Justice to England.

Manawatu Herald, 16 February 1895, Page 2

Justice to England.

Mr Edward Dicey, in the Nin* teenth Vmtury for November last, ' urges the Unionists not to oppose the passing by the Government of the ?< proposed Bill to abolish plural voting and to reduce the residential qaalifi* cation for lodgers to a period of three months ; but to accept these reforms in principle, and to resist their ap* plication unless they are made' an integral part of a general reform of the electoral system in accordance the principle upon whioh it has been allowed to be based, namely, the right of the numerical .majority to rule the State. He advises the Unionist party to meet the demand* for depriving the well-to-do classes of the advantage., such; a9*it i* of plural voteß/ana for"enmrgln?the lodger franchise, by the reduction of

the period o! residence, by dedlarfng that the time has come to give every elector the same amount of electoral influence. Ono vote one value should, he urges, be the cry with which the should defeat the attempt ► of the Liberal party to gerrymander the electorate in the interests of Home ftule* According to the last census, the population of the United Kingdom amounted to 88,000,000. The House of Commons Consists of 670 members, and Mr Dicey points out therefore that if they are to have one i)w» <me «a&«, each electoral district shouia r by tfcnts, comprise a Population of 57,000. With stich electoral districts* the parliamentary representation of the different kingdoms would stand about as follows : —England, 488 ; Ireland, 87 ; Sootland, 71 ; Wales, 26. Total, 670. Thus Ireland would lose sixteen votes, Wales six votes, and Scotland one, all of which, uuder equal electoral districts, would go to England thus increasing the English tetore* sentation by twenty three. From an Unionist point of view* the gam would far exceed these not inconsiderable proportions; If seats were redistributed according to jjopulatiottj the great towns in England Would gain very largely at the expense of the small boroughs, and of the agricultural counties } while in Ireland, the manufacturing and progressive North Would have a great augmentation, if not an actual preponderance of representation in Comparison with the agricultural and unprogressive South. In other words* equal Electoral Districts would, as things toe, give the complete command of electoral power to those parts of the United Kingdom; wnich form tne strongholds of the Unionist and Conservative party. Mr Dicey points out that if the Unionists meet the demand for modification in the suffrage designed to advance the interests of the Gladstonian Liberals by a counter demand for equal Electoral Districts, their position is unassailable, while their opponents will be placed in a very difficult dilemma. To oppose equal Electoral Districts, is to repudiate the fundamental principles of the Liberal creed. To accept it, is to forfeit the support of the Irish Alliance. Parnellite and k Anti-Parnellite would refuse to support a Ministry which proposed not only to reduce the electoral power of Ireland to its legitimate proportions, but to give the loyal Protestant worth its fair share of represent] tation at the cost of the districts] which form the strongholds of. Nationalism. To do this would be j simply to do justice to England is to any Government which J for its existence on the Na* tional votes.