The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) SATURDAY, AUGUST 17, 1878.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5426, 17 August 1878, Page 2

The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) SATURDAY, AUGUST 17, 1878.

Thebe is not probably any subject amongst the many “wrongful” things which the present Ministry are pledged to set right more objectionable than the practice of what is called legislation by Order in Council. On the stump the Premier has been uniformally eloquent on this subject. At a public meeting at Wairarapa, after interpreting the celebrated “ letter,” Sir George Grey said ;

They still, however, preserved an Executive Council, which had a power of making laws on a variety of subjects, without publicity. It could make regulations respecting the sale of lands, which had the force of law, without a single man in New Zealand knowing tile reason why they were made—and when altered no one knew why they were altered. Under such ft system ho described how individuals were favored at the expense of the community, and if the Council found it had broken the law all it had to do was to make a new law to rentier valid the illegality. That system had grown to such an extent that the Min stry began to think that they were omnipotent, and could make laws at pleasure. One of his objects in bringing the matter before them was that the people of New Zealand should determine that the power of the Governor in Council to make laws shou'd bo restricted—ami that the Ministers should be responsible for lire hws which now appeared in the name of the Governor. If Ministers did wrong the people were able to ex Teas their disapproval or turn them out of office as having forfeited their confidence. Ho thought the proceedings of the Executive Council should bo open. Some subjects might bo necessary to be considered privately, but others, such as public land, public money, road board districts, and all such questions, should be decided openly, and reasons given for wiiatever course was adopted. This id the general burden of the song, and with variations we find it everywhere, the Pinko Swamp being the shocking example of the consequences. Under ordinary circumstance it might have been expected that we should have had no more proposals of legislation by Order in Council, more particulnrly in regard to the disposal of land. But the existing circumstances are not ordinary ; we have now a Government which has confidence in itself, and, other things being equal, or nearly so, always helps its friends and starves its enemies for their good. The power which in other hands had, as they assert, been abused, is safe in their hands, and may be retained and oven extended with great benefit to a unit or two, as wsll as to millions of the human race. We have reprinted elsewhere a Bill intituled an “ Act to amend the Public Reserves Act, 1877,” which was brought into the Legislative Council by the Colonial Secretary, and read a second time yesterday. It is another instance of the mode in which the promises of the stump are kept, and a policy said to bo approved by the people is carried into effect by law. Part vii. of the Land Act 1877 gives the Governor power to make reserves of land for the several public purposes specified, such as railways, docks, &0., &0,, or as endowments for education. Reserves for endowments however require the sanction of the Assembly to m t ake them valid. Power is also giveh to the Governor to change the phrpose of, or to exchange a reserve for other land of equal value, after proper notice hy.d been inserted in the “ Gazette ” for four consecutive weeks.

iii the last session also was passed i( an “ Act to regulate the vesting and the “ administration oi the Public Reserves (( in the colony.” Clauses 4 and 5 of that Act run as follows : 4. All Crown lands which have at any time heretofore been lawfully reserved, and lands which have been set apart by resolution of any Provincial Council, and duly gazetted, for the purpose of being reserved for any specific purpose, and all lands vested in the Superintendent of any former province by purchase, or in any other manner, for the aforesaid purpose, shall be deemed to be public reserves under this Act, s»«d may be granted and otherwise dealt with in the manner provided by this Act. Provided always that no such public reserve or any part thereof shall bo sold or exchanged except under some expressed authority of law in that behalf. 5. All public reserves heretofore lawfully made which have not been granted to or vested in a-'y governing body, trustees, or other parsons, and nil public reserves heretofore granted to any Su;nrintendent, and which have become m cd in her Majesty under the provisions of the Abolition of Provinces Act, 1875, and all public reserves hereafter to he lawfully made, may bo granted to or vested in any governing body, trustees, or other persons respectively for the specific purpose for which such reserve was made. Tho new Bill—-the Public Reserves Act Amendment Bill—which is the subject of this article, purports to repeal these two clauses, amongst others; tho meaning of the proviso to clause 4, above quoted, wo take to bo that a specific Act of tiio Legislature would be required before any reserve of the class mentioned in the clauaocouldbe soldor exchanged. The new Bill also appears, in clause 4, to extend greatly tho terms of the definition of “public reserve” and “ reserve,” and, whilst it does not anywhere appear to restore tho security against selling or exchanging provided by clause 4 of the Act of 1877 > which it proposes to repeal, it gives, by clause 0, to tho Governor in Council power, in ease of doubt, to define the purpose of any reserve, and when so defined, to sell or exchange it, “without any expressed “ authority of law in that behalf.” The common fault of this kind of legislation is, that to meet tho exigencies of a particular case, general provisions of very wide operation are introduced, tho possible offset of which, after the immediate purpose lias been served, is often overlooked. As the Bill has boon referred to tho Waste Lands Committee of the Legisla-

lative Council, we do not doubt that it will be carefully considered. If wo are mistaken in our view of .the possible operation of the Bill ia the direction we have indicated, there can bo no doubt that it extends unusually the power of legislation by Order in Council, and extends it in the direction in which the Premier holds such extension to be most dangerous and objectionable ; it thus adds another to the many instances of contrast between promise and performance, which “a “strong and united Government, bound “together by well understood principles “and with a definite object before it,” have given us in the present session of Parliament.