THE MINERS' RIGHT FRANCHISE.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2009, 12 June 1875, Page 2

THE MINERS' RIGHT FRANCHISE.

~ The Otagb Guardian! ma recent issue gives the following history of the Miners' Eight Franchise in New Zealand :-—. ■ ■

Thehiftory of the Miners' Eight Franchise in this colony is worth again adverting to, both on Account of the curious fluctuations of opinion which it exhibits, and also because of the-incorrect statements which have been circulated, regarding ifc. In 1860, when gold-mining first became a colonial industry, an Act was passed which enabled the holder of a Miner's Bight to vote anywhere at any election for the Assembly or the Provincial Council, and also at the election of a Superintendent. The latter provision was, however, never exorcised, for, in 1862, before a vacancy had occurred in the office of Superintendent, the Act was repealed, and other provisions were made. The power of voting at Superintendental elections was abolished, and the franchise was limited to the right of voting at elections of "Goldfields members'" of the House of Representatives or Provincial Council, and where no ..such members were "by law appointed" at - any election within tho _ electoral district. in which the qualifying Miner's Eight had been issued. In 1865 the latter right, was still farther restricted to Provinces in which there was " a duly proclaimed goldfield.". Up to this point we followed the subject in a previous article, but we then made tho mistake, which we now propose to correct, of not stating the. further alterations which have been made since. In 1870 a fresh fit of liberality seems to have affected the Assembly, for we find in the Qualification of Electors Act, passed in that year, a clause declaring and enacting that the holder'of a Miner's Eight or business license mayvote at any election for either Legislature within any such one electoral district, " as he may think fit, provided it be sitaate wholly or partly within a goldfield proclaimed within the Province" in which the same was issued. The proviso to this clause, intended to be restrictive, really makes the matter worse, for it is to the effect that the " right " or "license " shall not carry a vote within the district in which the holder is registered, so that it would seem to confer the possible power of voting in two districts—in the one as a registered elector, in the other as a holder of a Miner's Eight or license.; Now, a? to the so-called gold-fields members, respecting whom very great confusion of ideas seem to exist. It is a remarkable fact, that we owe to the peculiar franchise with which we are now dealing, the presence in the Assembly of the present Premier, during the most important part of his Parliamentary-career. By an Act passed in 1862, it was expressly provided that two members should .be returned "as Gold-fields Eopresentatives for the Province of. Otago," who were to be " elected by persons; duly qualified under thcMiners'Kepresenlalion Act," It will be observed that tho dec-

tion of such members was limited to the Province of Otago, and in point of fact there never have been any ''goldfields members," properly so-called, in any other Province. The first representatives, of our miners were Captain Baldwin and George Brodie. In 1865 all'the townships were eliminated 'from the " Gold-fields Districts," leaving the latter in the position of a purely mining constituency ; and the two members elected under that Act were Julius Vogel and Charles O'Neill. These were the last goldfield members ever elected; for in 1870 the " Goldfield districts" were abolished, and the miners were merged in the various constituencies under a new division of electoral districts, their peculiar franchise being, however, retained as under the Miners' Representation Amendment Act, 1865.

We cannot but think that the more speedily all such • invidious distinctions as are created and maintained by tlie Miner's Eight franchise are, annihilated the better will it be for those mostly terested. And equally, for thesamereaaoa, we condemn the use of the phrase " Goldfields Members." It is. unmeaning, because there are not any such members of, the Assembly who are "so'designated, but \ represent the commercial, agricultural, and pastoral districts equally with; the goldmininff interests. And in some districts that wo could name, it is. even questionable whether in number the former arc not possessed of at least equal voting power.