MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.—MR. EARP'S PROTEST.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume I, 26 March 1842, Page 10

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.— MR. EARP'S PROTEST.

Not having received copies of the ordinance, we are not yet in a situation to enter fully into the merits of Mr. Earp's protest (a copy of which appeared in our last) ; at | the same time, there are some objections which he has raised to the principle of the measure capable of being discussed, with the assistance of such information as may be derived from the copy of the bill as originally proposed. The other "independent" members having neither signed Mr. Earp's protest nor entered one of their own, may be supposed to entertain objections of a different character. Omitting all mention, of matters of detail, which, as we have said, we are not in a situation to give an opinion on, we take Mr. Earp's evidently leading point, namely, the democratic tendency of the ordinance, " the near approach of which to universal suffrage in its most objectionable form," appears to alarm him exceedingly, more especially when he considers how large a portion of the inhabitants of these settlements consists of " fraudulent debtors and runaway convicts." Doubtless the settlers in the New Zealand colonies are much obliged to Mr. Earp for his good opinion. For ourselves; we take upon us to say that this opinion cannot have been formed upon his knowledge of the inhabitants of Fort Nicholson. It cannot have been formed from his acquaintances with Nelson ; and most sincerely do we hope that it is not justified by bis experience in Auckland, though the laudation he receives there does

not look like the repudiation we should have expected such a J statement to have called forth. Mr. Earp continues : — " That in a new colony such a principle, or anything approaching to it, must be highly injurious to the well-being and good order of the community, as tending to sow the seeds of discontent and insubordination to established authority in the outset of the colony, and to prevent that good feeling which does at present exist, and ought always to exist, between the higher and lower classes." Here we join issue with Mr. Earp. We acknowledge " the near approach to universal suffrage," though what is meant by "in its most objectionable form" we pretend not to comprehend. We hail this " near approach " with unqualified pleasure ; and this principle, which we might have opposed in an old country, as dreading the consequences of too sudden a breaking up of oldestablished .custom and long-cherished modes of thought, we here look upon as the safest foundation which our legislators could have adopted in framing rules for the election of a municipal or any other representative body ; as the least likely to produce the effects by Mr. Earp predicted, and the most so to produce that general interest among the inhabitants in the doings ,of their rulers, the want of which in new colonies generally has been the cause of those crying evils the records of which disgrace our colonial history. Has Mr. Earp yet to learn that the early political' education o£ a people is the most powerful safeguard against after misrule ? Do accidental and temporary difficulties so much appal him that he would sacrifice the great eventual benefit of a 'representative government, responsible to a constituency whose political capabilities had been matured by experience, because he cannot see his way clear through the temporary inconveniences with which every great and noble work is necessarily attended at its commencement ? The power of unlimited taxation appears to be a bugbear to which Mr. Earp cannot overcome his abhorrence. But it is selftaxation. This yearning after' dependence is to us perfectly incomprehensible; this determination, under any circumstances, not to be free ; this earnest longing to make the outlay of government money, as it always is and always must be, the excuse for government establishments, the expense of which is sure, sooner or later, to fall upon the colonists. How do governments universally endeavour to repay themselves for colonial outlay ? Why by restrictions on tratle, by duties on imports and exports, which are infinitely more oppressive than any direct rate, since interest must be paid for the increased capital necessarily embarked by the trader, and since these restrictions cannot exist without throwing obstacles in the way of an extended or increasing - commerce. Lastly comes this strangest proposition, " that this ordinance as it now stands will be the means of producing great and general dissatisfaction throughout the colony, as being based upon the principle of unlimited-self-taxation, with very limited powers of self-government; that it will thus operate as an incubus upon the resources and energies of the colony, and at the same time tend to foster a hostile feeling between the Government and the governed, which will not fail to be highly detrimental to both parties, and creditable to neither." Was there ever such perverse wrongheadedness? Why it is just because our present powers of self-government are limited that this self-taxation is so desirable. Would Mr. Earp protest us out of our senses ? Are not our .present liabilities in the way of taxation sufficient, that he would — by making all expenditure the act of a Government to us irresponsible — deprive us of the only check we are likely for some time to have upon the misappropriation of a fund to which we mutt, under any circumstances, contribute so largely ? The question whether universal suffrage tends to encourage corruption and bribery,

