TRW MAIL AND MR. LUCKIE.

Colonist, Volume XVI, Issue 1807, 8 September 1874, Page 3

TRW MAIL AND MR. LUCKIE.

' To the Editor of the Colonist. Sir—lf you will grant me space I should like to make a few remarks upon the criticism on Mr. Luckie's late address that appears in the leading article of Friday's Mail. The Editor of that paper, after a few preliminary remarks, plunges into the business by telling us that he is quite unable to agree with Mr. Luckie upon the subject of payment to members. After complimenting that gentleman upon the excellent manner in which he handled the matter, he proceeds to discuss the arguments advanced for the measure, informing ua at the same time that,

lie had the reasons given before him in pjint when penning his article. That being'the case does ifc not appear strange, that he ignored the first argument advanced, viz., that payment ofmembers is a wise proceeding in a democratic country? If this is correct (and few will deny.it), and if it is true that our form of government is democratic, then the only conclusion at which we can arrive is: That the payment of members in this country is a wise proceeding* Altogether the Mail writer makes a strange jumble in his article by first charging Mr. Luckie with making assertions without proving them, next admitting that it would be invidious to produce the only proof possible, and ending' by making assertions without proof in favor of his own opinion. I have, like the Editor of the Mail, Mr. Luckie's speech before me in print, and tind it there stated that the Government would go into the hands of merely wealthy men, but the words " of necessity"' do not appear but are an addition.1. If it is permissible to make a qualifying addition J would ,suggeat the substitution of the words "likely to"r in place of "of necessity."' If this may be done (and I see no reason why that which is right for an editor to do should be wrong, if done by me) the proposition becomes not only quite tenable, but easy of demonstration. We are asked to run over the list of our present representatives, and to look back and call to mind their predecessors. I have done this and found that they have either been wealthy men, or frovincial officers who did not suffer any pecuniary loss, but rather the reverse by representing us in Parliament; or they have been men without either profession or calling save that of politics. But, sir, in reviewing the list of our past and present representatives, I find that we never have been represented by a man belonging to that class that counts its numbers not by ones and tens, but by hundreds and thousands. I refer to those men who have to earn their living by the sweat of their brow. That it is impossible for men belonging to that class to be members of Parliament and thus neglect their business, unless they are paid for their services or have much more patriotism in their composition than most men have, is a generally admitted fact. But if legislation for the people by one particular class alone is objectionable, as affirmed by the Mail, then may it fairly be assumed to be objectionable to exclude one particular class from legislating for that people of whom they form the vast majority. Trusting that I have not trespassed too much upon your space—l am, &c, H. A. L. l\elson, September 6th, 1874.