PATER'S CHATS WITH THE BOYS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3312, 5 September 1917, Page 62

PATER'S CHATS WITH THE BOYS.

MANHOOD SUFFRAGE IN GERMANY.

Last week I promised a chat upon the absolutism of the Kaiser; but as I have shown in my two chats that the Bundesrat (Upper House) holds absolute powers as far as the two Germanic Parliaments are concerned, that the Prussian members are numerous enough to prevent my constitutional reform of the 1870 Germanic Constitution, that in area and population Prussia is more than half of the German Empire, that the Prussian King is automatically the President of the German Empire," that the Chancellor introduces all essential legislation, that he is responsible directly to the Kaiser, and can neither be made nor unmade by Parliament, and that all Ministers of State also hold office at the pleasure of the Kaiser—as I showed you these facts, there need not be any further reference made to the Kaiser's despotism, though columns can be written to illustrate the fact, so I am writing a few lines upon Manhood Suffrage in the Empire. Perhaps, however, that heading is inaccurate and indefinite, for I want to write a paragraph or two upon the Parliaments of the States of the Empire. THE PRUSSIAN PARLIAMENT.

The voting for the Lower House is not done direct, but on somewhat the same principle that it is done in electing the President of the United States—through electoral colleges. These colleges may be compared to councils; and these elected colleges or councils elect the members. Nor do they vote on equal terms. "The voters are divided into three classes, according to the amount of taxes they pay. In each electoral district the total amount of taxes paid is divided into three equal parts. Those citizens whose combined taxes amount to one-third of the whole choose one-third of the electors. Those who pay the next one-third choose a third; and the next, who make up the mass of the population, choose the remaining thi 1." This quotation is taken from an article in the World's Work for June; and, as an illustration, it gives the following: —In one district in Berlin three citizens pay one-third of the taxes, eight pay another third, and 294 pay the remaining third. Thus the three men in the first class choose as many electors [to 4 he electoral colleges] as the 294 in the third"!

Now see one way this works out. In 1903 the Social Democrats contested seats in the Lower Prussian House; "they cast 314,149 votes and the Conservatives 324,157. The Social Democrats did not elect a single representative, while their opponents elected 143. In the last election—the one in 1912, preceding the war—the Social Democrats cast 24 per cent, of the votes, and elected seven members in a House of 420," instead of 100. And this system of election and of representation, m a general way, applies to all the German States, though the Socialists have been more successful elsewhere. As will be seen further on, however, representation is more approximately equitable in the German Parliament —the Lower House, I mean; the Upper is as mediaeval as is the Prussian.

To emphasise the anachronism of the Prussian Parliaments, and, inferentially, of all State Parliaments, read this from an article I have already referred to> "Germany's Long Road to Democracy." After saying the King of Prussia dominates the administration and legislation, the author adds: "This Legislature, or Landtag, consists of two chambers—the Herrenhaus, or House of Peers, and the Abgeordnetenhaus, or House of Representatives. The constitution gives the King fairly complete control over the Upper Chamber, in that it provides that he shall appoint all its members, and also permits him to fix its membership. Naturally, therefore, the Upper House represents nothing but the hereditary and landed principal; it is, indeed, the great nesting place of Prussian Jnnkerism [pronounced yunkerism], and there is certainly nothing in the world less progressive or more autocratic than this. Its membership consists of princes of the Royal blood, hereditary nobles whose ancestors were formerly independent princes of the Holy Roman Empire, or hereditary members created at will by the King, then certain life members—some appointed by the King at his discretion, and others on the nomination of the large landowners, the universities, the churches, and certain cities. It is rather useless to look for anything savouring of democracy in such a miscellaneous body as this. In the past, in fact, the Prussian Herrenhaus has chiefly distinguished itself by its hysterical opposition to the reforms which the King, throwing a sop to his subjects, has sought to introduce."

In what way docs the Prussian Upper Honsa differ from the British Upper House? The latter has life and hereditary members; the King can create peers and add to the number when he likes; universities, churches —I should say Church, for there is only one, the Church of England,—though perhaps not cities, appoint members, and the King and the people have to acquiesce. I haven't time or space to work out differences.; but do so as a mental exercise,, if only to show what you know and do not. PARTIES IN THE BEICHSTAG.

We hear from time to time of the parties in the Lower House of the German Empire, but never of the Government and the Opposition sides, as with us. In Great Britain there is the Government, the Opposition, the Irish, and the Labour parties—l am speaking, of course, of normal times; —but as Germany has no Prime Minister, so no Cabinet, the two great parties as we know them do not exist. There are, however, several recog-

nised parties, which are thus summarised in "Hazell's Annual" for this year. I am giving the figures, too, for the four last elections :

These figures differ from those in the “Statesman’s Year Book,” which read as follow:—Centre party, 91; Social Democrats, 89; National Liberals, 45 ; Radicals, 45; Conservatives, 44; the German party, 27; Poles, 18; Social Democratic Labour party, 18; Independent, 20. In the table there is no Labour party; this came into existence in March last year, as an offshoot from the Social Democratic party, forming, I imagine, the Minority Socialists we hear so much about. It is interesting to know the proportion of votes polled for each of the principal parties, so I’m giving these figures too:—Socialists, 4,250,399; Centre party, 1,996,848 ; National Liberals, 1,662,670; Radicals, 1,497,041; Conservatives, 1,126,270. These will form the basis of some interesting simple ratio or proportion sums, and will show, too, that the Socialists, with 34 per cent, of votes, are not so badly off with 28 per cent, of members, showing a much better proportionate representation than is the case in the Parliaments of the States of the Empire. The question naturally arises, What is the distinctive characteristics of each of these? A question easy to ask, like many more, but difficult to answer. Again, columns can be written upon some of them. Though I have read more than the average, I suppose, my ideas do not stand out too clearly. Next week, however, I’ll try to crystallise them for my readers, for hazy reading is lazy reading, and results in a useless expenditure of time.

Partv. 1898. 1903. 1907. 1912, Centro 103 100 105 90 Conservatives 71 73 83 45 National Liberals •IS 50 DO 44 Social Democrats 5B 82 43 110 Had icals and .Moderates .. 43 35 51 41 Poles 14 16 20 18 Anti-Semites 12 9 30 11 Other parties 47 32 io38 397 397 397 397