DISFRANCHISEMENT OF CHRISTCHURCH.

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 627, 22 June 1876, Page 3

DISFRANCHISEMENT OF CHRISTCHURCH.

To the Editor of the Globe. Sir, —The first day’s debate in the new House of Parliament has so entirely realised some of my political statements and prophecies, particularly with reference to the disfranchisement of Christchurch by means of opposing votes, that the public will do well to look at the division list by the light of a short summary of particular points : Mr Stevens votes for full enquiry into a land job ; Mr Moorhouse and Mr Richardson vote against him :

Christchurch is thus made to vote for selling the finest land in the country for 2s 6d per acre, to Mr Russell and others, who are suspected of friendship (sub rosa) ■with the Ministry. Lyttelton also votes that way in the person of Mr Aynsley.

Major Atkinson (a Minister) positively stated “he would not delay to issue the Crown grant for the sake of the action of the House.” What is that but trampling justice underfoot ? But here is the vital point ;

1. The plan of the Ministry involves throwing the land into a common fund. 2. If laud up North is sold to their friends for 2s 6d per acre, why is it not given to the Canterbury working men at that price ? 3. The deficiency caused by selling so low must be made good out of our pockets. 4. I can produce in Christchurch a witness, who has walked over that very 83,000 acres, and his testimony is that it is splendid flax laud (the best of land), and can be well drained.

5. In Canterbury wo get £2 per acre for stony liver beds, and the Rangiora swamp brought that before it was drained. The language of the Premier may be taken as an earnest of his future intentions. “ The Crown had dealt with the land, and nothing our representatives could say could affect it,” This is a blow at the British Constitution. 1 am surprised that none of the members noticed it.

A city divided against itself must fall. Here you have Messrs Moorhouse, Murray Aynsley, Bowen, Fitzroy, Ilichardson, and Stafford voting land away, against Messrs Stevens, Montgomery, and Wakefield—all Canterbury men. Let no talk or promises divert our attenfrom this one fact—that the whole future of New Zealand lies in a good Land Law. By this alone can we settle the wastes and pay our debts. By this alone can we equalise and adjust the burdens.

By this alone can we save ourselves from taxation.

Remember our Parliament within these Islands is the supreme Power—for all the sneers and false statements of the Premier ; it is our highest Court, our fountain of law, the guardian and saviour of our liberties. Nay, the English Parliament dare not interfere with it. The British Crown itself, except by nominating a Governor, who cannot do wrong, and by imposing a veto, has no power here. Yours, &c., J. W. TREADWELL.