craze and the demand for mining on private property (a very proper demand with reasonable restrictions) arose in Victoria, there has been ever and anon a demand for a change in the constitution, emanating not from a majority of the people but from those persons who, as Mr. Murray Smith says, are continually poking the political fire in order to warm themselves at its bars, yet the people, when appealed to, have sturdily resisted any tampering with the Constitution. That we are not misrepresenting the action of the Victorians is proved by the miserable failure which attended Mr. J, G. Francis’ effort at reform. No man stood higher in the estimation of Victorians than he did. Compared with Mr. Berry, he was a large-hearted and widely sympathetic politician, but he mistook the mind of the people, and an appeal to the ballot-box on a well-considered scheme of constitutional reform, the Norwegian system, which came recommended by practical success in working, was so disastrous in its ultimate results that Mr. Francis retired from the political arena under a cloud, which still envelopes him. Mr. Beret, after his bluster and bounce, feels it incumbent upon him to do something, and afraid to appeal, like Mr. Francis, to the country, like Sir George Grey he insults the intelligence and stability of the democracy ho belauds by ’umbling the colony before the Secretary of State, of whose interference with his little plans , he so bitterly complains. The result must inevitably be failure so far as the mission is concerned, but it may help to show colonial politicians that constitutions cannot be changed at mere caprice to secure party triumph or personal aggrandisement, and that democracy is not an engine to crush out political life, but government by the people, through the people, for the good of the whole people.