REPRESENTATION OF THE COLONY.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1305, 25 May 1878, Page 3

REPRESENTATION OF THE COLONY.

[“New Zealand Times.’’] On the subject of the representation of the people of this colony in Parliament, there are now before the public two projects for the settlement of the franchise ; the one, that of the Ptimo Minister, Sir George Grey, the other that of his colleagues, as developed by the Hon. the Minister for Education, Mr Ballance, at his late meeting with his constituents at Marton. These two projects or policies are, as we have shown, fundamentally different. Manhood suffrage, with one vote only, tempered by twelve months’ residence, is the simple platform of the man of the people. In the scheme of his colleagues all the existing qualifications, property, freehold or leasehold, household, the lodger franchise and the ratepayer franchise, are proposed to be retained as they now exist. The miner’s right franchise alone is to be abolished, and for it is to be substituted manhood suffrage, tempered by the qualification of two years’ residence, by registration, and by an educational test, not, it is true, of a very severe character —the capacity to write one’s name. When Ministers are able to get together it is possible that a fusion of the rival projects may bo accomplished ; but it may be said to be at least new to colonial politics for Ministers to parade differences in opinion among themselves upon large questions, and to appeal publicly to the people directly in

support of their respective views, before the question itself had been submitted in a concrete form for the consideration of the representatives of the people. We do not think that the fact that the Cabinet are the representatives of the minority in the General Assembly will be held sufficient to excuse this very strange departure from constitutional practice. There is, however, a phase of the question of the franchise which neither the Greyites nor, if we may venture without offence to coin a word, the Ballancers appear to have thought worthy of any attention. How the franchise is to be used is probably of not less public importance than the question of who are to exercise it. Is the power of the majority to be absolute, and must the minority have no voice in the determination of public questions or in the doings of public acts, from a share in the responsibility for, or from the dangers of, which they, the minority, cannot escape ? Supposing the whole number of electors in the colony to be one hundred thousand and one, and supposing that a great question, such as the change in the incidence of taxation, or the difference between Ministers on the subject of the franchise, were submitted, upon a dissolution, for their decision, and that fifty thousand voted on one side and fifty thousand and one on the opposite side, the odd man kicks the “ballanco,” and the majority of one, as representing the “ popular will,” rules. The fifty thousand voters on the other side are thus politically extinguished. This is of course an extreme case, but it may, not unfairly wo think, be used to illustrate the situation, and show broadly how the opinions and the needs of a minority may be loffe unrepresented in the Council of the colony. Of the manifest unfairness and wrongfulness of such a condition of things there can be no doubt. The discovery of the best mode of obviating this unfairness and wrongfulness, and of providing in some way for the representation of minorities, has long engaged the attention of statesmen and political writers. Of the many schemes which have been projected in this view that which is known as Haro’s system, which has been before the public for several years, has stood the test of the severest criticism. Although in practice, excepting in Denmark where a method somewhat similar has been operative, it has not yet been applied upon a scale which might bo described as national, indications are not wanting that the time is at hand when its principles and processes will be generally recognised as the fittest for giving a true proportional representation of an electorate. The question of proportional representation was brought up for discussion in the House of Commons on the Bth March last by Mr Blennerhassett upon a resolution affirming—- “ That it is desirable that the whole electoral body should be enabled to enjoy that direct representation which is at present confined to majorities; that no effectual security exists for the due representation of minorities; and that as far as possible all opinions shall have an opportunity of being represented in direct proportion to the number of electors by whom they are held.” In moving the resolution, Mr Blennerhassett made an interesting and able speech; but after some discussion, the House was counted out, and the question shelved for the present. The subject is one of very great importance here, in view of that democratic extension of the suffrage which is proposed by the head of the Government, and we shall have occasion to return to it. It has not, as will be seen hereafter, escaped the attention of the late Government, who hoped, we believe, to bo able, by some modification and adaptation of the principles of Mr Hare’s system to our local conditions, to provide the means of securing a full and fair representation of all the people of New Zealand, and to give to the elected House the true characteristics of a colonial, and not a parish, Parliament.