Untitled

Timaru Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 6064, 25 September 1894, Page 2

In our yesterday's leading article, whioh reviewed the Premier's promised Municipal Corporations Bill, it was stated that the principle of one man. one-vote would be introduced at borough elections, bat that none except ratepayers would have the franchise. We had not seen the fall test of the Bill, and onr in* formation was derived, as we said, from abstraots and extracts telegraphed to some of onr contemporaries. Since onr ' article was published we have observed the following paragraph m the Wellington Evening Post : — " In defiance of tbe i opinions of the Municipal Conference, i and of every consideration of right and i justice, the Government is making I another effort to introduce the pernicious I principle of Universal Suffrage into ( municipal government, and to render ( its application still more unfair by tacking to it the one-man-one-vote principle. The new Municipal Bill < proposes to take from those who ' pay the cost of the municipal govern- ( menfc the power to direct and control the ' administration. The ratepayers are to « be content with the privilege of finding 1 the money, the power of expending it is < to be given to the non-ratepayers, c Representation is to be given without ] taxation. One set of citizens is to find j the municipal revenue, and another set t is to determine how that revenue shall ( be expended. A more revolntionary ] and Communistic proposal could not ] well be imagined than that embodied ( m the new Bill. It is the most direct attack on the rights of property c which has ever been attempted even , by the present Socialistic Minis- ! try. We hope it will be resisted ! to the utmost, and successfully." Yesterday's mail brought us a copy of B the Premier's Bill, and by a memoran- s dum prefixed to it we find (hat it pur- * ports to be " a reprint of the Consoli- * dated Bill submitted to Parliament m ' 1892 by the Municipal Association of b New Zealand." This is hardly a fair c description of it, although the next * sentence m the memorandum admits a that "m this copy there are several o alterations and additions made to the !

dissociation Bill." The alterations and additions, as far as they relate to the ' municipal franchise, are very important, : for they do actually introduce the one-tnan-one-vote fad, and prevent a burgess from having more than one ?ote m the borough even where he has property m two or more wards. Our account of the Bill was therefore substantially correct, and the paragraph which we have just quoted from the Evening Post conveys a partly wrong impression; that is |to say, unless tbe Government have again mended their hand and issued a later and altered edition of the measure, which is highly improbable. At the same time we regard the Bill as misobievous and revolutionary, because although none but ratepayers will have a vote, the cumu. lative Bjßtem will be altogether abolished. It is, however, very likely that the Bill will be dropped for the session, as it is stated that a caucus of Government supporters has been held and a determination arrived at to wind up the Parliamentary business of the year m the course of the nest three weeks.