THE GLOBE. THURSDAY, AUGUST 18, 1881.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2301, 18 August 1881, Page 2

THE GLOBE. THURSDAY, AUGUST 18, 1881.

It is possible that the Government will not find such difficulty in passing the Redistribution Bill as was at first antici- , pated. Before the Bill was brought before the House - the prophecies respecting its fate were numerous, but, at the same time, vague. It was generally felt that many members would object to it as affecting the influence of their constituencies, but there was no attempt to forecast the exact mould into which the opposition to it would be thrown. But now the objectors have formed themselves into three distinct camps, the members of which have, apparently, no sympathy with each other, although they are naturally to bo found voting on the same side. Each set of members has its own particular platform, which it enunciates without the slightest resorvo, while the balance of the House sit calmly by and listen to the singular cross-fire which is going on. Nothing could possibly bo more favorable to the Government scheme than such a state of affairs as this. The cloud of objectors which was anticipated and feared has been precipitated into three streams, each hurrying to its own particular gaol, but, both individually and collectively, more easy to manage, for the very reason that there is something definite to grapple with. Moreover, the baroness with which the arguments against the Bill have been urged has done much to consolidate the Government party. It has been impossible to weigh the objections brought forward so freely without seeing that no true case has been made out, but that two parties at all events have been swayed by purely local feelings. Nothing could possibly have served the Government better than the narrowness of mind exhibited by tho Nelson members, unless indeed it were tho principles advocated by tho Auckland members. On reading over the debate on tho Premier’s motion that tho Representation Bill bo road a second time, and the debate on Mr. Wood’s amendment on tho motion for going into Committee, one cannot help being struck with tho poverty of the arguments brought forward by tho opponents of the measure. Indeed, we cannot see a shadow of sound reasoning except in one notable instance, namely, in tho argument brought forward by Mr Pyko that tho proper basis for representation was tho number of electors rather than tho population. It must, in all fairness, bo conceded that there is a groat deal in this argument. In tho Constitution Act tho following is found; —“ lu

determining the number of members o bo elected for each district, regard shall be had to the number if. electors within the same, so that the number of members to be assigned to any one district may bear to the whole number of the members of the House of Representatives, as nearly as may be, the same proportion as the number of electors within such district shall boar to the whole number of electors in New Zealand.” This is clear enough, and wo must confess that the goldfield members have, in the wording of the Constitution Act, a strong argument in their favor. Indeed, we may go further and say that the spirit of the Constitution Act, to a certain extent, favors their case. If Mr. Pyke’s idea were carried into force our electoral basis would bo much the same as that of the United States. There the House of Representatives is composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several States, each State sending one representative for each 30.000 males over twenty-one years of ago. In State Legislatures, to provide members for which the several States are cut up into Senatorial and Assembly districts, the same basis generally prevails, although in Rhode Island and some other instances manhood suffrage does not obtain. But in the United States there exists a provision which does not exist in New Zealand. Increase or decrease of population is provided for by readjustment at intervals on the basis of the previous census. Did such a provision exist here wo should entirely welcome Mr. Pyke’s suggestion. But, as matters stand, the goldfield population is such a fluctuating one that a population that mightreturn two or three members by its present claims, might in a few years have dwindled to almost nothing, and a fresh ■ general measure of redistribution would have to be passed before the anomaly was remedied. The Constitution Act was framed when such a contingency could not possibly have been foreseen. Had the framers of that Act been aware of the mineral resources of the colony, and the consequent certainty of a large mining population sooner or later roving over various portions of the country it is almost certain that, before proposing for these nomads equal rights with the more settled members of the population, some such provision as that which obtains in the United States would have been tacked on to the Act. Viewing, therefore, all the circumstances of the case, we cannot say that the spirit of the Constitution Act can bo affirmed to be entirely in favour of the claims put forward by the Goldfield members. Moreover there is a further difficulty in the way. It may be distinctly laid down that hitherto the population basis has been adhered to in settling the distribution of our representatives. It has been the basis recognised by the House and the' country, and there has been no expressionof will on the part of either that any other basis should be employed. The call for redistribution at the present crisis has been l a general one, but there has been no accompanying cry that the present understanding as to the electoral basis should bo disturbed. We may say, therefore, that, although Mr. Pyke’s proposal is in the abstract a just one, yet that the country is not prepared to accept it cn the spot, but that, on the contrary, ample time is required in which the public may balance the various pro and cons of the question. It may be Mr. Pyke’s proud fate to educate the constituencies in this respect. We rather fancy, however, that they will come to the conclusion that, as far as regards the representation of the goldfields, he has sprung a cleverly conceived mine on the country, and that they will pause before they strain the letter of the Constitution Act so as to place in the hands of the fluctuating digging populations power out of all proportion to that to which they are entitled. Wo have dwelt at some length on Mr. Pyke’s argument, because it is the only real point made by the objectors to the Bill. The arguments used by the Auckland and Nelson members are of so feeble a character that they may very well stand over for consideration for an indefinite period.