The Nelson Evening Mail. MONDAY, MAY 28, 1877.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XII, Issue 124, 28 May 1877, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. MONDAY, MAY 28, 1877.

Drifting as we in New Zealand gradually are into the system of paying members of the Assembly, thereby making a seat in our colonial Parliament a haven o£ rest much, to be desired and stoutly to be striven for by the impecunious, it would be well if before taking another of our sessional steps in this direction we were to inquire into, with a view of profiting by, the experiences of our neighbors in Australia. On Saturday we published an article from the Australasian, in which the practice is strongly condemned, but it must be remembered that it is not merely a newspaper or two, or one party or faction that is calling out against the continuation of the existing system, but that the whole colony joins in the outcry. It would be impossible for it to have received a fairer trial than that accorded to it in Victoria, where the practice has now been in vogue for six years, a period of time that has proved quite sufficient to convince those who were the warmest supporters of the measure when it was first introduced that in passing it they had committed a grievous error. The two chief objections now raised to the system are, first, that it has led to a large and useless expenditure, and secondly that the consequence has been the introduction into the House of a most undesirable class of politicians, men who cared little for the result of their attempts at legislation so long as they secured the coveted £300 a year. Although this has not been made a test question in the recent Victorian elections, tte condemnation of it has been so surprisingly unanimous that there can be no possible doubt that the very mention of "payment of members" stinks in the nostril of the electors of that great colony. Sir James M'Ctilloch, in his address to the electors, spoke as follows on the subject :— " I am entirely opposed to payment of members. (Cheers.) 1 believe it is a waste of public money. We are spending at the present time £30,000 per annum. Since the Act which authorised payment of members was passed we have spent £180,000, and with really no occasion for the expenditure whatever, because even if the system be done away with to-morrow candidates will still offer themselves in abundance for the honor of representing you in Parliament." Mr Levien, a representative of the agricultural classes, and who had been a warm supporter of the measure at the time of its introduction, spoke still more strongly. He is thus reported :— " The next matter he should draw their attention to was one on which he had entirely changed his views, namely, payment of members. When the bill was first before the House there was no stauncher advocate of it than he was, but during the last few months he had watched the proceedings closely, and he must admit that he was thoroughly disappointed with tha result. The leading liberals in the country, including the present leader of the Opposition, had denounced both Parliaments elected under it as thoroughly demoralised and totally unfit to conduct the business of the country, and he thoroughly agreed with them. He was now convinced that it would be better to pay -£3!>,G00 annually in tho construction of railways outside the House than spend that amount for the erection of stonewalls inside the House. (Hear, hear.) He had no objection to any constituency paying its member, but he objected to the payment by the State of men who had violated their principles. It was the disorganised state of the House which drove Mr Higinbotham from it, and if he (Mr Levien) was returned payment of members would ever have hia uncompromising opposition. (Loud cheers)." With reference to the disorderly and disorganised condition of the House in consequence of the presence in it of men who had found their way into it since the establishment of the payment system, Sir C. G. Duffy in addressing his constituents said:—" If the constituencies send us representatives who will renew the scenes of last year, any solid progress in the reforms the country desires will be hopeless, and for my part I would rather be outside such a House than inside." Such are the opinions of some of the leading politicians in Victoria, and endorsed, as they appear to be, by an overwhelming majority of the people, they fully justify the assertion that payment of members has in the leading Australian colony proved a signal failure, and has thoroughly disappointed the expectations of all those who anticipated favorable results from its adoption. In New Zealand we have not yet appraised the services of our legislators at so high a rate as was done in Victoria, but we are rapidly approaching the £300 a year which was there looked upon as the precise sum that ought to be paid, but if, with this striking example before our eyes, we still continue to advance in that direction, we shall not, when the times arrives with us, as it inevitably must, for admitting our mistake as they have already done iv Victoria, be able to say that we had not received sufficient warning of the dangers surrounding the course which we insisted upon pursuing.