THE HOUSE.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1538, 6 September 1912, Page 6

THE HOUSE.

AWAKINO COUNTY. The House met at 2.30 p.m. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN (AttorneyGeneral) moved: That a respectful address bo presanted to his Excellency the Governor, requesting him to proclaim tho Counties Act, 1908, in force within the Awnkino County. The motion was carried. FIRST READINGS. The East Coast Native Trust Lands Amendment Bill (the Hon. W. H. Herries) and the Christcnurch District Tramways Amendment Bill (Mr. T. H. Davey, for Mr. G. Laurenson) wero read a first time. OTIRA TUNNEL INQUIRY. The Otira- Tunnel Committee was granted permission to sit that afternoon, in order to meet the convenience of a number of witnesses desiring to return' as soon as possible to Otira. WANGANUI HARBOUR BILL,

Mr. W. A. TEITCH (YVanganui) brought up the question of an informality in connection with tho AVanganui Harbour Bill. Tho plan, it appeared, had not been handed in to the clerk with the Bill. Tho plan, however, was now in the hands of tho clerk of the committee. He asked if the Bill might be allowed to proceed notwithstanding .the informality. Several members pointed out that there was another informality. Tho plan had not' been deposited in the Magistrate's Court. Therefore, people interested hml no opportunity of protesting.. Messrs. J'earce, Newman, and Guthrie said they did not wish to take any unfair advantage of a technicality, but there was a good deal of objection to the proposed boundaries, and the country districts had been refused representation by Wangamii on the commission regarding the boundaries. Those interested should have an opportunity of examining the plans. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN (AttorneyGeneral) suggested that'tho matter be allowed to standi over till next day, when tho Local Bills Committee could say whether any persons had been prejudiced. Mr. VEITCH agreed to the adoption of this course.

CUSTODY OF A CHILD, PETITION FOR INQUIRY". Mr. H. .1. H. OKEY. chairman of Hie M to 7, Petitions Committee, reported that tho committee had inquired into the netition oJ Sandstein and otters (re<?re-

senting the Society for the Protection of Women and Children in Christchurch), and that the committee recommended that

the petition be recommended to the Government fur favourable consideration. Mr. G. W. IU'SSULL (Avon) asked what the recommendation meant; was it a. recommendation for a further Parliamentary inquiry, for a Itoynl Commission, or what? Mr. OKEY explained that the petition iy.ns for a further innnirv. Mr. L. M. ISITT (Christchurch North) said he thought the Government: should take the case into consideration, but he. thought it would be unwise to assemble a large number of witues-cs fur another Parliamentary inquiry. It would l >o fur the Government, to say what form Ihe iunuiry should take. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) said he thought the Government should be careful to satisfy themselves as to whether there was occasion for a further inquiry into this unfortunate matter. The child concerned was now in the custody of her foster parents; and there was no Migijrstion that the child was now being treated improperly. The inquiry could do no good; it could only ."stir up mud." The inquiry was .not being asked for in the interests of the child, but to clear the magistrate of certain imputations made against him. The Hon. F. M. B. FISTIKU. sprokiiK as a member of the committee investigating the matter formerly, said that the object of the proposed inquiry was to protect the society, ami net In protect the child. It would mean that nil the neighbours' gossip and tittle-tntlol would be brought out again before the committee. Mr. L. M. ISITT said that the members of the society claimed that prior to the previous "inquiry they had received such short notice that they could not otter all tho evidence available. Mr. A. 11. HINDMARSH (Wellington South) said there was a great deal of cruelty perpetrated in taking children away from their parents. He had known several cases in Wellington. Societies such as this one mentioned when once started on a crusade did not like to be beaten. He had known instances of their having interviewed magistrates, and oven a Supreme Court Judge. In this particular crusade the ladies were apparently bent on getting their own way. He hoped Parliament would take a firm stand on this matter, for he was certain these societies ought to be very carefully watched. In cases of the sort the mother was very often a helpless creature who could not present her case before a magistrate, and the. ladies of the society, ladies of good social position, clubbed together against her, so that she could not get justice. This petition was for the purpose of vindicating "a little push of ladies down in Christchurch."

Mr. E. SCOTT (Otago Central), a member of the committee, said it seemed to hini there was a deal of "neighbourly illfeeling" in the ease. Mr.'G. LAOUENSON (Lyttelton) hoped the Government would grant the inquiry, and ho defended the society andits members against the reproaches of Mr. Hindmarsh.

