The Lyttelton Times. FRIDAY, DEC. 23, 1881.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LVI, Issue 6497, 23 December 1881, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. FRIDAY, DEC. 23, 1881.

We quite agree that nobody is likely to object to the translation of Mr 0. M'Lean to tho Upper House, not even the members of that Chamber to wfaioh we bavo just been told that Mr M'Lean was in tbo habit of making incomprehensible speeches. Wo apprehend that Mr M'Lean does not owe his elevation to any capacity his political friends imagine bo possesses of making speeches at once humorous and inoomprehensiblo. We aro at (he same time glad to learn that Mr M'Lean is thought to possess humour. In his now sphere there is enough of tie incomprehensible, bat for humour there is plenty of room. Mr M'Lean is oeitainly fit to be a Legislative Councillor. He has know* lodge of public affairs, he has bad Ministerial experieacc of public business, he is sure to be a working member. As he has always deserved and enjoyed the respect of his fallowcolonists, no one can object for a moment to his appointment. The same cannot bo said of the system adopted by tbo present Government of making appointments to tb« Upper House. It is not that they hare appointed unfit persons. Their three appointments—tho Hons P. Whitaker, J. Oliver, and G. M'Lean are of men who, individually, aro net only excellent members of the second Chamber, but who give it a practical character and business ability. What we object to is that the only appointments of the Hall Government are of the friends of tho Ministry. Why not have appointed also some of other views, or of high character tnd good capacity, but not of active Ministerial proclivities? Another valid objection is that out of three appointments two have been made for the purpose of appointing the newly chosen members to office in the Ministry. The precedent is constitutionally dangerous. It is always dangerous to resort, when there is no occasion, to the practice of selecting Ministers outside of the representatives of the people. With one Minister in the Upper House already, there was no occasion to nominate Mr Oliver for the purpose of giving him a portfolio. He was appointed probably because the Attorney-General who considered himself better employed electioneering, and attending to bis private business in Auckland, looked upon bis appointment as a necessity. But as that does not constitute a real neoesrity, Mr Oliver’s appointment is without justification. Tho Hon George M'Lean will by many be considered a representative of property. It will be objected to him that in his new sphere all his sym patbies will be with property. Fairly prosperous himself, connected by marriage with tho head of a wealthy southern family, having been for many years a leading banker and merchant in the southern capital, he gives by his history a certain colour to this estimate of his position. But as the Upper House is at present constituted, no member of that House can be fairly held to bo specially the representative of any interest. Tbo doty tho second Chamber has to discharge is to the Colony as a whole. At present, whatever a man’s sympathies, he feels after he has bad some little experience of tho business of tho Legislative Council that those sympathies must be subordinate to tho free exercise of tho great constitutional duty which belongs to tho second Chamber. Now, if a member is elected by a constituency ho enters upon bis duties, fettered by bis election pledges, as well as by tho tenor of his private conversations. During on election many persons are busy, there is considerable excitement, and a great deal of trouble is bestowed upon tho securing of a particular result. The same condition attends the entry into public life of members of tho Lower House, There, however, the demands of party discipline form what wo may call a buffer between members and their constituents. In the - Upper Chamber, there is no such safeguard of freedom. Hence wo find that when a second Chamber has constituents, the constitutional machine gets out of order. Therefore, wo conclude, second Chambers ought not to have constituents. A change is proposed in tbo present system solely because one Government, of the many that have held office m New Zealand, it accused of having made some bad appointments. It is usual, when making a charge of this kind a groundwork of reform, to base tho charge on some solid proof. But this the Premier, who stands forward ns tho champion of reform, has never attempted. Men ought to be judged by thftir todir fa whftt wftjf fa tho presence in the Council Chamber of Sir G. Grey’s nominees degraded the deliberations of that Chamber, or altered its honourable character r No one has attempted to show, not even tbo Premier. Bat tho Premier is not content

to stand forward m a reformor, wtto doco not ntako oat a eu«. He pose* also as wbat a reformer ought not to be. It there Is one thing which a reformer should know more than another, it is bis own mind on the sob* Jeot of reform. Now the speeches which tho Premier has delivered outside of Parliament during the last three years, show that ho does not know bis own miad—oithor as to tho neceeeity of reform of tho tipper House, or as to the system of reform which should ho adopted. But if tho Premier were to prove his case, and to cease from vacillation, ho would ho no nearer the end which ho last had in view when bo addressed a public audience. Let us suppose, for argument** soke, that tho power of nomination has been grossly abused. The only inference from that is, that tho power of nomination should ho confined within proper limits, duly drawn by. statute. The abuse of tho application of a principle is a reason for the reform of that abuse, not necessarily for the substitution of some other principle. Such a substitution must he justified by other considerations. But in this case no other considerations have been put forward. In addition, the principle advocated by our vacillating apostle of reform, who has not made ont his ease, has broken down wherever it has been tried. In one direction reform is, we believe, possible, and would be beneficial. Mr Weld’s suggestion of old, to limit appointments to certain men of mark in various lines, principally official, supplies tho framework. The question, however, is one that does not press for settlement by any means. We are getting along very well os things are with the Upper House, We commend to tho earnest consideration of the Ministry their favourite principle — to leave well alone.