The Patea Mail. (Published Wednesdays and Saturdays.) WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1879.

Patea Mail, Volume V, Issue 475, 12 November 1879, Page 2

The Patea Mail. (Published Wednesdays and Saturdays.) WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1879.

It becomes every day more and more evident that many of the majority that defeated the late Ministry did not join Mr Hall from any lack of Liberal ideas. Colonel Trimble has given notice to move that Women of the age of 21, whose names are entered on the ratepayer’s roll, should be placed on the Electoral Roll also. This certainly is no Conservative proposition, and, although not by any means an original idea with the Colonel, is quite enough to show that he, at least, will only be a supporter of the Hall Government while it remains true to its professions of Liberalism. We are confident that in this the member for Grey and Bell is only a fair sample of a large number of the rank and file of the present Ministerial following. If we had no other ground for trust in the professions of the Government, this would be amply sufficient. They cannot, and dare not, be other than Liberal. Any manifestation of a retrogressive spirit would at once alienate the sympathies of those who keep them in power. This fact, we think, affords sufficient answer to those who are for ever prophesying evil, and imagining that it is the object of the present Government to dwarf the development of free and popular legislation in the colony. Were we quite certain that the members of the Cabinet were at heart all that their enemies represent them to be, we would be equally certain that what was in their hearts would have no chance of outward development. But as we are sure that, even viewed in the “ fierce light that beats upon a throne, and blackens every spot,” their faults are not as great as spite and envy have pictured them, we’ have a double assurance, and we “make assurance doubly sure, and take a bond of fate.” The Colonel’s proposal to extend the franchise to women who are ratepayer’s has not come too soon. It is remarkable how legislators, like many others, strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. The question of extending the franchise to less and less worthy classes of men is almost perpetually before the mind of reformers, and yet the wish to extend it to the most worthy among the fair sex is never thought worthy of being a party cry, and is never expressed but to be joked at and then sat upon. In the present case there should be a fair chance of the proposal to do Lardy justice to women proving rather an uncomfortable thing to sit upon. A friend of ours who once sat upon a packet of tin tacks, said that he had had some experience of the Income Tax. We heartily hope those who try to sit on the Colonel’s motion will have, at least, as touching a tale to tell. There is a strong party in the House who arc great on the rights of mankind, and who will perhaps consent to women being included under that heading, and to their having, therefore, some rights. There is another party that is equally enthusiastic over the rights of property, and who will perhaps allow that property has some rights, even when owned by a woman. Between these two parties we should think that the New Zealander has ground for hoping that “ his sisters and his cousins and his annts” will have a voice in the next General Election. [Since this paragraph was in type, we have learned that the motion was brought on by Mr Ballance, and carried by a large majority. J

There is another matter in connection with the queston of Representation which is beginning to rise before the mind of the world as one of the things that shall be, but for which at present it is perhaps vain to hope. We refer to what is called the “Representation of Minorities.” It is a matter of notoriety that, especially in large centres of population, Election contests are often very close, and that the minority is not only not represented, but their weight in the country goes into the scale of their opponents. To dispute the right of the majority to rule, would of course be to open very wide issues, far wider indeed than would be suitable to these columns. We, therefore, merely remark that while a majority should carry more weight than a minority, a majority has no right to be counted as unanimity. A majority may be 1,000, while the minority may be 999; is any reason or justice in giving the unit that makes the majority, power to politically annihilate the minority ? Why should

1,000 get nil, and 999 get nothing? Could not some kind of proportionate representation be devised which would allow two or three minorities to coalesce in the election of a representative, and so make their voice heard ? It may be very fairly urged, as against our thesis, that the minorities of one great party are only a just sot-off against the minorities of the great party opposed. But there are small parties, parties within parties, parties that are on their last logs, and parties that are beginning to be, all of which, on account of relative weakness, and of being scattered broadcast over the country, may be nnablo to make their voice heard in Parliament. Suppose, for example, that the question of which we are now treating—the Representation of Minorities —should have from fifty to a hundred advocates in each electorate of New Zealand, they would, although'forming fully ten per cent, of the electors of the colony, probably not get a single vote in Parliament, We refer to this question simply as one that belongs to the future, and must “ stew in its own juice” for yeai’g to come. It is, at present, a “ crude and undigested mass,” and may, for generations, have to fight a hard existence, but it is none the less one of the questions that must be dealt with before the milleninm sets in.