78

with; and you suggest that any recital which the writ for the election of one member instead of
the writ which it has now become my duty to issue may contain, should be couched in general
terms, or, that a form similar to that now in use by the General Government should be employed by me on this occasion.

It has now become necessary that I should set out, for your information, in greater detail,
the circumstances under which Mr. David Graham obtained a seat in the Auckland Provincial Council, and the occurrences which, consequent upon that event, necessitated the prorogation of the Council.

On the 30th January ult., the Provincial Council, on motion by Mr. Joseph May, adopted the following resolution:—

"That as the petitioner, David Graham, has been placed in a majority by the Reports of the Select Committee appointed to report upon the disputed election for the Suburbs, the petitioner ought, therefore, to be the sitting Member; and that this Council hereby determine that David Graham is a Member of this Council, elected for the Suburbs of Auckland."

This resolution was carried by the casting vote of the Speaker.

On the 3rd February following, the Message No. 41, with its enclosures (copy annexed marked A), was transmitted to the Council; and with reference to this Message, I beg leave to direct your attention to an extract from the Votes and Proceedings of the Provincial Council (marked B), forwarded herewith.

On the 4th February a writ was returned to this office bearing the following indorsement:—

"I do hereby declare, that the undermentioned gentleman has been duly elected to serve as a Member of the Provincial Council, for the Province of Auckland, for the within-named District,

WILLIAM CRUSH DALDY, Esq.

THOMAS BECKHAM,
Provincial Returning Officer."

This return has not been amended. On the 6th February Captain Daldy, introduced by Mr. R. Graham and Mr. T. Henderson, took his seat in the Council. I am bound to recognise the validity of the writ issued by myself, and to regard Captain Daldy as being duly elected to the vacant seat. But the Provincial Council has given that seat to Mr. Graham, and the Speaker of the Council has ruled that he could not put any resolution which would have the effect of rescinding that resolution. Mr. David Graham and Mr. Daldy have separately, by writing under their hands (copy of each, marked C, annexed), resigned their respective seats.

If I issue a writ for the election of a member to serve in the Council in room of Mr. Daldy, I virtually abrogate a resolution of the Council, declared to be judicial and irreversible; and I thus bring myself into direct collision with that body. If I issue a writ for the election of a member to serve in the Council in room of Mr. Graham, I ignore the validity of a writ issued by myself. If I adopt the suggestion you have been so good as to make, and attempt to evade the difficulty by issuing a writ for the election of one member instead of the two who have resigned, and by using a form of writ, different from that now in use, containing a vague recital,—I feel assured that the right of any member elected upon such writ to sit in the Council might be successfully assailed, and that it would be competent for a member of the Council, by re-opening the question during the session, again at any moment to arrest the action of the Council.

In this view I am sustained by the opinion of the members of my Executive Council, by whom the resolutions (copy annexed, marked D) have been unanimously adopted.

Under these circumstances, I feel bound strictly to pursue the course which the New Zealand Constitution Act prescribes, and to issue writs for the election of members in the room of those whose resignations have been made. I am advised therefore to use the form of writ which has been heretofore invariably employed in such cases, and which was drawn up by the gentleman who, formerly Law Officer of this Province, is now Her Majesty’s Attorney-General for New Zealand.

The refusal of His Excellency’s Government to accede to a request preferred by me on a former occasion, caused the loss to me of the support, as members of my Executive, of two members of the Provincial Council. I have this day received a letter (copy of which, marked E, is annexed) from Messrs. Buckland, Brennan, and Merriman, members of the Provincial Council, intimating that, in the event of a dissolution being now refused, they will also resign their seats in my Executive Council. I have the honour to forward herewith copy of letter (marked F) addressed in January last to Mr. T. Henderson, offering for his acceptance a seat in the Executive Council, together with copy of his reply thereto.

The Provincial Government Act requires that at least one-half of the members of the Executive Council shall be members also of the Provincial Council. I should not be able to select from amongst the members of the Provincial Council, as at present constituted, gentlemen in whom I could confide, who, being competent, would be willing to undertake the conduct of the public business. The difficulties which I should experience in carrying on the Government will be thus sufficiently evident.

It will be remembered that my own election as Superintendent took place at a period subsequent to the election of the present Provincial Council, and that I was chosen to carry out a policy which differed essentially from the policy of my predecessor and of his majority in the Provincial Council.

In consequence of the proceedings in the Council during the late session, I have been compelled to take upon myself the responsibility of carrying on the public works and of defraying the cost of the Provincial establishments for the current year without an Appropriation Act. I desire, therefore, to afford the electors of this Province, from whom I derive my authority, an opportunity of expressing their opinion as to the mode in which that authority has been exercised, and generally upon the conduct of the Provincial Council; and I venture to assure His Excellency’s