The General Assembly WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 20.

Clutha Leader, Volume IV, Issue 166, 7 September 1877, Page 3

The General Assembly WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 20.

A number of questions having' been 'answered, Tho Harbours and Navigation Bill was introduced. The Speaker intimated that Mr Thomson's Bill to appropriate 25 per cent, of the land revenue to Counties could not be introduced without; the recommendation of the Crown. Mr Sheehan moved the House go into Committee to consider the petition of George Elliott Barton, and to examine the truth of its statements, and decide on the same. He read a letter from the petitioner urging ibis course as the fairest mode of investigation. He thought the petitioner should be heard at the bar of the House to determine whether there really was ground for further enquiry. The Hon. Mr Whitaker spoke at some length upon the case. He held that even assuming all that was stated to be true, the complaint was simply one of mere disagreements, and disclosed nothing to justify the removal of the .judges. He proposed that the order for the reception of the petition be read and discharged. This was- analogous to the precedent of the Imperial Parliament. He read a letter from the Chief ■Justice, containing his remarks on the petition and explanation of its statements. He thought Mr Barton fully justified in bringing his alleged grievance before the House and before public opinion, but nothing had been shown to render further enquiry or action necessary or desirable. A long debate ensued, and numerous motions and amendments were made. Mr Curtis moved an addition to Mr Whitaker's motion to the effect that the refusal to receive it was owiag to the allegations of the petition not being sufficiently specific, and being of such a nature that even if proved they would not justify tho House in removing the Judges. Mr Whitaker's motion, with Mr Curtis' addition, was then agreed to on the voices. Mr Pox moved the Local Option Bill into Committee. In doing .so he spoke for an hour and a quarter. In replying to the second reading debate, he accused Dr Wallis of having broken hits election pledges in coming forward like the ( high priest Bacchus in defence of the publicans. ' Dr Wallis explained he had broken no pledges, Mr Fox continued. He defended the : principle of the Bill, and denied the statistics regarding drunkenness increasing or decreasing, while the fact remained that we were drinking too much. He totally denied the existence of. any claim for compensation, and would rather lose the Bill than admit j ' it. Keinedial and not merely palliative ' measures were demanded by the urgency of the evil. No regulations for the conduct of the seller could be efficacious, and no punishment could be inflicted on the seller greater than those following vice. As to Bny understanding about the right to renewal of license?, there could be none. Licenses were only annual, and by Sunday trading', adulteration, and other breaches oi thb law, publicans forfeited all claims to consideration. Instead of being too strongly spoken of, they had been too lightly let off. He gave a sketch of the fearful state he found hotels in in Hawke's BBar.} r . The Local Option principle was accepted seven years ago, but the claim to compensation was quite new. He would resist to the last taking the working men's money to bribe liquor-dealers to remove their bloodstained hands from the people's throats. He had drafted new clauses to meet objections regarding the boundaries of licensing districts. Mr Bees condemned Mr Fox's telegram to Auckland about Dr Walls, and also the abuse heaped on publicans : a good cause suffered thereby. 'He would support abolishing all bar traffic without compensation, also the making of licensing commissioners elective. Mr Gisborne said if licenses were abolished on the grounds of public policy, compensation would undoubtedly be due. Dr Wallis condemned Mr "Fox's intemperate language, and defended himself. Fairness and justice demanded ■compensation. Mr Swanson thought compensation would be due in some cases. The Bill went into Committee, and progress was reported. In clause 2, after a long discussion, " 20" was alcered to " 50." A variety of other amendments were proposed. THURSDAY, AUGUST 30. Mr Pyke moved for an address to have placed on the Supplementary Estimates a sum sufficient for the continuance of long-service pay to all police officers hitherto in receipt of it, and also for the payment of all arrears. In doing so he spoke of the services of the few men in Otago who were concerned, some of whom had lost as much as 5s a day. Major Atkinson opposed the motion. Debate adjourned for a fortnight. Mr Travers moved--" That pendinglegislative action, no purchases or negotiations for the purchase of native lands •made or entered into since the withdrawal of the Native Lands Court Bill, 1877, shall be valid unless sanctioned by a measure introduced into the Mouse."

