Untitled

Southland Times, Volume I, Issue 34, 6 March 1863, Page 3

To the Editor of the Invercargill Timct. Sib, —Regarding the constitution of the present Provincial Council, there are a few facts worth recording. They throw some light on the dissolution inwetnent and the professed disinterestedness of the Government in re-arranging electoral matters lcot secsion. The N«w Provinces Act provides for the formation of the first electoral rolls in the ;;cw province. The Government was to frame them from the roll of the old province in force at the time ot separating. The separation of Southland from Otago took pjace in April, 1861. The new rolls were gazetted on 6th June following. It was under these rolls that all the present members of Council were elected, except Messrs Chalmers, Howell, W. Stuart, Cowan, and Hy. Bogera. Mr Chalmers, it may be remarked parenthetically, waa at the first elections returned for the town of Inverc:u*gill, but shortly thereafter being appointed Provincial Tre.irurer he vacated hi 3 seat. Knowing he had no chance of re-ek'Ction by his constituents (he must have got in by a fluke), like a sensible man he tried another district, for which he succeeded in being elected without opposition —through mismanage.nent. it is believed, of the opposite party. This election took place after the coming into operation (on Ist October following separation,) ot' the ordinary electoral roll for the year. Mr Colder, who succeeded to the vacant seat in town, was elected in the end of September, just before the Separation roll expired. The remaining three members, viz., Messrs Stuart, Cowan, and Rogers, were elected the other day. Last session the Government took it into their head that some change in the distribution of members was necessary, and passed the El.ctoral District Ordinance, 1862. In order to understand perfectly what they did, look at the tables below ;— At Separation.

Now, how did the Government deal with the representation in the above circumstances? They thought all the districts were rightly represented except the Matauru and New Kiver. There was something wrong with them. There was an increase of 21 in the former district, at Ist October, 1862, over the number in the Separation Roll; and in like circumstances an increase of 105 in the case of the latter district, — and what did they do ? Because there was an increase of 21 electors in the Mataura district they -cut it into two new districts, and gave it two new members — one for 11 men! ! As to the other district there was an increase of 105 electors, so they cut it into two and gave it one new member! Now, if the principle acted on in the cutting up of the Mataura was right, there ought to hay« been ten new members for the Aparima district — a tight brigade i deed ; but if the principle in tbe -case of the Ap"vima district was the correct one, then undoubtedly the Mataura ought to have remained untouched. The motives, however, for cutting it up are well understood, not being concealed even by members of executive at the time, — perhaps it may be necessary at another time to say mor e about them. W. D. Invercargill, 3rd March, 1863.

Districts. No. of Electors. No. of Members. Mataura . . 24 . . 1 Campbell Town .17 ... 1 Waihopai „..79 .. 3 Invercargill ... 78 ... 3 River ton ... 14 ... 1 New River . . 14 . . 2 Immediately before the passing of the Electoral Districts Ordinance, 1862, last November. Districts. No. of Electors. No. of Members. Mataura ..45 •• Campbell Town . 35 .. I Waihopai .. 137 .. ■' Fame B 3 Invercargill . . 145 . . ; above. Kiverton ..73 .. j NewEiver ..119 . . J