Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, SEPTEMER 10, 1875. WHO IS TO BLAME?

New Zealand Tablet, Volume III, Issue 124, 10 September 1875, Page 10

New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, SEPTEMER 10, 1875. WHO IS TO BLAME?

The newspapers which support the General Government in its unconstitutional and illegal attempt to rob the j people of their representative institutions, have lately given expression to doleful lamentations on the delay " of public business and waste of time caused by the debates on the Provinces Abolition Bill. But they and their patrons are the last who ought to make such complaints, for they alone I are to blame. This, however, th^y do not see, or, at least, affect not to see ; and they are loud in their denunciations of the tactics of the Opposition. It is another case of the wolf and the lamb. The Opposition is only endeavoring to maintain its own rights and those of the people at large, which the Ministry is determined, if possible, to annihilate. It is clearly the duty, then, of Provincialists to employ j every legitimate means, and have recourse to every lawful j expedient, to prevent themselves from being plundered. j If the reasonable request of the opponents of the A boli- ! tion Bill to have the question referred to the decision of the j people on the hustings had been granted, and were the G-ene- i ral G-overnment to adopt the constitutional and legal course of obtaining the opinion of the various Provincial Councils, there would be no reason to complain of the delay of public ! business, or waste of much valuable lime, and consequent expense to the public. The course, however, adopted by G-overnment leads, inevitably, to delay, loss of time, and, should the Bill pass, to long, bitter, and costly litigation. How does the case stand ? It is maintained by Sir George Gbet and others that the General Assembly cannot, constitutionally and legally, destroy the Provincial form of Government in New Zealand, and it is also pretty certain that not even the consent of the Provincial Councils, united with that of the General Assembly, would suffice. In the Act of the Imperial Parliament giving us a Constitution, no such power is conceded; and no argument can be derived from the Imperial Act which was obtained in connection with the Province of "Westland. Had the General Government, then, really wished to save time, it should have first consulted the provinces in the constitutional and legal way, and then, had the province expressed a desire of being annihilated, or merged in some other system, applied to the Imperial Parliament for power to enable the various Governments of New Zealand to make the desired arrangement. And all this will yet have to be done if Provincialism is to cease to be. This point was admirably well put by Sir Geokge Grey in his speech against the second reading of the Abolition Bill, a correct report of which has not yet appeared in any of the newspapers. We give here one passage from this very able speoch as it is reported in 'Hansard.' Sir

GrEOBGE says, " Sir, I pass from that, and I take up the ' great constitutional question which I raised before — namely, that the invariable rule of the British Empire for a lon<» series of years has been this : — That once the Crown has granted liberties of a representative character to the people, the Crown cannot meddle with these liberties to take them away. Great legal authorities have stated that the Crown, having granted such liberties, may increase or extend them, but the smallest portion cannot be taken from the people. That is the law which has been laid down, and which has been acted upon invariably. The other night when I stated that this was the case, the honorable member for Timaru almost asserted that I had been guilty of misleading the House, and that there was one inodern"instance which the honorable gentleman said, from my acquaintance with the Governor of that colony, I should have known j and he alluded to the instance of Jamaica. When the honorable gentleman said that, in accordance with the rules of this House, I had to sit still and hear this statement made, and I thought to myself surely the faculty of reasoning and the faculty of memory are at the same moment taking flight from that once sagacious mind. But, sir,.. what really happened in Jamaica ? The people of Jamaica themselves wished their Constitution to be abrogated ; and the Legislature — the Governor and Houses of Assembly — passed a law abolishing their own Constitution. And that was not enough. So delicate was the mind of Parliament that they said, 'You must go further; you "must pass another law, and ask us to replace it with a Constitution for you.' They passed a second Act ; and when that was done Parliament did pass an Act taking the representative Constitution from Jamaica, and establishing another in its place." Our General Assembly assumes to itself a right and a " power which the Imperial Parliament would not exercise in reference to the Constitution of Jamaica, even after the people of Jamaica through their constitutional and legal organ had declared they no longer wished to possess representative institutions. Here the General Assembly which did not create the Provincial system, wlich exists itself by the same law which established provinces, which received no power to destroy provinces from the Imperial Parliament, either in the Constitution, Act, or any Gthe'r Act. undertakes to do what the Imperial Parliament would not do, and labors to pass a Bill to annihilate the provinces without even consulting thej?rovincial_ Councilor legislatures. It^is said, however, that the people are in favor of the proposed change, as isevideut from the tone of the Press, and the large majority on the side of the Government in the House of Representatives . The Government has no right to assume for these reasons that the people desiro the change. In the first place, the represent tatives wore not elected with a view to any sucli change. And, in the next, the Press cannot be taken in this instance as a fair exponent of public opinion, as is manifest from the numerous meetings which have decided in favor of au appeal being made to the ballot-box, and from the obstinate refusal of the Government and majority to test the point by a general election. And this is strengthened by remembering that m any case there must be a general election in a few months. Nothing can be clearer than that both the Government and_its supportersjare^afraid to appeal to the electors. But even supposing, for argument sake, that the people, — understanding by the people, a large majority — were in favor of Abolition, still the Government would not be justified in adopting the course they are now pursuing. There is a minority, and a weighty minority against their measure. This much, at least, no one can deny. Should not such a minority, when there is a question of such a momentous change as is now contemplate"^ be treated with the greatest tenderness and consideration. But in any • event, the constitutional mode of ascertaining the will of the people should be adopted. Provincial Governments' are, though not equal to the G-eneral Assembly, co-ordinate with it, and, so far as their existence and the power conferred on them by the Constitution Act, absolutely independent of the General Assembly. Surely, then, they ought to be consulted on the question of Abolition. The action taken by the General Government is high handed, unconstitutional, illegal, and tyrannical, and must inevitably lead, if persevered in, to litigation. There are men in the colony who willjiave recourse to the Courts of Law to prevent Government iroin enforcing 1

an Abolition Law ; and no doubt the Privy Council will ultimately decide the question. But all this will involve delay, confusion, and other evils. Whose fault is this ? Clearly the Government's and their rampant majority in the House of Assembly. Had they adopted the reasonable course, and acted constitutionally, all these could have been avoided. But it is clear that an effort has been made to put an affront on the Provincial Councils, to render them contemptible in the eyes of the people, to prevent the electors from exercising their undoubted right to express their will constitutionally afc" the hustings, and to steal a march on ..the country. The entire blame, then, of the present unfortunate state of things rests with the Aboli-. tionists, and not 1 with the Provincialists.