Major Atkinson said the Government was making" inquiry, um\ intended to introduce a Dill to that effect. The motion was agreed fo. Mr Hatnlin moved the second reading- of the Medical Practitioners Bill. Alter a discussion the Bill was ordered to he read a second time that day six months. My Macandrtnv moved the second reading ot the Dunedin Wharves and Quays Reserves Bill. Both City Council and Harbour Board were agreed that the Reserves should be restored to the City, from which it was taken by Act of last session. The Hon. Mr M'Lean opposed the Bill, and would be no party to reversing the decision of last session. It was an insult to the Hoase to ask it to do so. Mr Macandrew had divided the House about the Harbour Board, alleging' that; independent members of the Board objected to the resolution to divest the I Board of its property. That resolution was arrived at by a majority composed of Municipal representatives, and of Mr Reynolds, who was authorised by the Government to conserve the interests of the Board, but had used his position to divest the Board of its property. He strongly opposed the motion. The Hon. Mr Keyuolds denied the motion was carried at the Harbour Board by his casting- vote. Members } of Government should be ashamed of themselves to countenance on act of republation, and the Government should have known him better than to nominate him if it would expect him to play the part of a rogue. The land honestly belonged to the Cit} r . The Hon. Mr Reid said the property had never been vested in or belonged to the Dunedin Corporation. T.t belonged to the whole Province, to be used for the benefit, of its chief port. He hoped tha House would not pass the Bill. Mr Pyke condemned the Act of last session as iniquitous, and maintained the right of the City Corporation to the Heserves. The Harbour Board did not : require Reserves. Mr Gisborne supported the Bill, as ■, the Reserves had been formerly legallvvested in the Corporation. < Mr Lumsdea supported and Mr '. Burns opposed the Bill. i Tne second reading «- a s curded on a : division, by 15 to 11. i The Oamaru Athemeum and Mechanics' Institute Pe&erve I3i!l, the Town of Waitahuna Bill, tho City of ! Wellington Loans Consolidai ion A mond- i Kent Bill, the Crown Grants Act Amendment Bill, were read a second time. The Port Chalmers Water Works Bill was read a third time and passed. i The second reading of the iSapiev Bay Improvement Bill was opposed by Mr Gisborne and Mr Oraiond as improperly > : transferring the ownership ot :i resoive ; from the Harbour Board to the Cor- j poratioii. The second reading was negatived on the voices. FRIDAY, AUGUST 31. Several questions were put and answered. Mr Rees asked certain questions as to land transactions referred to in the I Oamaru Mail, in the George Jones libel article. The Hon. Major Atkinson said the matter was pending in a court of law, and it would be improper to give any information. The Thames Water Supply Bill (Hon. Mr Bo wen) was introduced. On the Hon. Major Atkinson's mo-. tion, the House resolved to meet on Mondays tor the remainder of the session. Mr Curtis resumed the debute on the Education Bill. He congratulated the Hon. Mr Bowen on the Bill. It made education secular, ires, ami compulsory, without carrying any of these principles to extremes. He regretted no provision had been made by which the Koman Catholic population could take advantage of the Act. He would prefer the Nelson system, which had worked admirably. He would give no public money to any school where religion was : taught, as part of the daily course of instruction. This was not done in Nelson, yet Catholics and Protestants worked there heartily together in carrying on the work of public educacion. It was not fair to expect Catholics to allow their children to be instructed m histories tinged with strong sectarian .views. In Nelson they allowed the Catholics to select their own books, subject to the Inspector's approval, but no religion to be taught in them, or an) r religious instruction given in the schools. He had drafted amending clauses to assimilate the Bill to the Nelson system. The Catholic schools there wei'e decidedly superior to the others, and more than half the children i attending them were Protestants. He only proposed a reasonable concession to the feelings of a very large portion of his fellow colonists. Mr Barff entirely agreed with Mr Curtis, as also did Messrs Gisborne and Kenny. Mr Wakefield approved uf the Bill generally, and thought local committees, with an efficient system of inspection, would be sufficient without Education Boards, which were a relic of Provincialism. He would to the utmost disapprove of the religious clause of the Bill. This was a clause which proposed Protestantism, not secular education. ' Mv Lusk thought Mr Bowen's objects excellent, but he had tailed to . carry

