The Stonewalling

Feilding Star, Volume XI, Issue 20, 1 August 1889, Page 2

The Stonewalling

STATEMENT OF THE CASE OF THE COUNTRY MEMBERS. Aa the members representing country districts could not debate the present Re-' presentation Bill, and thus make their views known to the colony, without in effect lending assistance to the objectionable practice of stonewalling, it has been thought advisable to shortly state their position through the medium of the press. They would therefore draw attention to the following facts and arguments as entirely justifying that position : — ' Ist. They are supporting a Bill which introduces absolutely nothing that is new, but which merely endorses a principle that, throughout the whole past history of the Colony and up to the present hour, has been recognised without dissent. 2nd. That even the main detail of the Bill — namely, an advantage to the extent of 25 per cent, of population given to country districts — has also been the rule throughout the past history of the colony up to 1887. The Representation Act of 1881, for instance, deliberatively made " the quota for country districts less than the quota for town districts by as nearly as possible 25 per cent.," this being the actual language of an official paper then laid on the table of the House to explain the operation of the said Act. 3rd. This allowance to country districts made by the Act of 1881 was universally recognised jn and out of Parliament as just and reasonable. Two general elections were held under that Act, and amid all other matters then discussed, not a word of objection was raised to the said allowance to country districts. 4th. From this allowance no departure in principle has eyer been made, but in 1887 the extent of the allowance was curtailed to nominally 18 but practically 14 per cent. The main purpose of the Bill embodying this curtailment was to equalise representation as between the North and South Islands, and all objections in Parliament to the curtailment were suppressed for the time by the threat : on the part of the then Government that, if the objections were insisted ou, the Bill itself, otherwise a good one, would be jeopardised. sth. The true democratic principle consists in a fair distribution of power and influence in representation in proportion to population. The contention of the town members involves a very wide and most disastrous departure from that principle, inasmuch as it is recognised throughout the world that large cities, with their facilities for instantaneous organisation, their powerful municipal institutions, then* influential newspapers, and the close community of interests that exists through all their sections, have a power and influence out of all proportion to their actual nurnbors. Country members are therefore only advocating the retention of a power, hitherto possessed, of correcting an anti-democratic inequality in representation. 6th. This inequality is increased by the facilities which the town aftord for the exercise of the plural vote — a privilege which, whether right or wrong, wise or unwise, is obviously confined to small electoral areas with perfect communication. V 7th. Further, in every 10,000 of the city poprl ition there are 2000 male adults, who, it will be admitted, form the bulk of the taxpayers. On the other hand, there are 2000 of the same class in every 7000 of the remainder of the population of the Colony ; so that without taking into consideration any of the numerous political advantages the large cities enjoy over the country, 10,000 of city population should on a taxation basis have only the same representation in Parliament as 7000 in the rest of the Colony. This at once justifies 80 per cent, out of the 33£ per cent, of nominal deduction from the city population demanded by the country party. Their claim is therefore not only supported by the constitutional maxim that representation should accompany taxation, but also by the fact that the Constitution Act requires the representation of the Colony to be based on the number of electors and not on the total population. The decrease in the number of members from 91 to 71, the effect of which will be felt chiefly in the country districts, would justify an even higher proportionate difference than that now claimed. Bth. The statement that concession to country districts would mean throwing the representation into the hands of large landholders is manifestly absurd. In the past with 25 per cent, it has never produced that result. Why, then, should it do so now ? As a matter of fact the argument, whatever it may be worth, is quite the other way, since all experience shows that the feeling against such landholders is stronger in country districts than in the . towns. 9th. A true estimate of the value of the objections now made by town members may be formed trom a bare statement of the fact that their leader — Sir George Grey — in 1879 introduced and strove to carry through a Bill expressly conceding to country districts an advantage of 25 per cent. 10th. The activity of the cities at the present moment in their hostility to the Representation Bill is the most conclusive proof of their power of swift organisation, and the influence they can wield. On the other hand, the wide dispersion of the country population is a serious impediment to any effective effort even in defence of their own interests. In view of all these facts, the country members would regard it as a betrayal of their trust were they to recede from a position based upon justice and aiming at practical equality of representative power.