13

A.—l

The Premier further notes that His Excellency demurs to the division-lists being taken as tests of the voting-power of the Council. With an experience of consecutive attendance at nineteen sessions of Parliament, the Premier very respectfully urges that the division-lists are a very fair test as to the attendance of members. Considering the measures which were before the Council last session—measures of the last importance to the well-being of the people of the colony—it would be a grave reflection upon the members of the Council to say that they were in the Parliamentary Buildings and would not and did not take sufficient interest in what was going on to record their votes. If contended that such was the case, then it is a very strong argument in favour of placing the Council in a proper position to perform its functions by increasing the number of its members. The Premier would further very respectfully remind His Excellency that in Despatch 1., No. 16, Session 1892, he took the division-lists as his guide as to the relative strength of parties, and gave them as a test thereof; and, further, that the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in his telegram to the Governor of the 26th September, 1892, used these words: " Division-lists should be considered, rather than politics of the Premiers originally nominating members." The Premier admits that many of the policy measures of the Government were passed by the Council last session ; but there were some of great importance which had been passed, by the House of Eepresentatives before the general elections which were, in the face of the return of the Government by a large majority, rejected by the Council. There were other measures, again, which had been submitted to the people, and which were so mutilated in the Council that it has since been proved that they were made well-nigh unworkable. Moreover, it must not be lost sight of that, in respect to the measures which were passed, that they were only passed after pressure from the country. Owing to the action of the Council previously, depriving, as it did, the inhabitants of New Zealand of the benefits of the measures of which they had in 1890 approved at the ballot-box, they in 1893 emphatically pronounced upon the action of the members of the Council, and the latter gave way as a matter of course. His Excellency's Advisers very respectfully urge that it is their duty to place the Council in such a position as to make it efficient and enable it to properly perform its functions. As stated previously, owing to death and resignations, illness and old age, and the distances from their homes, the attendance of some of the members of the Council is very irregular, and in the case of the life-members this will go on increasing. Under all the circumstances, Ministers contend that the Council is not of adequate strength, nor is it able to perform its proper functions without reinforcement. At the present juncture, with Parliament summoned for the 20th June, the Premier would respectfully request His Excellency to give the fullest consideration to the representations made herein, and reconsider his previous decision. Premier's Office, Wellington, 12th June, 1895. E. J. Seddon.

Memoeandum for the Peemier. Government House, Wellington, 21st June, 1895. The Governor has to acknowledge the Premier's further memorandum, No. 25, on the subject of four additional appointments to the Legislative Council. He confesses that he cannot see any cause for the Premier's surprise at the view the Governor takes of the advice tendered to him. From communications which have passed between them he was previously well aware of the Governor's opinion of the present efficiency of the Council in every sense of the word. Had the Ministry of Mr. Ballance accepted the nine appointments then offered by the Governor—which he still thinks, for many reasons, were ample additions to the Council, and sufficient for the purposes for which the appointments were asked—the present Government would now have a plausible pretext for the advice now given; but, for reasons which he will give in this memorandum, he does not think that any appointments are now necessary or advisable. In the memorandum under reply the Premier again, by implication, describes the Council as inefficient and unable to perform its duties—in face of the fact that the Governor has proved by actual demonstration that the Council at present is above its average strength since 1887. The Governor will endeavour to put this more clearly. So far from there ever having been any degree of proportion between the population of the colony and the strength of the Council, on the contrary, as the population increased the Legislature came to the conclusion that the country was over-represented, and reduced the Lower House in 1887 from ninety-five to seventy-four. It has always been an axiom that all such changes in the representative Chamber should be practically accompanied by a corresponding change in the other House. It is true that there is no limit, constitutionally speaking, to the number of Councillors, but it cannot be denied that a reduction in the strength of the Legislative Council has practically taken place since the reduction of the number of the popular representatives in 1887. In proof of this the Governor has only to point out that for the seven years previous to the Eepresentation Act, including the year in which it was passed, the average strength of the Council was forty-nine, while in the seven years following the average strength was forty-two. At the present moment its strength is forty-four. If the four appointments were granted, the strength of the Council would be forty-eight, or only one less than was the number of the Council on the average for the seven years before 1887 —only one less than its strength on the last year before the reduction of the Lower House. The Governor, in making this simple statement of facts, is thus fixing no arbitrary number as the proper strength of the Council. On the contrary, by proposing to fill vacancies, it is the Government that is proposing to keep up the Council at an arbitrary strength, without previous arrangement with the Opposition or reference to Parliament. All the Governor has done is to point out, as he is fully justified in doing, that, judging by experience, the Council is of a sufficient