them out fully Jn the Bill. The Billwas not a secular one, and Mr Bowen was afraid to carry ouc to a logical conclusion his own principles., The religious instruction was a sham religions instruction, the only effect of which' would be to set one section of the community against another ; it would also exclude Catholics from being 1 teachers. He Jailed to see what advantage would result; to Catholics from such separate schools as Mi" Curtis proposed, if no religious teaching- were allowed in them. He praised the Auckland Education system, which was purely secular; but any section out of school hours could have the use of the buildings for ro- ' Hgious instruction. But this was very little taken advantage of. He would not go further, and would rather see the powers of the local committees curtailed than increased. He objected to their levying 1 and raising- rates ; they would not do it. Dr Walks hoped the Bill would pass in an unmutilated form. If not nil that could be wished, it was on,e of the best and simplest compromises under present circumstances. He objected to the narrow sectarianism of secularism, and approved oi the State taking- the general supervision of education, and that the people should have as much local control as possible. The Bill on the whole was satisfactory in these repects. Catholic schools tinder State supervision gave as good education as the State could itself, why should they not be assisted and supported ? The same wi h any other denominational schools ; they were too valuable allies to be estranged. The transcendent excellence of the Bill was its non -sectarian ehnrac ter. The common or secular religious system of education was infinitely superior to ihe so-called secular system, which was the outcome of modern infidelity, and would exclude, because it was frightened of" the Bible. Were they jo walk in the good old paths, with the Bible in their hand and prayer on their lips, or wallow in modern secularism ? Experience showed the former to be the safest and most efficacious in good results. lie denied that the Auckland system had worked well. To eliminate the religious clauses from the Bill would drive all good teacher's out of the service, and produce a demoralising effect on the community. A truly secular system was impossible. Although the attempt might outrage the best feelings of the people, the name of God would have to be struck out of every school book nridor the purely secular system. In fixing dates the letters A. D. wore li^ed, and here again was roli:;io:i. Mythology also would have to be forbidden, and even the days of the. week could not he mentioned, or the words death or immortality be used. If these were not excluded, everything* • false in religion would he admitted, So long* as the Bible wa.s read, he cr»red little what version. Jilvou as Jewish history, it should be used as Greek or Roman histoi'ies were. It waa, hov.v.vf-r, the most important fact in the world's history for it'UO years, lie denied also that the Lord's Prayer was either Christian or denominalionrJ. The Hou^e itself opened every sitting- with prayer, and yet it would deny the same privilege to children in schools. Either we must base our system on the recognition of the existence of a higher power, fur are state, and moral nature, or say all these things were untrue. Mr Macfarlane said in Auckland it had cost some £1400 to collect about £1000 oi education rates, the collector being- the partner of Mr Luuk, who was Chairman of the Board. Ivlr de La u tour said people did not object to religion in schools, but to creeds. Their religion could be taught at the beavth and in churches, without being 1 obtruded into schools. In Auckland, only 32 per cent, of the children attended schools, while in Nelson the percentage was 73. Whether religion were taught, in schools or not, nthdstioal teachers should not be employed. As for powers of local taxation, in' OtagO alone, LI ?,000 would be required for j buildings to keep this year on a par with last, and unless a loan was raised, whers was this to come from ? He thought people would really have to pay more for education under the Bible than they did now. If a capitation fee could be paid quarterly, it would be the less heavily felt. If local committees had to collect the fees, a paid secretary would. be required in each case. LVlr Hodgkinson agreed generally with the views urged by Mr Lusk. The Bill would degrade the Colony to a low dead level of Centralism. Better have kept ihe old Provincial Acts in force, but as this was impossible, the Bill was on the whole a fair one, and ! did Mr Bowen credit. He did not see how anyone could object to the Bible and Lord's Prayer being- read. He. would strongly oppose Mr Curtis's denominational amendment, and vote against the Bill altogether it it were adopted. No hardship would be inflicted on any section of the community by reading the Bible beyond that of not getting 1 State money to teach sectarian views. Ah* Pyke moved the adjournment of the debate. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 3. Mr Pyke resumed ths debate on the Education Bill. He would support it if its main principles were, limited. He objected to making- education a State ; j monopoly. The Bill had given rise to I general dissatisfaction throughout ihe

