Representative Re-unions.

Hawke's Bay Times, Issue 1615, 29 September 1874, Page 374

Representative Re-unions.

[To the Editor of the H awke’s Bay Times.] Sir,—l have read in your columns more than one article on the desirability of the representatives of this Province making the customary ex-Parliamentary statement to their constituencies. While I hold that the public have a .full right to look for such an explanation, and that the complete silence hitherto maintained by their representatives is, to put it as mildly as possible, discourteous, 1 cannot see from the result of similar meetings in other parts of New Zealand, that any. results of practical value are likely to accrue from them. There is a discrepancy of evidence as to the exact relationship between an M.H.B, and his constituents. Is he a representative or merely a delegate ? Ho is sometimes the one and sometimes the other, as exigency or personal inclination may determine. In any case it seems to be a matter of little moment what rdle he adopts—experience shows that he may be either or neither. Whatever seems to him to bo the fitting thing, seems to be equally fit in the minds of his constituents; and if changes of members are occasionally made, it appears to be more the result of a desire to test new blood than to show disapproval of any political action of a member while in the House, To all outward appearance a man may steer any course of politics he likes once he is elected, and calculate with considerable certainty upon a vote of confidence from confiding constituents whenever he chooses to meet them face to face. He is but a poor politician, and one of a genus very distinct from those who represent us in the Assembly, who cannot manage to make his post-sessional appearance before his constituents, as pleasant as need be. Our representatives certainly may make their minds easy on one point: the free and independent electors who returned them will always accord them a vote of thanks, if not of confidence. Their good nature is too effusive to refuse them that, and they may then go on their way rejoicing, trusting to the chapter of accidents to afford them an opportunity for making a claim at some future day for a more unequivocal mark of recognition. Amongst the many solemn constitutional shams that we have inherited, and that we preserve with a jealous care, this is one which is followed up and insisted upon with a zealous industry that would be highly commendable if the result were not wholly absurd. These reflections are forced upon one by (he daily record of post-sessional speeches. Either the different constituencies of the Colony have no opinions at all, or, in nine cases out of ten, they are blessed with representatives who carry out their views with a most remarkable exactitude. The session of Parliament just closed saw one of the most momentous and distinct questions ever introduced into the New Zealand legislature—one which led to a complete disintegration of parties and to the cementing of new' ones, out of elements formerly the most diverse. Strangely enough, everybody seems to have been up in his part, and to have acted creditably— at least one is forced to this conclusion by the voice of the constituencies. All the post-ses-sional records of the casting up of accounts between the stewards and those they acted for, show that there has been no cause for dissatisfaction. A voted for the resolutions to abolish the provinces m this Island, B opposed the proposal tooth and nail—but both are thanked, and meet with a continuance of confidence. Each is held to have done his devoir properly, although their lines were diametrically opposed. Sir Cracroft Wilson meets his constituents at Christchurch, and gets a rapturous reception. Mr Rolleston, who viewed the action of the old nabob, and all who acted with him, with the greatest alarm, and thought the outcome very sad indeed, was quite as warmly received, and went on his way joyous with the reflection that every man who had listened to him approved of his action, and would have acted like him had he been placed in his shoes. Turn to Auckland, and we see the like incongruousness. Mr Reader Wood is applauded to the echo ; but Mr T. B. Gillies, who was the essence of bitterness against the party to which Mr Wood so lately clave, was received with gushing gratitude as a saviour of his country. Further instances are not wanting to illustrate this peculiarity in our political life ; but the fact must be so apparent to everyone, that the task of doing so may well be spared. The question then suggests itself—What practical value or political significance have these postsessional speeches ? Does not every member of the House of Representatives feel and act with the conviction that, do what he may during the session, he can always patch up things pleasantly when he goes before his constituents ? Clearly the relations existing between representatives and their constituents want to be more distinctly defined than they appear to be at present. Many of the journals of the Colony insist with a wellmeaning complacency upon representatives in the Assembly going regularly before their constituents, as if that were an ordeal that would lay bare all taeir faults and backslidings, while the actual result is merely a sort of pleasant reunion. All that is required is just a little tact and good humor, a few friends judiciously dispersed through the throng to chime in with a little well-timed word of approval, or move at the proper time a resolution expressive of continued confidence, and the meeting passes off satisfactorily—especially to the representative. Unless members, when making their post-ses-sional speeches, are subjected to some actual scrutiny as to their political action, the practice wiil be more honored in the breach than in the observance. It is a sham, and nothing more.—l am, &c.j An Elector.