The Hon. W. F. SIASSEY (Prime Minister) said he personally had no knowledge of tho case, but' the Government would make all proper inquiries, and would in the end do whatever seemed to them fair.

The Hon. JAMES ALLEN (Minister for Education) said he was perfectly persuaded that the Department-administering the section of the Act under which proceedings were taken was doing its work exceedingly well in the interests of the children, . BILLS PASSED, . The "Deputy Governors' Powers Bill" and the "New Zealand University Amendment Bill" were received from the Legislative Council and passed. . '. " , .. DUNEDIN DRAINAGE BILL. The Dunedin District Drainage and Sewerage Acts Amendment. Bill (Mr. Sidey) passed through committee without amendment. MOKAU HARBOUR BILL.' The Mokau Harbour Board-Empower-ing Bill (Mr. C. K! Wilson) was committed. _ Mr. H. G. North) introduced an amendment to nullify the clause allowing ratepayers one, two, or three votes, according to the value of the property held by them. He proposed that a ratepayer should have one vote, and one vote only. In opposition to'the amendment it was pointed out that the Bill was intended merely to empower the board to raise a loan of ,£IOOO, and that unless the provision .were inserted in the Bill, the desires of bona-fide settlers at Mokau might be defeated by the'absentee owners .of quarter-acre sections. The Harbour Board was constituted under the Act, and the franchise for the election of members was in accordanco with the principal Act.

Mr. C. X WILSON (Taumarunui), who was in charge of tho Bill, listened ■to criticism of his Bill for an hour and a half before he replied to any of it. He pointed out that tho clause in the Bill was in the Counties Act, so that the. democrats of tho date of the Counties Act might still as democrats vote for the measure. The Bill had been agreed upon by the settlers, and he thought tho House ought not to put obstacles in the way of their borrowing money to build a wharf for themselves.

A division was taken on Mr. Ell's amendment at 9.15 p.m. There had been frequent appeals made by frionds of the Bill to allow the question to go to the vote during the two hours previously, but the debate was carried on by those opposed to the Bill. The amendment was in the end defeated by 35 votes to 2G.

Tho Bill was reported without amendments, and by permission of the House, as It was the last day on which Local Bills took precedence of Government business, Mr. Wilson moved the third reading, which was carried.

Similar permission was given to Mr. T. K. Sidey regarding tho Dunedin District Drainage and Sewerage Acts Amendment Bill. This Bill was also read a third time.

KARORI DRAINAGE. The Hon. A. L HERDMAN (member for Wellington North) moved the second reading of the Wellington and Karori Sanitation and Water Supply Bill. He explained that tho purpose of the Bill was to provide for tho joining up of Karori with the Wellington water supply and drainage systems. ' The second reading was carried. WAITEMATA COUNTY. Mr. A. HARRIS (Waitemata) moved to withdraw the Waitemata County Council Empowering Bill, which had been unfavourably reported upon by the Local Bills Committee. The Bill was accordingly discharged from the order paper. PUBLIC SERVICE BILL. This Bill was next oir the Order Paper, and, just prior to the supper adjournment when the Bill was called on, The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN (Minister in charge of it) said that he would like to consult tho Prime Minister as to whether he would proceed with it. Sir JOSEPH WARD suggested that it would be wise to defer the second reading of the Bill until some day when it could be taken earlier. " ,■" When the House resumed, the Prime Minister moved that the Bill be placed lower down on Jhc Order Paper, and the House offered no objection. GOLD DUTY. The Hon. P. M. B. PISHF.R (Minister for Customs} moved the second reading of the Gold Duly Amendment Bill, which, a? he explained, was a simple measure to allow jewellers to export their shop sweepings for treatment iu England with less inconvenience to themselves and to the Customs Department. The second Tcading was carried.

WANGANUI BRIDGE. The Hon. \Y. FRASER (.Minister For Fublic Works) moved the second reading of the Wauganui Bridge Amendment Bill. He explained that the measuro was a simple ono of machinery onlv, and that it was desired by the local 'bodies concerned.