•Colony. in regard to the Bible "readInt>- clause, he objected to the dominant sect of the .country outraging i\m religious feelings of others. The Catholics and Jews -were outraged by 'the State attempting* such a thing-. "As a Protestant, he protested against it. He regarded a purely secular system as an impossibility. fie objected to compulsory education as unnecessary and improper. The Bill in this respect was tyrannical and arbitrary. He would support Mr Curtis's amendment if the provision about the Board approvingbooks were omitted. . Captain Russell thought it absolutely necessary to make education compulsory. A small capitation fee would be no hardship. He deemed that education was a luxury. Local committees" would obviate evils arising 1 from having large districts. He would support Mr Curtis's „ amendment from a conviction of duty, and considering the feelings and convictions of- a large proportion of the community. Mr Seymour said the Bill would not provide sufficient funds to ensure successful results in many districts. The amount which Marlboroiig-h would receive would be £900 below what was required to pay the teachers' salaries even at the present low scale. He would vote against the Bible clause, and support Mr Curtis's amendment. He hoped to see the Bill pass with the necessary amendments, Sir Bunny asked was there any necessity for the Bill at all. The Provincial systems of education had worked well, and it was undesirable to disturb ' them. Mr Montgomery thought the Bill a well considered one. He objected to Bible reading and the Lord's Prayer clause until he knew who was to select the portion of Scripture to be. read. lie opposed Mr Ourtis's amending clause It would not only affect Catholic schools, but would call into existence a number of other small denominational schools, which it would be impossible to carry on efficiently or economically. Mr Gibbs supported Mr Curtis's amendment, as the system had long worked successfully in Nelson. ft simply secured religious liberty to all classes. He objected to tho compulsory clauses. Mr Tole opposed the Bill generally. It would be unjust to large sections of the community,, who could not conscientiously come under its provisions. This Bill would mako the poor pay for the education of the rich. Hi'/h School schoimships should not be confined to pupils of Government pchools. lie objected to the compulsory cl;iU- c c?. He denied thar. tho Bill was pecu'nr ; it w;ic sectarian in the most obnoxious form. Sir George Grey thought the Bill •was a wicked proposal to introduce religious discussions and to sot class against class. It would make the poor pay for educating the rich. He opposed the conscience clause os an injustice to a large section of the community. He regretted the provisions for secondary education, and totally objected to the provisions regulating scholarships ami reserves as unjust.. titulti education should absolutely free. No provision was made for orphan and destitute children, except in another monstrously unjust Bill. Ho protested against harrying through tho Bill, which would pluca 80,00u people under ! a sense of wrong. Mi* Sheehan desired to see the Bill made entirely secular, instead of being a miserable compromise. Mr Stout thought the consciences of those who belonged to one Church doserved consideration, and urged the i duty of tho State regarding- secondary jas well as primary education. The Lill must be made purely secular. Mr Fox urged our learning from American experience. He thought it satisfactory and that everyone benefited by living 1 amongst an educated, civilised community. Therefore all should pay for education, which was got through the consolidated revenue. Those whose children were educated contributed the capitation. He believed that the people generally desired that the Bible should be read in the schools. It would be monstrous to make it the only book specially excluded. These secular schools would not meet the Catholic requirements. Mr Curtis's amendment was pure denormnationalisrn. . Mr Woolcock strongly supported the Bill as it stood, though he was willingto see the religious clauses struck out in deference to the sentimental views of others. Mr O'Rorke supported Mr Curtis's amendment as being similar to the Canadian system, where it worked admirably. Messrs . Lumsden, Fisher, Shrimski, and Wood (Mataura), supported the omission of the religious ■clauses. Mr Baigent supported Mr Curtis's amendment. The Minister for Justice replied, acknowledging 1 the temperate tone of the discussion. The Government did not desire to do more than necessary" at present to make the Education Boards acceptable to the people, while avoiding* the evils of local representation. They were willing to accept any boti:jr method of doing this. He believed the funds provided would prove ample, as buildings, inspection, scholarship?, and Normal ■ Schools would be otherwise provided for. Tho LI OO,OOO to be voted- for building- would be divided in proportion to the deficiency between the existing accommodation and the number of children requiring it in each district.

