The Evening Star TUESDAY, MAY 10, 1870.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2186, 10 May 1870, Page 2

The Evening Star TUESDAY, MAY 10, 1870.

Mr Haughton’s motion in favor of manhood suffrage was introduced by him in a very able speech in which he put forward the arguments in its favor in a clear and forcible light. It has always appeared to us, in colonies where none of the class distinctions of the old country subsist, a very strange assumption of power to exclude any from voting, except on grounds of public safety. Each man comes on a perfect equality so far as social status is- concerned. From the nature of the case there can be no aristocracy—no exclusive privileges to maintain. The start is different from that of the nations of Europe. In colonies there is no gradual evolution from the family to the tribe, from tribal representation to

monarchy. Men are gathered together from all quarters of the globe : there is no exclusiveness, and the families that are founded have no separate interests from those of the community. Under such circumstances, society itself can possess no right of exclusion from the right of voting, excepting on the grounds of public safety. Then arises the question what danger there to public safety that will justify depriving any colonist of the right to vote for the election of a opinion the only danger is ignorance. At present the plea is put forward that no man shall have a vote unless he be a freeholder, a leaseholder, or a householder, according to the value of the property and conditions stated in the seventh clause of the Constitution Act. Now clearly the possession of property of any one of the three descriptions specified does not confer the necessary qualifications for giving a vote intelligently and honestly. Every day’s experience shows that there are freeholders, leaseholders, and householders whose standard of right and wrong is limited to what seems to be their immediate selfish interests. The walls of the Provincial Council not unfrcquently echo and re-edio the utterances of ignorance the most profound on many subjects that are proudly and grandiloquently discussed; and occasionally there may be found, both in the Colonial and Provincial Executive a monstrous pices of ignowce in office. Now it is ignorance and selfishness that are the real danger in colonial legislation. When, as in Great Britain, there are privileged classes in Church and State, it may be considered necessary, if they are to be upheld, to make a distinction founded upon the traditions ot bygone ages, between those who are supposed to have an interest in conserving those antiquated institutions and those who imagine they have an interest in abolishing them. The danger in the Colonies is, that ignorance may build up legislative abortions that will create class interests detrimental alike to present and future progress. This is the weak point of all colonial legislation, and to guard against this, colonial society has a right to impose restricttions, limiting as far as possible the franchise to those who, by the only test we can have, are capable of giving an intelligent vote. Mr Haugiiton said, with truth, there are several hundred young men, living in lodgings in Dunedin . alone, who are unable to vote. He might have added that many of them are intelligent and well-educated, capable of judging of measures necessary for the welfare and advancement of the Colony, and of the qualifications of those who come forward as candidates' for the office of representative, or even of becoming representatives themselves. Yet these are excluded from voting, although they may in reality have a far deeper stake in the welfare of the Province than many who, through the accident of circumstances, possess the franchise. Mr Haughton asks a very slight test ef fitness to vote—namely, that a person shall he able to read and write, and that he shall not be an idiot nor living on charity. In a eoutitey where education can be had so cheaply, this must be considered reasonable. Men who can neither read nor write cannot in these days bo considered to care sufficiently about subjects of public interest, nor to know sufficient about them, to trust them with the privilege of choosing a representative, A higher standard in our opinion ought to bo fixed. Reading aiid writing cjfl not necessarily imply the exercise of the reasoning faculties. They were very well some fifty years ago as educational tests, for at that time society was only beginning to perceive that the true danger to bo feapod was not popular knowledge but popoiat' ignorance. This truth has been a long time hi flanking itself felt; but it has manifested itself in the compulsory subjection of some of the highest interests of mankind to, popular ignorance, in countries where' free institutions afforded the opportunity of a brilliant career. It would be Impossible to make a registration officer an examiflijig commissioner as to the educational quatifmotions of a voter; and this we apprehend jx G>e true reason why the standard is placed so tow as to b« limited to being able to fill up a registration paper. Could not a scholastic certificate by a or authorised examiner be made a necessary qualification for voting? There is no necessity to fix the standard too high. We have passed the rudimentary stage, and the standard should be gradually raised, so that our political system may be based on intelligence, and an inducement thus he placed before all classes to mental cultivation.