INCREASED REPRESENTATION OF THE THAMES.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 267, 16 August 1872, Page 3

INCREASED REPRESENTATION OF THE THAMES.

To the Editor of the Thames Guardian. Sir, —ln this day’s issue of your journal you have published a copy of the petition on the above subject, and, from the items mentioned therein, it must be presumed th it the committee were put to considerable trouble. After giving bhcli items which refer to gold duty, etc., the petition continues—“ That the said district is not justly represented in the General Assembly of the colony according to its population, or the amount of taxation paid by its inhabitants, as may he shown from three points of view, viz:—l. It is not justly represented as compared with the electoral districts of the whole colony. 2. It is not justly represented as compared with the other gold fields of the colony. 3. It is not justly represented as compared with the other electoral districts in the province of Auckland. It is perfectly true, as alleged, that as far as the population and taxation are concerned, we are not fairly represented, but when a petition is prepared on such an important subject as the one alluded to, some greater care should, I think, he taken to place all the facts cl. arly and intelligiidy before those* who are asked to grant the prayer therein contained. Tlie committee, I opine, intended so to do, as will be seen in their dividing the matter under three heads ; tint in so doing tiny have gone astray altogether, and have not shown that we are entitled, to any increased representation Oil any grounds whatsoever. In ti.e Miree points referred to, vague comparisons only are drawn to the other electoral districts within the colony, instead ot giving reasons “ for the faith that is within them.” ’Had an estimate of the population of this district, as compared with that of other electoral districts been given, and also some reliable information respecting taxation, and much less of comparison wanting statistics to support statein.-rts, I think the ei-mmittee would have acted rightly. The third paragraph respecting the Electoral District of Auckland is very stupid, for it will possibly prevent our getiing an additional member for tlie Province of Auckland, to which we belong; tor the House, after perusing that paragraph, may <1 -cideoti a re-adjust-ment of the A. ucklaud electoral district as a whole, and take one member from another portiyn of the Province to the Thames, leaving the same nuiniier of % representatives for the Province as we now have. Whereas our duty, as I take it, is to get additional members for the Province—as representatives for this portion of it, in particular. On the whole, I think the petition exceedingly vague, aud wanting in facts, which should have been fully set forth. —I have, &c\, Observer. Grahamstown, August 15 1872.