New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1875. THE REPRESENTATION BILL.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume III, Issue 127, 8 October 1875, Page 10

New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1875. THE REPRESENTATION BILL.

The Government has introduced a Bill to increase the number of membprs of our House of Representatives. No one asked for this BUI; and the public is convinced that the colony has already as many representatives as it wants, or as it can very well pay for. One way or another each representative costs the colony close on £400 per annum ; and it is not at all improbable that, if abolition be carried,- colonists ■will have to pay between four and five hundred per annum for each member of the two Houses of Parliament. Instead of increasing the number of legislators, some means should be devised of preventing the Government from nominating uny new members of Council till the present number should be first considerably reduced. It is proposed by this new Bill to add seven members, and thus raise the number to 82. There are already seventyfive members of the House of Ttepresentatives, and forty-nine members of the Legislative Council. Truly we are blessed,

if blessing it be, with a multitude of legislator^ There are not a few, however, who do not regard this in the light of a blessing, quite the contrary^ Victoria, with 800,000 inhabitants, is satisfied with 30 legislative councillors, and 90 members of the Lower House. New South Wales, with its population of 600,000, has only 21 councillors and 72 representatives. The Cape of Good Hope, which the last census proved to have 700,000 inhabitants, gets its work of legislation done by 21 councillors and 66 members of the Rouse of Assembly. But New Zealand has already 49, councillors, which 'number may be increased indefinitely by the Ministry of the day, and . 75 representatives, which number the new Bill proposes to increase to 82. Well, wonders will never cease ! Is there any-reason for this % None that we can discover. But there are" many reasons why it should not be ; and one very valid one is that the proposed increase is certain of being attended with an additional expense to the public of at least. £2000 per year, should it take place. The Government has a difficulty to deal with. There are loud complaints » as to the inequality of representation. The Thames; for example, has 14,U00 inhabitants, and only one representative. Taranaki has 6000 people and three members. Dunedin has 20,000 citizens and between three and four thousand electors, and only two members. Wallace has 150 electors and one memj ber. These are only specimens of the present state of out representation. This is scandalous, and the remedy proposed by our Government is to increase the number of representatives, and leave the worst features of the present system untouched. Taranaki is to retain her 3 members for COuO, the Thames is to have 2 members for 1 4,000, Hokitika 2 members for 7000, Grey Valley 2 for 8000, Dunedin 3 for 20,000, Napier 1 for 3,500, &c, &c. Perhaps there must be inequalities, and perhaps it is well it should be so, but these are too glaring and unjust.

Again, it will be perceived that in those cases where there are two or three representatives for one constituency, such as Auckland, Christchurch and Dunedin, there is no provision for the representation of minorities. In the three-fcomered constituencies of England, minorities are represented. There, electors can only vote for two candidates, and in this way the minority is enabled to return one representative. This is jusfc and equitable." But our Government absolutely ignores the minority and proposes to increase the power of the majority, which is already too great. ,

Tliis new Representation Bill is crude, uncalled for, and inadequate to meet the complaints of the people of some" few localities, &uch as the Thames, for example. There should be a complete readjustment of electoral districts, and care should be taken so to adjust them as to secure a representation of all opinions, as far as possible. For this purpose we would venture to recommend equal" electoral districts, that is, that all electoral districts should have an equal number of inhabitants calculated on the basis of the last census, and that each electorate should return three members, who should be chosen on the principle of the three-cornered constituencies of England. That is, no elector should be allowed to vote for more than two candidates; Indeed we would be disposed to go further and adopt the cumulative principle — that is, ' allow each elector either to split his vote, as it is said, between two candidates, or, if he should prefer to do so, to give two votes to one candidate. A Hpuse elected on these principles would represent the people and all shades of political opinion . as perfectly as possible. But under the present system it is only the majority that is represented : in fact, the majority rales despotically for the time being, over the minority. This leads to oscillations dangerous to the stability of the commonwealth. Under the present system it very often happens that there is not even one member in a Legislature to jnve expression to the views of large masses of the population, not one to argue their case or enlighten legislators as to discontents that are eating into the very foundations of the State. In fact, one class legislates for all, and shapes its legislation according to i its own views, which alone it understands and values. From this arises so much class legislation, and so much indifference to the interests and feelings of others. Wise men ought to be glad to hear what everybody has to say, to.be tender of everyone's feelings, interests, and even prejudices, and ought not to disdain to argue with even irrational people. . Men should put more faith than they often dn in the reason and common sense of the multitude. Let all be neard patiently, let all be fairly represented, and depend upon it peace and prosperity will follow. It may be slow and weary work, but it will be sure and lasting.