The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1878.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5527, 13 December 1878, Page 2

The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1878.

Considerable interest has lately been aroused by the various city council, county, and road board elections. From all parts tidings have been received of the raging of keen contests, and every now and again there appear in the papers reports of m.ob meetings, and of the postsessional speeches of notable M.H.R. s. In this our own city we have just concluded the election for the Mayoralty, and as may readily bo soon, party spirit has run high. At such a time as this it cannot but be advantageous to rest for a moment after the turmoil, and quietly to consider, without any reference to local matters, in what manner the interests of electors as a class may best bo served, and what should bo the proper standing and the sole aim of every representative. Too often is it the case that the term “representative” is entirely mia-

used. Of late years it has become the fashion before the day ot ballot to urge the candidate to bind himself down by definite pledges as to his future conduct with reference to any questions of public importance, and the unfortunate individual, if only he is weak enough to be caught in these hampering meshes, assumes at once the position of a delegate and nothing more. If an M.H.R., he is forced to take his seat in the House tied hand and foot by promises, and thus it may often happen that, after listening to the arguments adduced on both sidos in the course of the debate, ho may feel himself constrained to give his vote in accordance with his promises and against his convictions. It is not at all an unusual thing for a candidate to be forced to pledge himself to resign at any moment, if called upon to do so by a majority of those who elect him. This system of pledging is the germ of an enormous amount of evil, and we believe also that however plausible and specious the arguments usually urged in support of this practice may at first sight appear, they will not bear the slightest examination. For let us for a moment consider what is the real meaning of the word “ representatives.” Lord Brougham’s definition, for example, is as follows “ The people part with and give “ up their power for a limited period to “ deputies chosen by themselves, those “ deputies exercising fully and freely “ that power, instead of the people thein- “ selves.” If this definition be correct, it is surely right to affirm that any attempt to fetter a representative by pledges, or to retain the power of dismissing him- before his period of office expires, is clearly a violation and infringement of the very principles of representation. If the question is put—For what purpose do the people elect representatives at all ?—ls it not that they may make laws for tho peace, order, and good government of the community? Is it not that they may do that for tho people in legislation which, from the nature of the case, it is impossible for them to do in their own persons? All this will readily be admitted afterwards. Legislation implies not merely the passing of laws, bu t also a searching and often laborious examination of the grounds upon which they are proposed. The representative is presumed to avail himself of the position in which he is placed, to institute inquiries, to collect facts, to make himself acquainted with the most reliable information that can be obtained in reference to every measure that comes before him ; to hear conflicting arguments, and, having carefully considered the question in all its bearings, then, and not till then, to adopt the course which he really believes to be moat conducive to the public welfare. The representative, in short, is sent to deliberate, and not merely to register the decrees of the people. What therefore can be more absurd than for a body of men clothed with such grave and responsible duties to assemble for no other purpose than that of voting as they have been directed. Under this absurd system of exacting pledges, intelligence, ability, integrity, and experience in public matters are no longer qualifications for the office of representative. Rather should these qualities be regarded in the light of disabilities, for their exercise is expressly forbidden under the penalty of dismissal. If we remember rightly, it was upon this very subject, in his letter to the Sheriff of Bristol, that Burke used these words—“ It is the “ duty of a representative to saori- “ fice his repose, his pleasures, ' his “ satisfactions, &0., to his constituents, “ but above all ever and in all cases to “ prefer their interest to his own ; but “ his unbiassed opinion, his maturer “ judgment, his enlightened conscience, “ he ought not to sacrifice to any set of “ men living.”