The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19, 1878.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5375, 19 June 1878, Page 2

The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19, 1878.

Tr is admittedly a good thing for a political agitator, perhaps a necessary stock in trade, to have principles. If they can be made elastic and to fit easily, so that the wearer can at any time disembarrass himself of them, so much the more valuable are the principles; or better if, like a paletot which was in fashion not very long ago, and was distinguished as the “reversible,” tho wearer will bo able wholly to alter the character and color of his principles and yet be able to say quite truly that he had not changed his coat, but had only turned it. If there were any one “principle” which more than another could be taken to bo the foundation upon which “ such a nation as has never been seen” was to be built by Sir George Grey and hia assistants, that principle is manhood suffrage, with one vote and only one vote for each adult male. To borrow the words of our contemporary the “ Timaru Herald,” from a leading article which we reprinted a few days ago: “Manhood suffrage is the article with which Sir George Grey begins, continues, and

ends his political creed. Again and again he comes back to it, whenever ho addresses the people. He wants a land tax, but the only way to get it is by manhood suffrage ; he wants ‘ to ‘destroy tho power of the runholders, ’ but tho only way to do it is by manhood suffrage ; ho wants to reform the Civil Service, but he cannot do so until lie is supported by a House elected by manhood suffrage. He bewails the abolition of the provinces, and declares that no appeal was made to tho people on that subject, because there was no manhood suffrage. Everything with him turns on manhood suffrage, and when lie speaks of manhood suffrage he means it, and nothing else.” At Hamilton, in Waikato, the Hon. Premier is reported to have pointed to tho existing law, which gave to one man forty-live votes, whilst others had only one vote, and some none at all, as giving tho rich man an undue voice in the disposal of the taxes to which tho working classes had contributed to the greatest extent, and ho then declared that “himself and his colleagues were of opinion that an end should at onco bo “ put to a system by which tho wealthy ‘ ‘ had undue votingpowerin the regulation “ of the expenditure of the money raised “ from tho laboring classes.” The enunciation of these principles has t 'very where, wo are told, evoked ‘‘the “ most extraordinary enthusiasm.” Politics, d activity was enormously increased ; mien who never took any interest in polities before had given up work, and having put themselves into training as statesmen, were handling tho imaginary bricks, and mixing the imaginary

mortar, for the building up of the future nation. I fancy, said the Premier, moved by Pythonio fervor on the stump at Dunedin, — “I fancy I “ sometimes see passing along the beach “ what are vast populations, now say half “ a million, then in a few years two or “three millions, then in a few years “ almost countless millions, all passing “ on, all founded by you, the present in- “ habitants of New Zealand, all depending upon the laws which you have “ made, depending upon the institutions “ which you have established. And then “ I look carefully to see as I gaze at these “ populations passing by, what is their ‘ ‘ aspect ? Is is one of general comfort, “ general happiness, general, content- “ ment ? Are these countless millions “ which I see all follow one after another “leading a happier "life than the men “ hitherto were 1 Am Ito see a mean “ wretched squalid population, some mil- ‘ ‘ lion or two, strutting with pomp and “ power, and perhaps thirty-eight mil- “ lions starving, scarcely fed, scarcely “ clothed ; old people without hope, “ drunkards driven to drink from want “ of any animated principle in life to “ guide them on ? Which are the popu- “ lations to pass before us ? Well, the “ hopes I indulge in are these : I imagine “I see banners in their hands and on “ them the names of, some now living, and “ I see the names of families that 1 have “known in New Zealand, and I hear “ loud shouts and loud acclamations of “joy and encouragement as these ban- “ nors wave. I believe. —I believe that “such will be the future of New Zea- “ land—(loud cheering)—and the last “ words I will say to you are these : “ You must strive to the utmost to bring “ such an equal state of things about. “ Let us strive to found a nation such as “ has never been. Wo have power to do “ it. Who will prove recreant to such a “ trust 1 Who will prove ungrateful to “ such a course 1 I believe the people of “ New Zealand never will.”

This may be said to bo pretty well for “ hi"h.” It was, however, the baseless fabric of a vision.

Hans Breitmau git a barty— Vbere ish dat barty now ? Vbere ish dor lufly colden gloud Dat float on dev moundain'a prow ? Vbere ish de himraelstrablonde stern— Do shtar of de shpirit’a light ? All gon’d afay.mit dev lager-peer— Afay in de ewigkeit! Sir George Grey’s manhood suffrage with one vote, and one vote only, is gone, with Major Breitman’s beer, into space and the eternal silences. ' Yesterday wo heard the voice of the great agitator, not now on the stump, but in his right mind and clothed in the reversible paletot with the wrong side out, speaking thus:—“We hear a great deal of the “ shocking proposal to give a man a vote “ in every district in which he has a pro- “ pertyqualification, while the Whitaker “ gift of one vote and no more, is held “up for our admiration. Lot us apply a “ test. Will Mr. Whitaker move an “ amendment on the .Government mea- “ sure, taking away plural voting? If “ he declines the challenge, we may sus- “ peot the design of his own scheme as a “ measure securing popularrights. ‘Timeo “ Danaoa et dona ferentes,’ which, freely “translated, might run ‘Fear the “Tories, especially when they offer gifts “ to the people ! ’ ” ' We have not held up Mr. Whitaker’s Representation Bill—of which we were able to give only a mere outline—for the admiration of any person, in the present Government or out of it. We have endeavored to contribute towards the existing stock of information upon a most important public question —the representation of the people in Parliament —by showing what has been done already in the way of change or improvement in a direction different from that of the existing system, and by stating broadly what was proposed to be submitted for consideration of Parliament by the late Government.

Until Sir G eorge Grey or Mr. Baxlance shall have promulgated his policy in the shape of a Bill, which, although solemnly promised, neither will do, Mr. Whitaker cannot bo expected to accept the challenge so chivalrously offered, to him by Ministers. To Sir George Grey’s scheme of manhood suffrage with one vote, and one vote only, and with representation and government by majorities only, we think it probable that Mr. Whitaker, in common with most men who have anything to lose in this colony, would strenuously object. But if the Government measure contained a fair and reasonable provision for the representation of all the people and of all shades of public opinion in the House of Representatives, pleurality of votes would make inequality in representation, to which, we think, Mr. Whitaker, in common with liberals generally, would object. It is to one-sided representation and to mob »ule under Sir George Grey’s inspiration, and not to manhood suffrage with proper securities for the liberties of all—and not for the liberty of the majority alone—-that serious opposition will be found to exist eitherin the Parliament or in the country. Even if Sir George Grey should now feel “ blue moulded for want iv a batin,” it is imprudent to challenge Mr. Whitaker to tread on his coat-tails, as he has just done. If his own memory be bad, others are not so conveniently gifted, and although even the echoes of his recent appeals to all creation, on the stump, have died away, appeals can still be made to the recorded evidence of the reckless insincerity of his political “patter.”