THE Marlborough Express SATURDAY, DECEMBER 25, 1869.

Marlborough Express, Volume IV, Issue 209, 25 December 1869, Page 3

THE Marlborough Express

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 25, 1869.

“ Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to prgua freely according to conscience, above all other liberties.' —Milton.

It is said that history repeats itself, and a case in point occurred this week in, our Provincial Legislature. The Council met on Tuesday, but after electing a Speaker, the business stuck fast, and at 12 o’clock it adjourned till after dinner. Then followed a furious onslaught by Mr. Ward on Mr. Eyes, returned with interest by the latter, and a scene occurred of which we have not hitherto seen the like. Two motions for adjournment made by Mr. Eyes’ party were lost by 10 to 9, and ultimately the adjournment was carried by a fluke. On Wednesday morning nothing was done,--and the Council adjourned on the voices to see if some arrangement could not be made, it being understood that Mr. Seymour was standing in opposition to Mr. Eyes. At 2 o’clock the members met, and after maintaining a silent attitude, expressive of anything bxit having met for the “ despatch ot business” for some twenty minutes, when Mr. Eyes rose, and after regretting that he was under the necessity of following a precedent, which had been made by the opposite party before time, prorogued the Council. The Opposition, joined by Messrs.

Dodson, then held a meeting, when a petition was prepared and signed by 12 members and the Speaker, requesting the removal of Mr. Eyes from the Superintendency. On the 20th September 1 , 1862, a scene, similar in its chai'acteristies, occuiTed in the Council Chamber, Picton, when the then Superintendent, Captain Baillie, — immediately upon the reading over at his request of the notice calling the Council together—rose and prorogued it. Mr. Sinclair protested against the act as illegal, on the ground that Captain Baillie had not the power, which he contended ceased when the Council met, but was interrupted in his remarks by seven of the members simultaneously leaving the room. These were (7) : Messrs. Bailie, Seymour. Ward, Cartel*, J. Godfrey, Keene, and Hood; and those i*emaining were (10), Messrs. Dodson, Eyes, Sinclair, P. M‘Rae, G. M‘Rae, Bowler, Budge, Gowland, Williams, and Noswoi*thy. A Speaker was then appointed, and Mx*. Eyes was elected by the ten. An organised opposition to this and other proceedings followed, and ultimately an action in the Supreme Court determined the issue in favor of Captain Baillie, whose course was confirmed as legal and right. We have stated elsewhere in detail what occurred in the Council this week, but to understand this it will be necessary to inform the reader what took place outside. In the course of Tuesday it became apparent that the members constituting the Picton party, headed by Mr. Joseph Ward, were by no means of one mind, and that while opposed to Mr. Eyes, would not unite for Mr. Seymour. A deputation under the conduct of Sir David Monro, (who also was a candidate,) waited on Mr. Wemyss, but he promptly declined the glittering sceptre. Mr. Goulter was willing to bridge the difficulty, but after a canvass prudently withdrew, and that evening the lists closed finally on Messrs. Eyes and Seymour. Next day the numbers stood still the same, making no progress before noon, when the nine members met and considered the position. Among these were representatives of three constituencies ( out of eleven which declared for Mr. Eyes,) representing one-third of the elector’s of the Province. These nine then agreed to stand firm as one man in endeavoring to carry this resolution : *' That in the opinion of this Council, there is no likelihood of a majority j agreeing to the election of a Superintendent “That His Excellency the Governor be respectfully requested to dissolve the Council with as little delay as possible.” —and failing to cany that to return to their homes. In consequence however of information which reached him afterwards, Mr. Eyes thought fit, after again consulting his friends, to prorogue the Council. While he was speaking, Captain Baillie rose and wished to speak, but was then too late. The Seymour party say that one of the others had decided for them, making eleven, which is since denied by that person, and that failing him they had the Speaker on their side, and therefore, as in a few minutes more Mr. Seymour would have been elected, the prorogation was made to prevent it, thus placing Mr. Eyes’ morality at a very low pitch indeed. As we have already said, one party has petitioned for Mr. Eyes’ removal, whilst the other seeks a dissolution. Both feel sure of attaining their several ends, but on a careful consideration of the circumstances, as well as the law guiding these matters, we think the result will be simply a dissolution, and fresh election, and that Mr. Eyes will not be interfered with by the Governor. Others better skilled in. the law than ourselves, aver that a disso-/ lution must follow, as there is now no one who has the power to call the Council j together again. j We regret this termination, because we| hoped that the election of Superintendent) would determine the question of policy \ involved in the late elections, of Compul-| sory Rating-for Roads, and an improved■ system of Education, but we are now as far off as ever, and the battle has to be fought over again. We sincerely regret that the-action of any party should be disputed

on the ground of unfairness ; but what is - of more moment,, is the stoppage of the business of the Province, as some months must necessarily elapse before any measure can be brought into operation, while those dependent on the Government for remuneration will suffer for lack of appropriation. Our space is exhausted, or it was our intention to draw a moral from the events we have narrated,: and show the absurdity of the law which enables the people of Nelson, Wellington, Taranaki, Canterbury, Otago, . and Auckland to elect their Superintendent, while in Marlboaough, Southland, and B[awke’s Bay that privilege is conferred on a Council, in our case, of twenty men,

which causes a repeated dead-lock, and by which system it is possible that a Superintendent might be elected who would not be acknowledged as such by a large majority of the people.