Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE PARLIAMENTARY MUDDLE.

! Circulars, a copy of which will ibe j found below, have been addreßßed Iby j (tie Premier to the members of* the I Assembly relative, to the Parliamentary ! muddle — we can find no other name for it—which was reported in our yester- , day's telegrams. Tne facts are slibrt ' and simpje : — On the 28th October : last the usual prollamation appeared; ; summoning the Parliament to meet on the 10th February. * That day arrives, | and no notice of a further prorogation having appeared in the meantime, two : or three members meet in each House. There were no Speakers present, & there ; *Waß no Governor's speech, which asVe till! know invariably ends with , the words " I now declare this Parliament open for the despatch of business." : Not having been opened for business, j tbe Assembly could transact none. Adjournment is business, and coni sequently they could not adjourn. Of course it was well known that there never was any intention that a session should take place at this time of the year, but still there was the proclamation, and owing to an accident, or rather a huge blunder, it had never been revoked or amended. The AttorneyGeneral tells us that, for certain reasons which be gives, he is of opinion tbat ! tbe meeting of the few. members did • not constitute, a legal session. Probably * not, but if tbere was no session, why j was there not ? Suppose the Governor j had as usual summoned the members, | aqd they had wilfully refused to attend, ! would he not have been justified in j considering that the Parliament had I lapsed,, that, in fact, it had died by its own hand, committed suicide ? If :w© are right in this supposition, then it most be asserted that the Parliament how supposed to be in existence is virtually dead. An enquiry into the circumstances attending ita demise \ would not perhaps result itt* a verdict 6f {/elo clese, but "accidental death "would ariSwer all the ends of 1 justice.

Still it does appear to us to be dead to all intents and purposes, and that a successor must be appointed. Tbere is no desire whatever^for a v general election,, but eveu'that with -aIK ita turmoil and expense would be preferable to an illegal session. Probably there is no precedent upon which to base a decision on the question, fpr ; we doubt whether such a ibungle ./was ever beard of before. The Attorney General appears to be pretty clear that there has been no session. This being the case is he equally clear that the Parliament, which ought to have sat but did not, is ndt extinct? The following is the circular referred to: — The meeting of members of both Houses yesterday aro*e through the non-appearance of an expected proclamation of prorogation. Some weeks ago it was intended to further prorogue Parliament. His Excellency was advised to that effect, and signified his willingness to comply with the advice. It is pro-bable-the proclamation bf prorogation has been signed, but if so it has miscarried, as a few members of Parliament attended yesterday, some members of the Government also attended the meeting which took place. Since then the Attorney-General's opinion has been taken, and I attach it for your information.; It is clear that the present meet? Ings do not constitute a session, ahd as soon as the prorogation can be proclaimed it will be. In the meanwhile if the members in Wellington meet daily such meetings will not constitute a session, and members will probably after to-day not meet, at least so the Government will advice. To-day they will probably meet as yesterday; tbey agreed to do so. There, seems no reason why you should put yourself to the trouble of coming to Wellington at present. The Attorney- General's opinion is' as follows: — I think that as the Governor has not met and addressed the two other elements of the General Assembly, neither oi those elements can proceed to any buaines***, but j adjourn tiil met by the Governor, ond addressed by him, consequently neither House can sit; each may meet but cannot sit and proceed to business. It is held that a complete Act must be passed, otherwise there is no session to constitute an Act. . There must be a bill passed by each douse aud assented to by the Governor. Therefore there will be no session within the meaning of the SOth Section of the Constitution Act, and; the Governor may safely and properly prorogue to a later date. The time elapsed between the date to which the Assembly was prorogued by last instrument of ■ prorogation, namely, loth February, and the date of the nezt instrument of prorogation will not have been a session, although members of < ach House of the Assembly may have met and adjourned.-— (Signed, J. Prendergast.) •- J. Vogel.**

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NEM18740212.2.7

Bibliographic details

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IX, Issue 37, 12 February 1874, Page 2

Word Count
804

THE PARLIAMENTARY MUDDLE. Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IX, Issue 37, 12 February 1874, Page 2

THE PARLIAMENTARY MUDDLE. Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IX, Issue 37, 12 February 1874, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert