THE CONSTITUTION STATUTE OF 1842 295 



evasion of public duties and responsibilities, and there were serious 

 difficulties to be overcome. The Constitution of 1842 provided that 

 the Council could not legally proceed to business if there was a 

 deficiency of more than two members by non-election. The Gover- 

 nor, therefore, rather than block all legislative business, resolved to 

 issue a fresh writ for the Port Phillip district, although such a 

 course was without precedent and of doubtful legality. Having 

 received some unofficial advice that the settlers in the Western 

 District were at variance with the Melbourne party led by Curr, 

 Grooves and McCombie, Fitzroy directed that Geelong should be 

 the place of nomination, and on the 21st of September that 

 formality was duly gone through. 



When the rumour of this contemplated slight to the Metropolis 

 gained credence, the citizens were once more on the war-path. A 

 meeting held on the 13th of September, in the interests of non- 

 election, deputed three of their number John Pascoe Fawkner, 

 Captain Cole and J. Stewart Johnstone to proceed to Geelong to 

 try and dissuade the electors from voting. If they failed to attain 

 their object they were authorised by the meeting to nominate five 

 members of the British Cabinet, with a view to repeating the Grey 

 episode. But the Geelong and Western District electors were con- 

 tumacious, and they declined to ask the services of the Duke of 

 Wellington, Lord John Kussell, Lord Brougham, Lord Palmerston 

 and Sir Bobert Peel, who only got fifty-eight votes each at the four 

 polling places, while the five colonial candidates averaged 220 each. 

 If the useless but triumphant return of Earl Grey was deemed by 

 the authorities to be insulting, what must be said of the igno- 

 minious position in which these respected noblemen were put by 

 such a contemptuous rejection. It was all, however, a part of the 

 game, and nobody suffered unless the electors may be said to have 

 compromised the dignity of their office. 



One matter connected with the election has never been sat- 

 isfactorily cleared up. Mr. J. F. Leslie Foster, who had stood 

 for the Melbourne seat against Earl Grey, was also nominated for 

 the district, but he refused to go to the poll, and went over to the 

 Opposition. On the other hand, Mr. Edward Curr, the so-called 

 " father of separation," who was one of the delegates from Mel- 



