The Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, MAY 24, 1888. THE ELECTORAL BILL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1741, 24 May 1888, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, MAY 24, 1888. THE ELECTORAL BILL.

‘‘ When you set about killing your mother-in-law, kill her outright,” is a facetious way of urging the desirability of doing things thoroughly when they are to be done at all. The present Government are evidently determined to act on this principle with regard to democracy. It is a thing they hate, and they are determined to kill it. Last session they reduced the number of members, so that the constituencies might be made larger, and that poor men' would find it too expensive to contest them; they also reduced the honorarium so that poor men could not afford to go to Wellington lor so small a sum. Not satisfied with this, they have now introduced a Bill which, il carried, will render it impossible for any poor man to be elected.. The new hill proposes to abolish the present electoral. districts, and to give to the Governordn-Council, which is another name for the Government, power' to divide the colony into districts which shall contain not more than eight and not less than three of the present constituencies. This proposal can best be understood by giving an illustration of how it would work. In all probability if it were to become law, all the country lying between the Bakaia and the Waitaki would be one constituency, and there would be elected for this district about four members. It would thus be im possible for any poor man to contest such a large constituency as that, and doubtless that is the object Government have in view. There is, however, this to be said. It is possible it would result in the people organising themselves better, and by doing this they would still be able to elect the poor man without involving him in any great expense, But it is doubtful whether this would be done, and the chances are ten to one that the mian who could spend the money would always be elected. There is another villainous proposal in the Bill. The electors would have to take out electoral rights every three years, and for these they would have to pay one shilling each. Thus before any man could vote he would have to pay one shilling for the right to vote. Of course thousands of electors would never go to the trouble of taking out electoral rights when they would have to pay for them, and thus they would be disfranchised. The Bill has not yet reached us, and we have only gathered this much information from the newspaper reports. There can he no doubt but that if it becomes law the capitalists, monopolists, and moneyrings will have things all their own way.

SUGGESTED INSOLVENCY. Sir Frederick Whitaker and the Premier have made desperate efforts to explain away Sir Frederick’s startling statement. They say now that what Sir Frederick said was “We shall have to file our schedule,” meaning that the Government would, as private individuals, have to file. What an absurdity ? What shuffling ? The House laughed at this explanation, and no wonder, and Mr Beeves (St. Albans) and Mr Turnbull stated that they heard Sir Frederick make the statement. We have frequently said that, since this loan was first proposed, the Government’s main object in view was to help the Bank of New Zealand.; I he Wellington correspondent of the Otago Daily Times says

“It ia whispered that the secret reeson for the haste was due to a desire to help the Bank of New Zealand. An evening newspaper b'uited out the alleged fact, and Sir Frederick Whitakoi’a extraordinary lapse in the Council seemed only too surely to confirm it. The Opposition now freely declaie that they were sold in the matter, and it is thought that there will be trouble over it yet. Such is the way important questions are decided in the House. The Council then took up the running, and Mr Waterhouse, with an amendment similar to Mr Mackenzie's, nearly succeeded in getting the Loan Bill delayed. Sir F. Whitaker is reported to be anything but comfortable over the expressions he used.”

Thus people are beginning to see what has been as clear as day to us for years. Sir Frederick Whitaker denies that he wished to help the Bank, but it is a notable fact that Sir George Grey has protested against the Chairman of the Directors of the Bank occupying such a position as a Minister of the Crown. We do not care to enter more fully into the matter at present, but it appears to us that we are standing on the brink of a financial volcano. The loan which, is about to be raised has already been spent, What will we do next year and the year after F

THE LOAN BILL. In our last issue we commented on the startling statement made by Sir Frederick Whitaker with reference to the solvency of the colony. More recent information to hand confirms in a sort of way Sir Frederick’s statement. The Wellington Press has given “ the secret history of the Loan Bill ” as follows“ The opponents of borrowing, nevertheless, determined op g line of action, though there was no time fop proper concert. Mr Scobie Mackenzie gave notice of an amendment on the second reading of the Loan Bill, and a large body of i members who had previously , sup- 1

ported the Government resolved to support hia amendment. It was deemed only fair to the Government, however, to acquaint them with this resolution, and accordingly Mr Pulton sought an interview with the Premier and informed him that he must not count upon his (Mr Fulton’s) support to the Loan Bill, or that of other members who shared his views. Upon this the Premier requested Mr Fulton, to come into his private room, where he was engaged in conuersation with him for about a quarter of an hour. What passed there is not definitely known, but on emerging from the Premier’s office Mr Fulton at once communicated with those who had determined with him to vote for Mr Mackenzie’s amendment. He told them that the Premier, having bound him jtp the strictest secrecy, had made a disclpsure to him which convinced him that the immediate passing of the Loan Bill was a matter of absolute necessity. He told members that he was powerless to open his, lips as to the nature of the disclosure which the Premier had made known to him, having pledged his word not to do so ; but he affirmed that alter that disclosure. ; he felt compelled himself to vote for the Bill, and he advised them to, be guided by him He mentioned that the Premier had made it a question of personal confidence, and had appealed to the cordial and longsustained relations existing between them, and earnestly dwelt on the consequence to himself of being abandoned by hia oldest and most trusted political friends.” Of course this implies that the Premier communicated some secret to Mr Fulton in the room, which made him vote in favor of the loan, Mr Fulton and his friends had evidently determined on throwing out the Loan Bill, but owing to what the Premier told him, they voted for it. This of course leads to the inference that the disclosures made by the Premier in secret, were not less sensational than Sir Frederick Whitaker’s startling announcement. On last Tuesday, when the House met, Mr Seddon brought the matter before the House, but Mr Fulton only said that “ there was a time to speak, and a time to be silent. Just now he would hold his tongue.” This confirms the report given currency to by the Press, It has been next asserted that the Liberal party consulted Sir Robert Stout, who happened to be in Wellington on private business, and he advised them to vote for the Loan Bill. It has also been suggested that his advice was given on the strength of communications made to him by Sir Harry Atkinson at the interview both had in Dunedin recently. Sir Robert Stout has denied this, but it is somewhat remarkable that in a letter to the New Zealand Times, he has endeavored to defend Sir Frederick Whitaker.

Looking at all the surroundings, we have come to the conclusion that there was a screw loose somewhere, and we cannot help believing that the matter will exercise a baneful influence on the immediate future of this colony. Sir Frederick Whitaker’s statement will doubtless reach London, and do a good deal of harm to us in raising the loan.