STONEWALLING IN THE NEW ZEALAND PARLIAMENT. AN AUSTRALIAN OPINION.

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 391, 7 August 1889, Page 4

STONEWALLING IN THE NEW ZEALAND PARLIAMENT. AN AUSTRALIAN OPINION.

Sydney, August 2. The "Sydney Morning Herald," in a leading arbiclo yesterday, deals with the stonewalling tactics adopted in the New Zealand Parliament. It says that there is a strong presumption that such a struggle, being fought in secrecy, is conducted more or less in a discreditable manner, and questions whether, under any circumstances, persistent obstruction is justifiable. It considers that the defence that the Government should not force a measure before the people had expressed their opinibn might easily be carried too far, and would mean the superseding of representative government by a system of public meeting government. It holds the continuance of stonewall to be an abuse of the legitimate use ,of parliamentary pri\ ileges, The article says it does not commend the disputed Bill, but has no sympathy with the methods used to oppose ' it. It says it cannot be denied that there is extreme provocation for the action of the stonewallers, and that there is neither justice nor sound policy in the special recognition of the pastoral, and agricultural interests while commerce and manufactures are not accorded recognition.

'Wellington, August 3. The House met at 2.30 without any definite arrangement having been made between the two parties. There seemed to be Wgeneral impression that as negotiations wore still in progress the, House would adjourn until 7.30, bub this was nob done until twenty minutes past iour, the interval being taking up in comparatively empty discussion, questioning by the Opposition, and fencing by the Minister. The opponents di the Bill and supporters of Sir George Grey's amendments wanted to know exactly what the Government would do if these amendments were carried, bub Mr Hislop, who was in charge of the Bill, fenced every query with consummate skill ; but time after time, the questioners returned to the charge and at length after an hour's bickering the • Premier was drawn, and reminded the ! House that no committee gave any decision upon a question that was nob before it. , What would follow if the amendments I were carried it would be clearly wrong for the Government to disclose, until the question came before them. Mr Seddon intimated that Sir George Grey was willing to withdraw his amendments as being the only dignified course that could be taken, seeing that before he brought them down he misunderstood from the whip, the attitude of the Government. Mr Fraser said the House would not allow the amendment to be withdrawn. Mr Seddon by way of getting out of the difficulty suggested that the consideration of the short title to which Sir Geo. Grey's amendments related should be postponed until after the remainder of the Bill had been dealt with. In default of that he moved to strike out the word " short "from the clause, and this being an amendment to an earlier portion of the clause would have to be put before Sir Geo. Grey. Sir George asked leave to withdraw, but unanimous con&ent could not be obtained. As, however, it was ruled that Mr Seddon's was the prior amendment under the standing orders, discussion was invited upon the question of the omission of the word "short" from the short title, the original amendment dropping out of sight for the moment. After some further discussion the question that Sir G. Grey bo allowed to withdraw was again put a third time, and leave at last given. Mr Seddon's amendment was also withdrawn. Sir George G iey exonerated the Government whip from any intention to mislead him, and said that that gentleman's communication to him had been of a moot friendlynature.

PLURAL VOTING. Sir George Grey asked what were the intentions of the Government with regard to the abolition of plural voting. The Premier said that any action in that direction would have to be" by way of the insertion of a special clause in the Bill, and before the time came for that they would make a statement. Sir George Grey having twitted the Government with their undignified position in having to submit to the dictation of caucuses of city and country parties, an adiournmenb was made until 7.30, to enable a conference of delegates from the two parties to meet. WORKING FOR A COMPROMISE. When members dispersed at 4.20, the delegates fiom both parties met and discussed the terms of a compromise, and very soon it became known that terms had been settled, and the deadlock averted, This speedy termination of the differences that had occupied the attention of Parliament nearly a fortnight was doubtless due to the fact that all hopes of a reversion to ninety-one members, for which members had really been striving, had vanished. On resuming at 7. 30 an adjournment was made till 9 p.m., so that the town and country parties might consider the compromise which their delegates had arrived at. Everything had "been settled then, but the drafting of a new clause required a further adjournment, which was made until 10.15 ; and then it had not been finished, so that the Government ngieed to a further adjournment until Monday at 7.30, progress being first reported.

WHAT THE COMPROMISE IS. I foreshadowed yesterday what the compromise would be, the only difference being a precautionary recommendation as re^ garded the swinging margin, instead of reducing ib to 500 from 750. This was done because the Commissioners intimated that with only 70 electorates they rather needed a larger margin than a reduced one. The delegates appointed for each party had no difficulty in arriving at a settlement of the difficulty, for it was resolved after careful consideration to recommend to their respective parties the following as a basis of compromise :—: — (1) The Act of 1577 to be taken as a basis. This determines the special districts to be as at present ; the allowance to be made to special districts to be by addition, not by reduction as in the present Bill ; the amount of allowance to be 28 per cent. (2) The margin of 750 each way at discretion of Commissioners is not to bo used to the detriment of the towns and in favour of the country. This was adopted by the town party after considerable argument, but they preserved their unanimity until the last, for those few who objected gave in without demur to the majority. In the country party were five dissentients, among whom was Colonel Fraser, who strongly protested against the compromise ; but its acceptance was carried by 41 to 5, and then the only trouble remained to redraft the clause required to embody the last resolution passed by the delegates.

