The Wairarapa Daily MONDAY, JULY 29, 1889. THE STONEWALL.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume X, Issue 3268, 29 July 1889, Page 2

The Wairarapa Daily MONDAY, JULY 29, 1889. THE STONEWALL.

It is contended that the stonewall in the House of Representatives is a struggle for the maintenance of the democratic principle of ono vote for one man, or absolute equality in representation, We can always respect a principle,and if the advocates of it are sincere they also deserve every consideration, Wo have,

howover, high authority for the belief that very little democratic principle exists in New Zealand, for has not Sir Bobert Stout expressed reluctance to re-enter political life on this'very ground, Sir Robert has had opportunities of forming a sound opinion on this point, and it may fairly bo assumed that when lie despairs of his disciples wo may take it for granted that the democratic tenets which are occasionally paraded before parliament and the country are brought forward more as a matter of convenience than of conviction, It is also very patent that the question of equality of representation is less dear to many stonewallers than that of tho incrcaso of members, If tho Government would give way on this latter point and permit the numerical strength of the House to remain unimpaired, the stonewall would vanish liko a winter night's frost. The stonewallers are fighting against the reduction in the number of members as well as for the quota, but as the clemociatij principle ia more applicable to tho latter they givo it prominence on their tongues, but in their hearts the former is the big grievance, We regard the reduction of members as of greater consequence than the quota, This reduction is one of the pledges we

luve given to the world of oi

intention to eponomiso and to live within our means, The withdrawal of it would be taken to mean a reversal of the prudent policy upon which we have entered and would do immeasurable barm to our reviving credit in tho mother country. We cannot believe that Sir Harry Atkinson will give way on this point, and if some compromise becomes desirable, we trust it will bo based on the quota. The Premier is an old parjianif-ptary tactician and is a very safe general to fjor.duct a small political crisis like the present stonewall. If the difficulty is to bo solved by t)iS njaintenance of the principles which control public business, the decision must be inj favor of the majority, The fundamental principle of our parliamentary system is that the majority must rule. This principle is recognised by democrats, arid a stonewall on the part of a minority is an attempt to violate it. We cannot see how the cause for which town members are now fighting cap be assisted oither by stonewalling pr by public meetings. Members who leave their seats in the Assembly to influence mass meetings on)y weaken their standing in tho House, jt }a frue that eminentmenliko Sir George .Grey and the other illustrious es-Minister George, have resortod to tßCtics of this kind, and that a still more dis. tinguished personage, Mr Gladstone,

has frequently sought to influence Parliamentary procedure by direct personal appeals to the people. It is, however, plain that oven He, who is perhaps the ablest politician of the nineteenth century, has injured his pnrty in the House by his stump oratory. It is a shir on the representatives of the people when their legislators endeavor to bring outside pressure to bear on the House of which they are constituent members. Sir George Grey, Mr Fish, and Mr Fisher fouled their own nest when, on Friday evening last, they deserted their places in Parliament in order to discuss the Representation Bill at the Princess Theatre, The Uouso will probably resent this attempt at coercion, and the chance of a satisfactory compromise is lessened by the adoption of such tactics. If Sir Harry Atkinson makes up his mind to go to the country on the Representation Bill, the stonewallers will give way. The Premier holds the winning card, and if lie chooses to play it there will be consternation in the camp of the obstructionists,