The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE. SATURDAY, MAY 10, 1890.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 2781, 10 May 1890, Page 2

The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE.

SATURDAY, MAY 10, 1890.

Equal and cxact justice to all men, Of whatsoever state or persuasion, religious or political.

RiiHiESEM'ATivii Government is one of the surest safeguards of the liberty and freedom of the subject. Those countries in which the principle of Representative government is fully recognised enjoy the greatest freedom in the world. "The government of the people for the people and by the people" is so obviously wise and just, that it is surprising it is-not universally recognised and accepted. In those countries in which despotic government holds sway are to be found conspiracy, disorder, and discontentWlierever full political freedom is enjoyed, trade and commerce prosper and peace and contentment reign. New Zealand enjoys her full amount of political freedom. Universal suffrage has conferred on every man the right of exercising by his vote a direct influence in the government of the country. As this°extended privilege has been conferred upon the community, it is manifestly highly important that the means employed to obtain the three great essentials of representation should be effectual —namely,

power to the majority, a hearing to the minority, and the representation of every considerable party by its best and ablest leaders. The Parliament of the country should be worthy of its name, and represent all parties fairly. These are the. objects to be kept steadily in view in discussing and forming the representation, laws of the country. Under the present Representation Act the single-membered system is established. The colony, with the exception of the large towns, is cut up into different electoral districts, each district returning one member, and each elector having one vote. Does this system secure the desired essentials of true representative government ? There are, we are convinced, many very serious defects in this system, which, to a large extent, defeat the object sought to be obtained. Wo cannot now discuss these defects at length, nor can we do more than touch upon a few of them. The first and most serious objection to the single-seat system is, that a large portion of the population is unrepresented in Parliament. This can be shown to demonstration. Suppose the colony divided into two political parties, Ministerialists and Oppositionists, and that the Ministerialists have a majority of the population, with them. If the two parties are distributed evenly over the colony, it is apparent that Ministerialists would win at the elections and the Oppositionists would consequently be unrepresented in Parliament. But pursue the investigation a little further. Suppose in a House thus elected a measure was introduced of an exceptional character, and of the seventy members (exclusive of the Maori representatives) forty voted for the measure and thirty against. The minority, in the House in addition to the electors represented by themselves, would also clearly have with them the electors who were left unrepresented at the general election. The measure, although carried by a majority in the House, would have become law against the wishes of the majority of the electors. In this way the minority would have ruled the majority,—a direct violation of the first principle of representative government. We have at our own doors an instance of another of the imperfections of our present system of representation, in the newly-con-stituted district of Te Aroha. There we have the mining and agricultural interests brought into direct conflict. The interests of these two industries are distinct. In a general way it may no doubt be claimed that the interests of the two industries do not clash, inasmuch as in the business relations of life one industry is dependent on another. But. the special knowledge required by mining members has no connection with the proper representation of a purrly pastoral electorate. Districts aro thus brought together by artificial boundaries, which have really nothing in common. A further objection to the present system is, that it tends to foster a spirit of localism and narrowmindedness. Every representative is peculiarly accountable to a small section of electors for his political actions. He has always present to his mind the prospect of mesting his constituents, and having to relate what special advantages he has been the means of conferring on his district. This naturally hampers his actions, dwarfs his mind and prevents him from entering with zeal and confidence on the public business. John Stuart Mill, in speaking in this connection with regard to America says, "it is an admitted fact that in American democracy, which is constituted on this faulty model, the highly cultivated members of the community, except such as are willing to sacrifice their own judgment and consciences to the behests of party and become the servile echo of those who are their inferiors in knowledge, do not allow their names to appear as candidates for Congress or the Legislature, so certain it is they will be defeated."

Another drawback to our present system is and will be the constant alteration of the boundaries of the different districts. Apart from the labour and expense incurred, there is always a danger of manipulation of boundaries to suit political ends. One more objection must suffice, although many more could be raised, and that is the temptation to bribery. If the supporters of two opposing candidates are about equal in number, and there is a small number of electors of no decided political views prepared to make terms, it is clear that this small section will really return the representative. Whichever candidate, therefore, offers the greatest inducement secures the seat. Our representation system is obviously defective? What is the remedy ? We have on previous occasions, in common with several other journals, advocated the adoption in this country of a modification of Hare's system. Those of our readers who take any interest in this matter will doubtless be familiar with the working of this system, and it is therefore unnecessary for us to enter into any explanation of it again. Each elector has a single vote, but in order to avoid the loss of voting power, he may indicate on the ballot paper other candidates, in the order of his preference, to whom he would wish his vote to be transferred, in case it is not required by the candidate of his choice. The advantages of this system are surely sufficiently obvious. There is comparatively no -waste of voting power, as no candidate is allotted more than sufficient votes to secure his return ; there are no local influences brought to bear on members, and the further point is also gained that every class of political opinion in the country secures its proper

proportion of representation in the House.

We trust that pulilic opinion will be persistent in this important matter. Tho proper representation of the people is the very mainspring of all true government. Measures, such as we have indicated, were

introduced into the House some few years ago, but were subsequently abandoned. The subject is, however, of such vital importance that we hope it will be given proper prominence at the next general election. Our aim should be so to constitute our Parliament that it may be in fact what it is now only in name, ." A Mirror of the Nation."