THE LIBERTY OF MEMBERS TO VOTE.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 14, Issue 706, 5 August 1869, Page 3

THE LIBERTY OF MEMBERS TO VOTE.

I (Nelson Examiner.) We btioflv noticed, on Wednesday lisf., the arbitrary conduct of Mr Fox in seeking to force Major Brown to throw up the command of the Taranaki Militia or resign his' seat in the House of R presentatives, because of a vote he had given hostile to the Government. At the time we wrote that notice, wo knew nothing of the subject beyond what reached us by telegram, and we thought it probable that other reasons besides those stated have influenced Vtr Fox in the conduct he had pursued towards Major Brown. The Government might have consider 'd the presence of I Major Brown in Wellington inconsisten with a proper performance of his militarj d'ltiea at Taranaki, and had culled upor him to elect between the two. —serving hia constituents in the Assembly, or serving the Governnment as one of their militarj officers. But the correspondence betweer Mr Fox and Major Brown, which will bt found in our VvVlington- correspondent's letter, shows that no such excuses wore made by the Premier to punish a representative who voted in accordance with his sense of right. Mr Fox says " the Govern ment had taken into its consideration the constitutional question of the propriety ol its officers voting against it [voting honestly] in the Legislature, and has arrived at the conclusion that it is not consistent with the exercise oi responsible government." The view taken by the Government of this "constitutional " question we consider altogether erroneous, and totally foreign to English practice. A considerable number of military and naval men always possess seats in the House of Commons, and some of them are in command, or hold staff appoint ments. Do these genthmeu always divide with Ministers ? Why, the thing is preposterous. If the military men in the present House of Commons are all supporters of Mr Gladstone, would they on change of Government, change their opinions, and vote for the Government of the day without respect to the principles they were elected to support? Mr Fox may justify the course pursued by him, if he seeks for precedents in the United States, but we believe he will altogether fail to justify himself by English practice. The principle of coercing a man to whom has been confided a public trust—to belie his conscience, aud vote white that which he considers black—is an act worthy of a Napoleon 111. j but we are astonished to find it upheld by Englishmen who profess themselves the friends of liberty, and freedom of conscience.