HOW THE BILL WORKS. There has been such a lot of balk about the Bill and the effect it would have that a clear statement with figures cannot but prove interesting to all who have watched the struggle from the start. The Government Bill as framed, viz., with 25 per cent, deduction from the population of the four cities and suburbs, as therein defined, would have given the following results :— Town quota, 10,220 ; country quota, 7,665. If 28 per cent, deduction had been substituted for 25 the result svould have been .town quota, 10,567 ; country, 7,691 ; if 33£ per cent, deduction had been used the result would have been town quota, 11,232 : country, 7,488. This w.as, however, done away with, as the delegates of the two parties were unanimous in abandoning the principle of deduction from "town population and in reverting to the principle of addition to the country population, as defined in the Act of 1887. _ This being so, it will be interesting to give the results of the various percentages. - ■ / Thus 18 per cent, as at, present in the Act makes the town quota, 9,147 ; country quota, 7,755 ; number oi town members, 22 2; number of country members, 47 8. With 25 per cent., addition the quotas are — town, 9,517 ; country, 7,611 ; number of town members, 21 \5 ; country members, 48 *7. With 28 per cent, addition town quota is 9^676, country quota 7,565 ; ' town members 21, country members 49. With 33i

per cent, addition the town quota would be 9,959,, c0untry 7,473; town members 20*4, country 49*6. By comparing these figures it will be seen that the whole difference that the struggle has been about nominally has been a difference of quota ranging in the case of the country between 7,488 and 7,755, and in the case of the towns between 9,147 and 11,232 ; and as regards the number of members, between 20 and 22 for the towns, and between 48 and 50 for the country. , Of course the stonewall when first erected was against the inclusion of the boroughs and small towns also, but there has been a majority in the House against this for some time. The country districts will gain a ten per cent, advantage by thepresent arrangement except in the case when the population is principally within the borough and there is only a very small area of country included. Many members think that the parfc about the using of the quota to the disadvantage bf the towns is only a fancy, but the wish of the town party is that a town electorate will not be asked to contain more than the population required to entitle it to a member according to the Act. The clause to guard against the Commissioners injuriously using their power in this respect has been drafted in various forms, and will finally be settled on Monday, when no further difficulty it is expected will be found in dealing with the Bill. *

THE <• TIMES" ON OBSTRUCTION. The city party are jubilant over the compromise, which they consider on the whole to be all in their favoui\ Some few would sooner have seen the Bill killed. The "Times" this morning, in dealing with the compromise, says : " On the whole the compromise is a satisfactory one, and the city members and those who assisted them are deserving of the warmest thanks of their constituents. Now a word on the subject of the obstruction. The city members have in this case felt themselves called upon to fight for what they considered a great principle, and what certainly was a great principle. In order to successfully maintain "their course they resorted to what are commonly known as 'stonewalling' tactics, with the result that they kept a wordy war raging for a week and then obtained peace with honour. That the majority must rule cannot be denied. Ife may indeed be considered a fair proposition that the fittest will survive, and the majority command in any contest ; but let it not be forgotten that minorities have their rights also, and that justice must prevail even over majorities. Than the present case there could be no better exemplification of that principle. While we applaud the city members we must also render the country party that praise which is their due for the honesty with which they have allowed principle to prevail over physieaf strength."

PAIRING. Among the pairs on the Representation Bil* the other day were Messrs Beetham and Peacock, who are at present absent from the colony. The " Post " last evening condemns this, and says it is quite legitimate that a member who is from any cause unable to be present at a division should record his opinion by pairing with a member similarly situated on the other side, but it is not legitimate for friends or whips to pair members who are at the other side of the globe, and who do not and cannot know anything of the questions upon which they are paired.

A SMALL HOUSE. The effect of the withdrawal of Sir George Grey's amendments and the determined stand the Government propose taking in the matter is to kill any chance of obtaining a return to the old number of members. The "Post" had a strong leader on the subject last night, and while advocating a compiomise between city and country, argues against a small House on a variety of grounds.

PUBLIC RESERVES BILL. In the Upper House yesterday the Hon Mr Stevens moved the second reading of the Public Reserves Bill, and explained 'that if the Bill were passed the classification of the recreation or charitable reserves could nob be changed except by special Act of Parliament. This was agreed to, and the Bill will be committed next Tuesday.