has been too long before the worW, and too often, both by argument and experience, decided in the negative, to make it necessary for us to enter upon it. Mr. Earp's assertion on t!ie subject stands for what it is worth, and only convinces us that his opinion is but little in accordance with that of those whom he is supposed to represent. We cannot but doubt Mr. Earp's zeal on the subject of self-government, when he thus strenuously opposes the first opening that has offered for obtaining it, on the strength of a verbal distinction without a difference between self-taxation and selfgovernment. We are as conscious as Mr. Earp can be that it is desirable to attain at once, or as early as possible, the power of exercising a direct influence upon the acts of our rulers ; and we agree with the preamble of the bill, that self-government produces self-reliance. If Mr. Earp had pressed home the one subject of deficiency in this matter of self-government, we should have looked on him as our co-operator in the great object of attaining independence of officialism for the inhabitants of this colony ; but we cannot sympathise with the questionable and hasty zeal which will take nothing because it cannot get all. Mr. Earp's protest states one objection, which appears to us to be unfounded, viz., that in which^he* says that the corporaHo'n iias'iftT* power given it to levy dues on captains o* vessels. We extract the 75th clause : v "To levy Tolls, &c— 7s. It shall be lawful for the council to impose such tolls or dues ias maybe reasonable, upon all persons making use of any road, bridge, market-place, dock, basin, wharf, lock, quay, pier, or landingplace, which the council is hereby empowered Ito make and maintain ; and, in case of the nonpayment of such tolls and dues, to levy the same by distress and sale/ Whether the construction to be put upon this clause, in conjunction with the sth and 77th, is such as justifies Mr. Earp's objection we cannot tell ; but, if he is right in his construction, there can be no doubt that he is right in his conclusion — that it is unjust. There is one point on which we agree perfectly with this protest, namely, that of the mayor being denied the magisterial functions, which appear to us to be his of right. We do not admit Mr. Earp's conclusion, however, that the mayors will not, " under the universal suffrage principle, be men of sufficient standing in society to be intrusted with the magisterial office." On this subject we propose making some remarks at an early period. We shall soon have an opportunity of beti ter judging what the weight of Mr. Earp's objections to matters more of detail may be. • Some of them appear reasonable enough ; but if those to the principle of the ordinance are a specimen of them, we shall have but I little faith in Mr. Earp as a legislator.

We are exceedingly anxious to afford our readers, at all times and to the best of our ability, information of what is going on in the sister settlements of New Zealand. More especially it appears to us desirable, for many reasons, that the settlers at Nelson and elsewhere should be in possession of the legislative proceedings of the Council and also of the state of public feeling and opinion in Auckland, at as early periods and "with as much accuracy as is possible. In our first number we expressed an opinion on the subject of the state of communication between Auckland and the Straits, in which we believe all ouf readers agreed. We hope they will be equally unanimous in looking with some degree » of indulgence upon any misapprehension into which we may be led when obliged to supply the want of certain information witli uncertain rumour. The only vehicle of opinion and news which we believe exists at Auckland, is so uncertain in its own views and opinions as to be a dangerous guide. The proprietors-hip of the Auckland Herald lies in a company of gentlemen, who have repeatedly changed their editor, since the paper was established ; and more than once, we believe, the comp;niy have been themselves obliged to undertake a«*»** of multitudinous editorship. Our spaders may therefore judge of the c °f confidence to be placed in the Herald as

I

a representative of public opinion, when they have read the following extract from its columns of the 12th of January, and are reminded that with the feelings expressed at the meeting on the subject of the Land Claims Bill this paper cordially agreed", and that the then editor took a leading part in the proceedings of that meeting : — i "We can state, from good authority, that the 1 Land Claims Bill will give satisfaction to every ; Reasonable • old settler,' and will be a boon thankfully accepted by the majority of the land claimants ; that means will be taken to expedite the settlement of the claims, with a almost unknown in the annals of commissions, and thus act at rest a question which has been the source of much irritation and discontent." . Under these circumstances, we think we may, without drawing too largely, claim some consideration in respect of any possible inaccuracy in our views of Auckland politics, parties, and opinions.