differed from that of the King in relation to the British Parliament, or from that of a constitutional Governor of the colony towards the House of Representatives. Then, if the Superintendent was to be responsible for his policy, it was a serious hardship that he should not have a seat on the floor of the Council, and be able to defend his measure personally, instead of having to depend upon an Executive, which possibly did net support him whole-heartedly. This disadvantage was felt severely by several of the Superintendents, notably by Mr. Rolleston, who made strenuous, but unsuccessful, efforts to obtain an alteration m the Constitution enabling the Superintendent to take a seat in the Council.
There were at first, no “parties” in the Provincial Council, as the term is understood to-day, but oddly enough, that did not prevent a rapid succession of ministerial crises involving constant changes in the personnel of the Executive. Some of these atmospheric disturbances were quite amusing, and a few instances will illustrate difficulties which arose at the beginning of representative Government in Canterbury.
Mr. Henry John Tancred had been appointed head of the first Executive, and in the following year, the Provincial Council was summoned to meet on October 10 (1854). Mr. FitzGerald, delayed by Parliamentary duties, was unable to be present at the opening. A message from him was, however, read, in which he referred to three important questions which would require the immediate attention of the Provincial Council. viz., the Waste Lands Bill, the affairs of the Canterbury Association, and the enlargement of the Provincial Council itself, The latter was an important proposal involving an alteration in the existing electorates, and would necessitate a fresh election of the Council. Obviously, such a measure required the most careful consideration by the Superintendent and his Executive: to ensure such consideration, it was the intention of the Executive that
