With less than a month remaining until the Independence referendum is held on August 15, The Royal Gazette today begins a series of articles examining various aspects of the issue. As well as constitutional matters, the series will examine the experience of other countries, Independence and race, how Bermudian families view the issue, and what the effects of a "yes'' or a "no'' outcome would be. The series opens today with a look at the Opposition's call for voters to abstain.

Since its formation in 1963, the Progressive Labour Party has consistently -- if not always loudly -- supported Independence.

So the question: "Are you in favour of Independence for Bermuda?'' would seem an easy one for a PLP supporter to answer.

Not so, says Opposition Leader Mr. Frederick Wade.

Mr. Wade says he wants Independence so bad he "can taste it''. But on referendum day, he wants his supporters to stay away from the polling booths.

When the PLP kicked off its abstention campaign in April, Mr. Wade compared voting "yes'' in the referendum to signing a blank cheque, and said the long-governing United Bermuda Party could not be trusted to negotiate Bermuda's split from the United Kingdom.

He claimed the UBP went into general elections "guaranteed'' at least 16 of 40 seats in the House of Assembly, due to unfair electoral boundaries and double-seat constituencies.

During 50 years of electoral reform in Bermuda, gains like removal of the "plus'' vote for property owners and the addition of four seats to Pembroke Parish were offset by other losses, he said. Government allowed some non-Bermudians to vote and increased the number of seats in the House to 40 from 36.

The PLP wanted single-seat constituencies based on equal population, not parish boundaries, he said. That would require changes to Bermuda's Constitution. But if the UBP took Bermuda to Independence, he said it could enshrine the present system, which he saw as corrupt.

It would then take a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and the Senate, plus a referendum, to make a change.

Despite those concerns, Mr. Wade wants Independence decided in a general election, not a referendum, saying a general election campaign would compel Wade defends referendum position detailed positions on Independence before the voters. Critics argue that referenda represent democracy in its purest form and say the PLP position defies logic.

And there are serious doubts about how many party supporters will heed Mr.

Wade's call. Prominent PLP supporters like Mr. Alvin Williams and candidate Mr. Philip Perinchief have spoken out strongly against the boycott. The abstention campaign suffered another blow recently when the Committee for the Independence of Bermuda came out firmly in favour of a "yes'' vote.

In any case, it will not be possible to say from the referendum result how many voters abstained and how many simply were not interested.

Premier the Hon. Sir John Swan and other prominent figures inside and outside of Government have condemned the boycott call as anti-democratic.

Sir John says Government's positions on Independence are clearly spelled out in position papers and the cheque he is asking Bermudians to sign has been filled out in full.

Further, both Government and the Opposition would have seats at the Constitutional Conference in London prior to Independence. It would be up to the British Government to decide which party position to accept, or whether to approve a compromise.

Mr. Wade argues that abstention is a legitimate and democratic method of using one's vote. MPs have used it throughout the Commonwealth. Most recently, Government backbencher the Hon. Ann Cartwright DeCouto abstained on two of the referendum bills brought to Parliament.

Position papers were not the same as a Government policy paper called a White Paper, and they were not binding, Mr. Wade said.

Since Government was not committed to Independence, it could not be committed to the position papers, either. If Government received a "yes'' vote in the referendum, it could go to London with any constitutional proposals it chose, he said.

And Mr. Wade professed no faith in the Constitutional Conference that would precede Independence. At such conferences in the past, each time the UK was asked for an end to parish-based boundaries or the foreign vote, it sided with the Government against the Opposition, Mr. Wade said.

Some critics have called on Mr. Wade to sit down with Sir John and compromise on Independence. But Mr. Wade said that was impossible because the UBP had no position on the issue and Sir John had no power to negotiate.