The Globe. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1876.

Globe, Volume VII, Issue 704, 21 September 1876, Page 2

The Globe. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1876.

The members of the House of Representatives are fully determined, it seems, to make the present session one of the most memorable in the history of the colony. It began on the very first day with charges of corruption against Ministers, and to all appearance it is going to end in general demoralisation. Mr. W. J. M. Larnarch has moved that hon. members’ remunerate themselves at the rate of £3OO for the session, and if report speaks truly a majority of the House are quite willing to value their distinguished services to the country at that sum. We are not going at present to discuss the question of paying our representatives a salary for their services, There is much to be said on both sides of the question. Theoretically, we admit the justice of the system, but somehow in practice it has not worked well. The experience of Victoria, for example, is that it has not produced the class of representatives its warmest advocates had anticipated. Instead of bringing out a class of men who, from want of means, are unable to devote their services to the State, but who are otherwise eminently fitted for the position, the plan has created a class of professional politicians, whose only policy has been to further their own personal interests. .No Legislature in the world, for example, is more corrupt than that of the United States. Recent exposures have brought to light an alarming state of things — corruption at every turn —a system of lobbying and bribery unknown in any other civilised State. Hit more ihoughtful and upright citizens no longer seek to take part in th ; government of the country, and the honor of a seat in the supreme Legislature is not now regarded as a mark of distinction.

But whatever may be said in favor of the payment of members, we hold that the present time is most inopportune in which to bring the matter forward. The Colonial Treasurer, in his financial statement, admitted that our position was somewhat critical at the present moment, and that retrenchment would have to be the order of the day. We had honorable members on all sides of the House talking in Ihe same strain, and yet the moment those gentlemen see an opportunity of personal advantage, the state of the colony is at once forgotten. The terms of the resolution are that the £3OO is to be placed on the estimates “ for the purpose of defraying “ the expenses of the members of the “ House in connection with their “ parliamentary duties during this “ session.” Surely the hon gentleman who moved the resolutions must have felt that he was poking fun at the House. “ Services during the present session ! ” What are those services, we would ask ? What have members done since the House met ? They have fought and wrangled and abused each other for three mouths, and scarcely anything else. They were elected first and chiefly to complete the work of Abolition begun last session. The work is as far advanced as it was a year ago. The verdict of the colony was given in unmistakable terms at the late election, and it was the duty of the House to devote their entire energies to the work of arranging for a proper system of local government. But a paltry minority has been permitted to obstruct business for three months, when it was known from the first that their cause was an utterly hopeless one. It is urged that members cannot afford to attend to their duties in the House without payment, in consequence of the injury done to their private business. The argument, it appears to us, is vicious. What would amply remunerate one member for the neglect of his business, caused by his attendance to his parliamentary duties, would be utterly inadequate in the case of others. If we once admit the principle of compensation for loss in business, we do not know where we may end. As was stated in the House, £5 per day would not remunerate some members properly. Actual expenses out of pocket of course should be, and is at present, paid, but nothing more. Had the constituencies known that their representatives were anxious to make the office of representative a business transaction, their verdict in many cases might have been different.