Manawatu Herald. FRIDAY, JANUARY 25, 1889. THE DEMOCRACY.

Manawatu Herald, Volume VII, Issue 237, 25 January 1889, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. FRIDAY, JANUARY 25, 1889. THE DEMOCRACY.

The appointment of a Railway Board, is, in Sir Robert Stout's opinion, an anti democratic and an anti-progressive step. He considers that the voluntary resignation by Parliament of their powers, is a declaration that democratic institutions cannot control those commercial enterprises. Democracy, in theory, is one of the most encouraging articles of faith, in practice it is generally exemplified in most unfortunate failures, and the reason for it is not far to seek. It is supposed to be high treason for a public man to say one word against the system of manhood suffrage, but if the people really interested in the colony, and attached to her soil, would, only speak out, the voice against it would be loud and strong. This would arise not from the Yeomanry of the country objecting to exercise their undoubted right in controlling the actions of their representatives, but from the practical difficulty that arises at every election, of being able to sift the chaff from the wheat of the votes. The action of the Government explains what takes place at elections, and does most decided y record what the representatives think, but do not dare to say. What electorate can fairy claim to put its candidate into Parliament, upon the vote of its residents ? And what efforts are not made to secure the support of those, who not resident, but by the nature of their employment happen to be in the district at the time an electfon is being contested ? Surely no one, acquainted with electioneering tactics will pretend to say, that many a work has been urged, for which no necessity existed, many a good resolve refrained from being spoken, simply from the fear of driving this casual vote away. Democracy has been made nauseous to the settler, not from objection to responsibility, but

*f°m the waste and extravagance that has been the result of the adoption of the principle, in a colony like ' ours where the fixed population bears too small a proportion to the roving. In these small electorates numbering from one thousand to fifteen hundred actual voters, the presence of a large body of navvies on some publio work would cause the voice of the true electors to be ignored, and the floating vote to be all powerful. These voters, here this year and gone the next, and whose livelihood depends on the outlay of large sums of money on public works, are not likely to support any oandidate whose platform was for retrenchment, and Pariament has thus added to it, by their votes, one more member to assist the plundering and squandering policy. The greatest absurdity in the whole of the democratic theory has always appeared to us that whether thefree and independent voter is the happy possessor of the suit in which he stands up in, or is the possesor of thousands of acres of valuable property, he and his fellow man have each only one vote. The possessors of small means naturally outnumber those with large means, and thus we by our legislation calmly allow the very poor to tax the very rich. We have always held that every man, having an interest in the country, should have a vote, have some power to interest him in the conduct of his representatives, but to say that a man brought out at the colony's expense, should in. a year's time, have as much right to be returned to Parliament and to tax his benefactor for his own advantage, is reducing the principle of fair play to a farce. In what private concern will the same ultra* iberal allowance be made ? Certainly not in any commercial transaction for there the power of money, and the assistance of money, is well understood, and the votes go in the proportion of the interest each shareholder has in the concern. Not even is it recognised in County politics, where the power of levying- rates is given, there the votes go in proportion to the value of land held, and so instances might be quoted to no end. Yet, in the most material issues, where not only is property, but the good name of a large and important co'ony at stake, do we find the clamour for all men to be entitled to one vote, and one vote only, with the result that is now staring us in the face, that it is under such circumstances impossible to carry on one of the most important departments with a prospect of success. Sir Robert Stout goes on to say "If the Parliament ought not to control the management of our railways, ought it to control our education system or the disposal of our land?" We are very much of the opinion that unless very radical alterations are made in both these two subjects, and the wish of the settleis, instead of the voice of the electors, be taken into more earnest consideration than has yet been accorded them, it will not be long before Parliament will act in the like manner they have with the railways, and remove them entirely from political control.