bestow any real examination upon a new thing. Those, indeed, if any such there be, who under pretence of equal justice aim only at substituting the class ascendancy of the poor for that of the rich, will, of course, be unfavourable to a scheme which places both on a level.” The hon. member addressed himself to the question of the suffrage for the Council roll. He had been asked why they did not adopt the ballot? He had been anxious for something of the kind in first drafting his Bill; but it might be said in reply that Mr. Hare's system was itself so superior that it would not conform to the ballot, to secret voting in its essence; but still there was so much of the ballot that there could be no violence, no influence used at the time of voting, which the ballot sought to avoid. He moved that the Bill be read a second time.
Mr. Plunkett seconded the motion; and after some observations by Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Merewether, Mr. Brown Russell, and the Attorney-General, the debate was adjourned.
The above report, omitting the argument on the other portions of the Bill, is taken from the Sydney Morning Herald for Thursday the 4th September, 1862. The report of the discussion on the next day has not come to hand, which is the more to be regretted, as the Bill appears to have been opposed by one member, Captain Ward, who would seem from the subsequent report to have addressed himself especially to this method of election, and to have contended, 1, that it would not be a guarantee for the representation of majorities and minorities in just and equal proportion, putting forward in support of that argument, substantially the problem suggested in Denmark, in which E with 101 third votes is elected, while B, with 299 second and 200 third votes, fails (See Appendix D, p. 302); 2, that mere single voting would be a better method without the contingent vote; and 3, that the loss of votes, owing to a large number of electors polling for the favourite candidates, might be obviated by publication of the state of the poll from time to time.
Wednesday, 17th September, 1862. The debate was resumed by Mr. Merewether. He did not admit that popular election of an Upper Chamber was better than a selection by the ministers of the Crown, with proper restrictions, to prevent a creation of members to carry particular measures. If the Lower House was the people's Chamber, the Upper should be the