He I 'did' hot think clause 8-5 would interfere with the hbet ty of conscience of j any one. He objected to the bigotry of j secularism, ., and did. , not any j practical difficulty would arise under, the Bill. Mr Curtis's amendment vvus incompatible with the principle of tht) Bill, and therefore could not be adopted < by the Government. No capitation •would be levied on children receiving-, a sound education outside the . ißtute schools. The second reading" was carried by il to 6. ' ' " " The Census, Friendly Societies, and Industrial Societies Bills were read a second, time. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER, 4. The Hon. Mr Bowen, replying' to Mr Button^ said Government did not intend •this year to bring- in any Bill dealing" with raffles and lotteriesj which were illegal' under the English }aw 3 but the police were instructed, as in .England;, to warn publicans that racing' aad other lotteries were illegal. In Eng'iand it was not customary to interfere' with charitable lotteries. The Hon. Mr Whitaker, replying to Mr Murray, said that the prosecution of Geovg'e Jones was in the hands or Mr Izard, the Crown Prosecutor, if evidence were not sufficient to warrant a committal here, Jones would be committed for trial in Dunedin. Both par- 1 tics being hero, it was felt desirable to have a preliminary investigation here. If necessary, the enquiry would be ad- ; jouvned to Oamavn. The lion. IVlr Bowen, replying to Mr Murray, said it was intended to erect a new Supreme Court in Wellington. New Bills introduced: — Deceased Wife's Sister Marriage Bill (Mr IJodgkinson), Peninsula County Library Bill (Mr ISeutou), Akaroa Library Exchange Bill (Mr Montgomery). Auckland Har- : hour Board Hechiiuied Land Bill (Mr Tola). The Hon. Mr Reid moved the second reading of the Land Bill. Ix hud become necessary to consolidate the land laws of the Colony, and render them more easily comprehensible, lie had ' frequent applications iiora beyond the ' Colony for information as to its land laws, but there was no book which could ' be. Kent them, and probably no member of the House knew exactly what all tho la'.rs were. Government had now consolidated ail the laws into one Act, while endeavouring to retain tho fo/atuvos peculiar ro each, and with which people wore familiar, j'hey had dealt with rko matter tentatively., bulkving it batter gradually to approach a uniform liunl law r/unn intern pt Biiddeiuy to enfbvey on«« Part 1. dt-alt, wish the appointment of the 1 Lands Boards, which it was proposed to rer-ain in the hands of the Government, at; the House held tho Government largely responsible for the land administration. Experience had shown tho desirability of appointing a district land officer for receiving applications. Part 2. dflalt with the classification of lands. This would com mend itself to the good seme of members as to the desirability of laying off suburban lands in the neighbourhood uf now towns and villages. Holders of land orders were especially anxious to obtain such- lands on arrival. All such lands must be sold by auction. Regarding rural lands, the distinctive features of each Province's land regulations were presented. The Bill would extend the system of deferred payments to nli parts 01 tbo Colony, He thought, this should hay« Wen part of rho original Public j Works policy in order to settle people on the lands. lie hart then striven unsuece.ss'hilly to got a Bill passed for the purpose. Thy system would be of mioi'iiious advantage in relieving tho I labour nuu'kefc of those who would thus be enabled to re tiro from competition I for employment, and take up land for themselves. 1 1 would also be a great; inducement ro people at home to emigrate. I-leg-ai'ding- the provision, for taking up pastoral land on deferred payments, due care would be exercised in advising j tho Governor what land to open, and land which would otherwise remain unoccupied as containing only a small proportion of agricultural land would be settled, and a class of yeomanry be established. He. believed this provision would act most beneficially in encouraging profitable occupation of broken country. lie did not think the Bill conferred any undue advantage on the Canterbury runholders. iiightly or wrongly, the Colony was committed to certain obligations in this, matter which could not be evaded without a serious breach of faith. Ho quoted I from regulations of 1856 to show this — a vested continuing interest was then created and recognised in subsequent regulations and Acts. Tho Govern men c, however, had provided that full value for the lands in the way of fair rental should be obtained, and even wenc so far as 10 deter mine all exisiing claims at the end of 10 years. It was proposed also to take such blocks •as were required for deferred payments Kegardin.3- the Otago runs, it. was proprosed to alter the law by enabling the Board to grant renewals for either more or less than 10 years, as it thought proper. After one renewal either in Canterbury or Otng-o, the runs would be dealt with on a uniform plan, as 'far as the grazing privilege was concerned, but not iMcH'fenhg' with free selection where it was at present legal-. The Bill was read a second time I without debate. .in -order that it. ring lit

be referred to the Waste Lands Committee. ■■"'•' "■ ' The Education Bill was discussed in Committee. The first six clauses were passed with/slight alteration..