CORRESPONDENCE

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2142, 26 July 1907, Page 1

CORRESPONDENCE

THE CHINESE QUESTION (To the Editor.)

Sir, —I would crave your indulgence so far as to permit of my again occupying a place in your columns on the subject of the “Chinese Question.”

In view of the explanation which appeals in your leader, the question of Mr. Lloyd's resignation can no longer find a place i n further argument. That the campaign is praiseworthv and popular there is no question, and when the congratulations of the Right Hon. the Premier are united to the effort, further controversy can only be restricted to the question of ulterior motive. While congratulating your latest coi respondent, Mr. Dally, on liis advent into the arena of constitutional politics, I cannot bring myself to agree with his expressions in toto. In the first instance the text which led to General Botha’s remarks is by m means quoted in its entirety, and I would therefore again refer your correspondent to the subject question. I think on reference he will accede to me, that the- quotation is referable onlj to the repatriation of exported Chinese, and not to those complying wit.' the accorded legislation of the colony of South Africa. Respecting the legislation demanded from Sir Henry Parltes by the people of New South Wales on this question, and his memorable expressions at the time, these were by international legislators considered totally unconstitutional, and therefore naturally rendered abortive. I can hardly conceive my opponent will justify with sincerity a further repetitio 1 of constitutional blunders for til» people of this colony. For purposes of argument may I be permitted to. quote the numerical strength of the Chinese population. We have at the present time in the colony 2515 males, 55 females; last year there were 247 males and 13 females landed

in New Zealand, being an excess of arrivals over departures of 127. Even in the-face of such figures I say it is impossible for our Government to pass prohibitive measures, because the Act of Constitution provides that legislation involving constitutional reform shall be submitted for assent of the British Government, which clauses of the Act aro exempt from the operation of our laws, thus necessitating a petition to the Imperial Government by both Chambers of our Legislature for an amendment of the Act of Constitution, and it is doubtful if that petition would succeed for years, because such a measure would fa;l entirely in its general acceptance by both Houses of our bi-cameral Legislature, and should it riot, you iwouli 1 yet have to deal with the two Houses constituting the Imperial Government, whose interests would naturally be to a great extent submerged in its acceptance. Therefore without terr of contradiction I assert proliibi-ti.-o legislation must be acceded as at variance with constitutional law and consequently impracticable in its enforcement. I grant further restricti /i* legislation may be given effect to and in this respect I note the lion, members for Christchurch East and Wellington Central have/ both asked for its consideration, thb Hon. the Prime Minister replying, “It is intended to legislate on the matter tlns session.” That is, I am afraid, llie most that can be undertaken. In closing my remarks, I think it a very great pity Constitutional Law is not more thoroughly understood, as it would obviate unnecessary agi-

tating crusades amongst the laity, as well as expressionless voicing of opinio ■ from gentlemen endeavoring to

seek public suffrage. This subject will come up for debate at the next meeting of the Literary and Debating Society, on whose behalf I extend my opponents a hearty invitation.—l am, sir, JAMES C. COLLINS.