The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 1878.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5370, 13 June 1878, Page 2

The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 1878.

It cannot, we think, be fairly urged as a ground of complaint against any Government, or against the General’Assembly of New Zealand, in these latter days, that either have failed to recognise “the right “of all her Majesty’s subjects of what- “ ever race within this colony to a full “ and equal enjoyment of civil and poli- “ tioal privileges.” If there has been a failure in the complete application of this principle in the representation of our Maori fellow citizens in Parliament, it has been only in the detail of the want of fair proportion between the respective numbers of each race and the relative number of members elected to represent them under the European and Maori Representation Acts now in force in this colony. The words which we have quoted above are those of a resolution proposed by Mr. J. E. Fitz Gerald in the House of Representatives in 18C2; it was not until 1807 that the good seed bore fruit; then the Maori Representation Act, giving four members to the native people, was passed. That was a tentative measure avowedly, and its operation was limited to five years ; it was renewed for a similar period in 1872, and in 1876 it was continued by an Act introduced by Mr. Taiaroa, the representative of the Southern Maori District, who endeavored, without success then, to have the number of members increased to seven—five for the North and two for the South Island. There was a long debate upon the motion for the second reading of that Bill. Mr. Whitaker, as representing the Government, said he thought that the Maori representation had never been upon a fair and proper basis, and, having recommended Mr. Tazaeoa to withdraw his Bill, promised that in the next session “a Bill would be brought down for the “adjustment of that and of all other “ matters in reference to representation “and the regulation of, elections that “ required amendment,” On this subject there appeared to be the usual discord of opinion between its members which appears essential, as we are told, to the harmonious action of the present Government.; Sir Georoe Grey felt that the native population was not fairly represented, and he urged Mr. Taiaroa not to give up the Bill; and promised him every assistance he could give in carrying it through all its stages. The Hon. Colonel Whitmore, in the Legislative Council, said that ‘ ‘ there “ was no question that the Maoris were “ at present enjoying an undue amount “ of representation in Parliament, and “ that the only excuse that could be “ made was that they had not yet got all “ their lands Crown-granted.” In the last session on the 17th August the subject was revived ; “ Mr. Sheehan asked the Attorney-General, —Whether the Government intend to introduce a Bill dealing with the question of Maori representation, as promised last session; and, if so, when the Bill is likely to be brought down 1 Ho asked the question in consequence of a promise made by the hon. gentleman last year. Ho wished to know whether the Government were prepared to bring in such a measure; so that, if they were not, the subject might be taken up by a private member. “ Mr. Whitaker said, this matter had been carefully considered in connection, generally, with the question of Parliamentary representation. : It was the intention of the Government during the present session to bring in a Bill for the purpose of registering Maori electors. It was also intended to bring in a Bill for the purpose of adopting a new plan for registering other electors. It was also intended to . take a census of the European. inhabitants, and a census of the Maori population, and then to confer oh the Maori population a representation in proportion to that of the Europeans.” Aa a matter of fact, a Bill had been prepared which,—providing for manhood

suffrage and for a mode of registration for Maoris and half-castes on a roll, separate and distinot from that of the Europeans,— proposed to enact—

“ That the number of Maori members to be elected for the whole colony shall bear to the entire number of members of the House of Representatives (exclusive of the Maori members thereof) the same proportion as the number of registered Maori electors shall bear to the entire number of registered electors on the rolls of the several electoral districts of the colony.” According to the Maori census of 1874, the number of males above the age of fifteen years was 16,517 in both islands. Of these we may estimate, roughly, 12,000 as being adults ; taking the adults of European race at 120,000, and the number of members of the House as 84, the Maoris would thus be entitled to eight members, instead of four, the present number.

We take up this question now in reference to the lately reported proceedings of the Hon. Minister of Justice in the North, and to the abrupt dismissal of the Registration and Returning Officer for the electoral District of Mangonui and the Bay of Islands, Mr. Williams, in order, as it appears, that four hundred Maori claims to vote to which ho (Mr. Williams) had officially objected, might be placed upon the electoral roll of the district without objection to them being made. What we desire to show is that there has been a disposition on the part of the Legislature to act with perfect fairness to the natives, and that there was no necessity, in their interest at least, to resort to any extreme measures of protection.

The duties of the registration officer are defined by the Registration of Electors Act, 1866. The clause XII. is as follows :

“The registration officer shall, within the first seven days of the mouth of May, make out an alphabetical list, in the form numbered 4 in the schedule hereto, of all persons objected to as aforesaid, and if he shall have reasonable cause to believe that any person whose name shall be on the said list of voters is dead, or from any cause whatever, is not entitled to be on the electoral roll in respect of any qualifications stated in such list, and is not objected to, he shall insert the name of such person in the list of persons so objected to, and shall affix his name as the objector thereto.” In making the objections to the Maori claims, it would thus appear that Mr. Williams was discharging the duty imposed upon him by law, and that it was the Revising Officer, and not Mr. John Lundon or Mr. Sheehan, who should have determined, after a public hearing of the claims in Court, whether the objections were substantial or not. The mode of procedure by dismissing the official objector from liis office, and thus preventing the hearing of the objections, has the character of one of those smart and unscrupulous electioneering dodges for skill in which Mr. Sheehan has justly acquired fame, but it is not a proceeding we think which is becoming in the Minister of Justice, or creditable to the Government of which he is a member. It secured the registration of the 400 claims to vote objected to. It may bo that the fact of four hundred natives having their names recorded in a memorial of ownership of tribal lands in the Native Lands Court, entitles them to the privileges of the franchise, but it would have been at least proper to have allowed the Revising Officer in open Court to have heard the objections, and to have decided thai question. It cannot be proper for the Minister of Justice to stifle lawful inquiry by an arbitrary act, and to do so in what is well known to be the interest of his own party, and with the result that, if there were a general election to-morrow, —unless the sense of honesty of the natives revolted at the trickery which has been practised,—Mr. John London would be sent to Parliament as the desired “ companion ” of Sir George Grey. If Ministers themselves show their respect for laws, and for judicial institutions established bylaw, in this way, we need not be surprised to find the natives bettering their instruction. We are proceeding now upon the assumption that, incredible as it appears, the statement made by the “New Zealand Herald,’’ which we reprinted in our issue of the 10th instant, is true, and that the Government have deliberately violated the law, and swamped the European electors of the Bay of Islands and Mangonui District by four hundred bogus Maori votes, for the purpose of securing a seat in the House of Representatives for a friend of Sir George Grey; and in this connection we note, with some surprise, the fact that the Press Agency, which has been accused, so lately, by the Government of political partizanship, has had no notice from its Auckland representative of an event which the “ Herald ” said “ had ‘ ‘ created a great deal of stir,” and would “ be heard of again when the Parliament “meets.”