The Patea Mail. (Published Wednesdays and Saturdays.) WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1879.

Patea Mail, Volume V, Issue 477, 19 November 1879, Page 2

The Patea Mail. (Published Wednesdays and Saturdays.) WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1879.

One of the Bills before the House that will not become law this Session, is Sir George Grey’s “ Elective Council Act, 1879.” It would not occupy much attention Re re it not for the man by whom it was introduced. “ I’ll make you elective,” is a standing throat with him. Ho quarreled with a Governor and forthwith we heard that Governors should be elective; he found it inconvenient that MiHall should pass from the House to the Council, and from the Council to the House as he lias done, and that Mr Whitaker should be called to the Attorney-Generalship at the will of his opponent, and he forthwith brings down the Bill in question. Wo do not see that there is any necessity for wasting valuable time with a Bill that is foredoomed to the shelf, nor of adding to the other troubles of the country a dispute between the two Houses of Parliament. Wu are not aware that the Upper House

has proved itself unworthy of the confidence of the country, or that it has done anything to warrant the ex-Promier in inviting the House of .Representatives to insult it. The effects of the dispute between the two Houses in Victoria have not been of a kind to excite the envy of neighboring colonies, and it is therefore to be hoped that New Zealand will decline, with thanks, to bo hurried into a conflict with her Constitution similar to that under which Victoria has been groaning since the advent of Berrylsm. It is argued by the opponents of the nominated Council —the New Zealander for example—that if it be abolished “ one flagrant source of political corruption would be removed.” Wo do remember something about a seat in the Council being offered to a Mr Ingles if ho were defeated in an election which he was invited to contest, but it was not then discovered that the Council could be used for purposes of corruption. We are of opinion that the fact of a seat in the Upper House being often made the reward of services rendered to a party, is an argument in favor of its remaining Nominative. It is a safety valve; it prevents corruption of a baser and costlier sort. What is the grand secret of the difference between the American and the English politician ? It is this: tnc American knows of no reward but money. The almighty dollar is the only thing his party has to give, and the only thing he is taught to value. Hence the American politician is generally a corrupt and perjured villian. Hence they have, as President of the Country, a man who was not elected by the- people, hut was put into the office for money. Politics have so degenerated under the reign of this detestable practice of buying and selling every kind and degree of political influences and Government offices, that the better classes of people who have souls above bribes and swindles hold aloof from public life. Only the needy man, who has nothing but his wits and lack of conscience to live on, is to be found in the ranks of professional politicians. Or, if a man of means is there, it is only for the purpose of finding good investments for his money among the bribe-taking crew. Turn to England ; look on that picture and on this ; what a contrast! Scarcely any member of the House of Commons would take money lor his vote; certainly no prominent member would, and what is more, no member dare offer it The politician who should bo found guilty of corruption, instead of being counted a ‘ smart man,’ would be regarded with horror and detestation. The nation has not been trained to regard filthy lucre as the only reward for _ any political service. The highest ambition of the majority is to attain * honor or distinction. A Peerage, or an Order, is often the reward of political services, yea, perhaps even of party services. These rewards might therefore be stigmatised as corruption. For the sake of argument, we accept the word, but maintain that if they are corruption, they are the mildest form of a necessary evil. A title is an infinitely less objectionable reward than sordid gold. A'title, if it be only ‘ Hon.", may not lessen one’s self-respect, or, the self-respect of those who grant it, nor will it help to break down the nation’s reverence for a good name. But when a man’s ambition can no longer be appealed to, there will be sure to be an appeal to his avarice, and when that appeal is admitted, self-respect is a minus quantity, and things are rotten in the State of Denmark.

The Bill is objectionable on other grounds. In the first place it pioposes to give the North Island one member more than it gives to the South Island. Considering that the population of the South Island is fifty per cent, greater than that of the North Island, it is not

by any nravus a just proposal, and is pAftidilarly remarkable coming from the champion of the rights of man and of representation on the basis of population. In the matter of political power, the North Island mast be content with a fair share, and any attempt to make an anjnstdistinction which will stir up jealousy, and promote Separalionist ideas, should be as carefully sat upon as possible. Why, again, should there be but two electoral districts in the colony ? Why, i{ a member should die, or resign, should a whole Island he put to th<* trouble and expense of an election to fill one seat? And further, none but the rich could contest an election on such an extensive scale, and none but those already known in the political world would have any chance of success, so that we fail to see wherein the Elective Council would (lifter from the Nominated Council, except that it would be somewhat loss independent.