New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, JANUARY 7, 1876. A WISE ANSWER.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume III, Issue 140, 7 January 1876, Page 10

New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, JANUARY 7, 1876. A WISE ANSWER.

U3n At the nomination of members for "The Thames," an elector asked Sir George Geet what objection he had to name the form of Government he would propose if he had a majority at his back? to which he replied, that if he attempted, until after months of consideration, to put forward a scheme, he would be looked upon as a fool. Of all the strange things he had come across, asking him off-hand, at that late hour, to develop a form of Government for New Zealand, was the strangest of all. There are a good many legislators and would be legislators who would do well to follow Sir George Grei's example, and imitate his caution. New Constitutions are not to be framed in a day ; old ones that have worked well ought not to be lightly discarded ; and he is a wise man, who hesitates to lay destructive hands on a substantial fabric, with only a remote hope of being able to put something better in its place. The other day we were greatly amused at an argument adduced by one of our centemporaries in favour of abolition and centralism ; and Sir George Grey, if he has seen the argument to which we allude, must have laughed heartily at the simplicity of the writer of the leader in which it is embodied. The public are gravely told that at the Cape of Good Hope there is a great agitation at present in favour of uniting all the Colonies and independent States of South Africa, under a Federal form of Government ; and that this, amongst other indications, proves the modern tendency to union and centralism on a large scale. But how the conclusion follows legitimately from the premise has not been made apparent, particularly so far as the argument is applicable to the case of abolition in New Zealand. The circumstances of the two cases are totally dissimilar. No one in South Africa proposes the abolition of any of the existing Governments, or a diminution of their legislative powers, except in a few matters of general interest. Here in New Zealand, the contrary is the fact. In South Africa, the various Governments are invited to agree to a form of government very similar to that which New Zealand enjoyed before abolition, and which a moribund Parliament, misrepresenting the country had the hardihood and tyranny to fling to the winds in defiance of their constituents. There is no analogy, no parallel whatever between the case of South Africa and that of New Zealand.

And not only this, but the very opposite of what has been done here has been proposed there. Cape Colony proper is divided into two provinces, eastern and western. The latter is the older, has the seat of Government, and a small majority of members in both Houses of Parliament. The Eastern Province, however, has, and has had, for nearly twenty years, twice as many inhabitants and twice the amount of revenue ; and notwithstanding these two important advantages, she has never yet been able to obtain even equality of representation. On all occasions when an. effort was. made to re-adjust the representation equitably, according to population and revenue, the western members to a man, fearing a removal of the seat of Government from Capetown to a more central position in the Eastern Province, have united to defeat such an act of justice. As might be expected, the Eastern Province thus injured has agitated, for years, for separation, and asked to be erected into a Colony perfectly independent of the West. This cry it is, which has now culminated in ths almost universal demand for Federation, which would necessarily bring with it an Eastern Province Government, independent of that at Capetown. This does not look like the abolition and centralism advocated by our present Government and its tail. If an argument at all in the case, ,it points the other way, and is, in favour of the i policy so strenuously upheld by this paper — viz., a Federal Government, and two sovereign provinces, one for each Island.

It is to be feared that, in the absence of such a form of •Government, as that recommended by us, a strife similar to that which has been going on between East and West at the Cape, would be inaugurated here. Always since the establishment of the New Zealand Constitution, the North Island has had more representatives than it was fairly entitled to. Last session the astute politicians of the North stole a march on their Southern fellow-colonists, and succeeded in adding still more unduly to the number of representatives for that Island ; and, it appears that it is a fixed policy there to obtain an equal number for both Islands, no matter how great the disproportion between them as to population and revenue. But if this be done, the Island having the seat of Government will lord it over the South, and govern all New Zealand with a view to its own particular interests. That such a state of things is probable, no one deserving the name of politician can doubt. To readjust things thrown into confusion by the Abolition Act, much time and thought on the part of our best men will be required.