MASTERTON DEBATING SOCIETY.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 4, Issue 1120, 8 July 1882, Page 2

MASTERTON DEBATING SOCIETY.

- There was & fair attendance of members at the Masterton Debating Society. The Eev. Mr Isitt, in. the absence of Mr. Gruudy, being voted-to. the chair.. Mr E, Brown advocated the delegate system of government the subject of the "evening and argued that: it would raise politics above the reach of sell interest irid; that such a system'was as to true repretentation as a monument was to masonry; He Contended that in a delegate structure the base would be aswideas possible, a sort of pyramid . system ! he)jinniri? with local self Government and grouping these primary bodiesinto districts; of a suitable size for electing mombers of the central.legislature, Hu pointed- out the advantages of men graduating, in' 'the lower bodies, and becoming thoroughly conversant with the requirements of,- the ; country and amenable to the wishes of their constituents,. At the.same.time the constitution of lower bodies, would be greatly improved as aspirants for legislature honors would in the first. instance have to serve in them. The result would be considerable advantage to both: local and general goyerments, .;. •-.•• • ; ■■'- 1: 'Mr! Wobdroofe,- -in- reply,-objected -to getting.nd of the present ballot; box'system,' The proposal. ;meant taking awaythe the maisesand giving them to the uppfirclasßea. Itmeantput-. . ting.tyrants in power.;,. There• should be', no such thing as consolidating, into small bodieß.' .be ;as- broad as possible"" Such a-cour'se af.theone proposed.would create corruption and lead to'a revolution; '••It would keep the peo-ple.hood-winked, and ;the country 5 Would groan under misrule. .. ' :.V ~ . ■ MriPaytoh sai'd'.'the'pffopo¥al was a. oon : servative.one, but it wasaaohapalpablo fraud on the franchises "of Working men, and that he felt bound to oppose jt.'-' Mr Hogg said that opposition to any innovation was" a characteristic of the British; race.' • He : did niif know that this W.as a.bad. trait. : Stillbis.tyry showed'that-, .the greater the innovation' the greater the obstacle placed in its'way. present' proposition'was an 1 "invasion'! of the tradition's to which-they had been born.. Professor Newman,, who had brought their proposals, forward in' England,- wasable'not only to formulate a thejory but'tu indicate bow it might be carried out. The change to suoh a system!' was not •■ 'neceasarilw revolutionary in its character. It was more, a mark ofonward -progress!. A-; still-, gfoater' revolution was accom-, ptished by...Sir.,. Julius: Vogel whentho.' provinces were abolished.' He'.'-be lieved the.syatem-ijtiuld have a purifying effect. It was a system; pi, building -up .'whetherthe oope'-stohe be a king, ah eniperor, or a president.; Men were now placed in "'high-positions', mere; mcunle;banks were" elevated, Bimply ;: beoatiße • the multitude were/dazzled by. -prepossessing exteriors', : .object: of 'the', delegate, system was not only to improve .but to oheapon.the cost of Government.- Asthings now were menibers were not re;{ sponsible to their Constituents but underthe delegate ayatom if the structure beneath gave. way, the feet were cut from under the legislators', above.' An absolme vote, of a majority could at any time replace a member who had forfeited the confidence of those bodies Iwliioh returned, him. ■ ' ,

. Mr Bedman thought that in the present state of European countries a proposal like the one before them was premature... If Legislators were demoralised, and nothing but a complete change, would!' save a country from a downfall, it would be desirable to try the delegate- system. If they we not well represented nowit was thefr own fanlt. he did nbt think the delegate system was the pre-; sent one. ";:.■.. ''■ j .

Mr.H»IL said he had.,fliie4 to gather anything good from advocates of the system,. If, the people clamored, under a delegate, the'delegates; would : at once turn Jtypdiand reply-that they were not -responsible to them. The countrywasibjcflming thoroughly educated to exercisa the present franchise, 7 He did not ;pb]eoT|a'iimpvatipn6| but the present one • wen^ioVfir.:. The extension of the franbe lost i ■Mr. Gir^6oa'-Mgr^^ : tfiai''ifr Worth. ■haoV.nbt rf on the del§?ate system,'. He; should"'fa'ther- feel' Tiioiiried; to 'oppose' He jpointodout that, once the'foundation of tHe pyrajriaid waslaid 'the. working classes who cqrißlituEettfthe basis word no longer ; required,... i N6'w„iri;W l o'biMon\the work;jh'jfafts.ieS ihbuldia^e-a^h l a. ! in putting fih"e''ye'r'y.stonSi ' ThpeTefate system ourtailed''the.:.]irivilij#B: of'-working men. The;;' present ~ ifiM United constituent's'with their members, though it ,KBfbpen to a oharge. of rad-tapeißm, but 'witb/the Rebate system the oircumlocu- . tiphtwj) u uld'pe ; materially jnpreased. The time lost in travelling from/he-founrlation ;6f tlie pryaiatd to the t6'p,and back would. . vuin any country. He.,tJiought there-were | hdnoit"able men in the country whom they could returri : under;the present system to Parliament, ;,.:••..!. ; I !•/.-Mr B,.Brown.;in -reply said ! tbe present system ww.avmisrepreseritative system! 'people had very little choice.in returning "» member,-\M6ney'-rather' than, merit seoured-i feat. "People took; very iittlii "interest:in the business of tlie country,, awl were-misled;by election claptrap.- In the'absence'bf any other, propoaal to reinedy' existing evils, the delegate iysterapugWtohavoa trial:'" ' ; "

•• The question wasJtheh' put fo-tlie' vote;, and jost,'fo.ilf.TSupportipg and !bers op'pdsih?. the .delegate. syste;ra,^,„.,', :