The second reading was agreed to,

WAIHOU AND OHINEMURI RIVERS,

The Fon. W. FRASER (Minister for Public i,oik?) moved the second reading •f the Yfaihou and Ohinemuri Rivers Improvement Amendment Bill, . Xhe sicojid reading jvas carried,

STATE FIRE INSURANCE. The Hon. F. M. P.. FISHER (Minister in charge of the Government Insurance Department) moved the second Tending of tho State Fire Insurnnoo Amendment Bill, 110 explained that the second clause of the Hill provided for tho disposal of tho profits ot the Slate' Fire Insurance Department. In the original Act provisict wa-i made for the allocation of surplus prolils mining policy-holders. Now, it was considered necessary that the profits should be n-eil for the purpose of building up n riv-crvo fund for the institution, and also fur the purpose of repaying the..UMKM capital borrowed from the Slide on which (ho institution was (onmlcd. Sir .IOSKIMI WAUI) (Awarun) said that he recognised I lie necessity for the Bill, anil he would support it. Mr. (!. W. IiUSSIIIX (Avon) discussed thi< Slate I'iiv Insurance venture generally, lie uiniiiliiincd that it had been of immense benefit In the. people of rJio eonnlry, having saved them'.Xl.'-'oO.OOO in insurance rales, lie asked tho Minister to say whnl the iiiilure of the arrangement wni which obtained between the Stole Department and all other companies. Mr. A. II.Mil! IS (Wnitematn) said tho .'iileci'ss which had alli'lided Ihe Slate Fire Insurance business had been due to tho fuel that Ihe State Guaranteed Advances Olliee had compelled mortgagors to whom Ihev hud advanced monev, to insure in I his Depiirlmenl. Me hoped the Minister now in charge would not alter (ho rule. Mr. G. V. I'l-lAKCH (Paten) .said ho undei'slo.id the Government had made it compulsory on persons In whom tho State Departments advanced money, to insure with ihe Govevnineul Olliro. With this, he did not «|!iTi\ Many farmers had banded togvlhcr to form a en-operativo insuranco company, inul now when they got a small advance from Ihe Government they had to withdraw* from the Farmers' Union Company, and pay higher rates to tho Government.

Mr. W. 11. 11. BELL (Wellington Suburbs) said the wholo argument in favour of State institution's was that they would keep insurance, rates down to a. reasonable level. It was not to drive privnto competitors out of the market. What the State Office _was doing was in the nature of establishing a monopoly by insisting upon mortgagors to the State insuring with the State. Mortgagors should bo allowed to insure, with anv reputable office. Mr. .T. H. BKADNEY (Auckland West) said ho was opposed to all monopolies, whether State monopolies or private monopolies. Ho, maintained that tho State Office, was in agreement with other offices to keep up a system of monopoly rates.

Mr. A.. H. HINDMAESH (Wellington South) said tho Government would never dare to put into effect the suggestion of Mr. Bell. He scarcely liked to put it that way, but ho believed they had too much sense of justice to attempt it. Other leading institutions always specified an office in which a mortgagor must insure. '

Mr. W. C. BUCHANAN (Wairarapa) said there was no doubt-that lendine institutions, where they could mak*e it compulsory upon people receiving loans to insure in offices in which the companies were interested, but the rate was not universal, and was never enforced against a borrower who was in an indenendent position. He thought it unfair that the Government should seek to injure- tho Farmers' Union- Company, which took risks not readily taken by other offices, aud at rates which the Government could not approach. Mr. T. W. RHODES (Thames) defended the practice of tho Department. Mr H. G. ELL (Christchurch South) said tho proposal advocated bv Mr. Bell would deal a severe blow at the Government Insurance Department. Mr. G. J. ANDERSON (Mataura) said the btate Department, which was established to reduce rates by competition, was doing no good'while it was joined in an agreement with other offices. Mr. A. S.'MALCOLM (Clutha) thought it was unjust to compel mortgagors to insure with the State office. The Hon. F. M. B. FISHER, in replv, said it was not the intention of tlio Government to alter the policy of the State Fire Insurance Department. The statement of the member for Avon that the State Fire Department was working with the private companies was absolutely incorrect. The Department had no agreement with other offices, and it had never been' suggested that anything of tho sort p'hould ..be made. He believed from his own experience that other lending institutions put business in the way of particular companies. The State Department was not going to join any combine, nor was it going to tako hazardous risks to make business. But if the State Department was put in the position of putting up a fight, the State Department would fight, it was not the intention of the Government to try to ruin tho State Fire Department. He agreed, however, that it. was not tho business of the State to make insurers pay higher rates than could lie got elsewhere, as had appeared from the case cited by the membor for Patea. The Department had not been established -to destroy private companies, but to regulate the price of insurance.

- The second reading was carried on the voices. '