PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1806, 19 July 1913, Page 6

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

A DAY ON BILLS.

LAW OF LIBEL.

The House of Representatives met at &30 p.m. yesterday. . 'Mr. J. B. HINE (Stratford) gave notice of his intention to ask tho Minister for Defence whether he wquld in future, when making arrangements for supplies at Territorial camps, take steps to provido against the proprietors of dry canteens charging excessive prices for goods. » THE WESTPORT INQUIRY. Mr. R. SCOTT (Otago Central) asked - that "he be allowed to move that his name be withdrawn from the committee to make an investigation into Wcstport Harbour affairs, and that the name of the Hon. R. M'Kenzie be substituted for- it. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) asked 'Mr. Scott to state his reasons for making such a proposal. Mr. Scott said the reason was that the Hon. R. M'Kenzie was member for the j district and he strongly desired to be on the committee, Mr. G. WITTY (Eiccarton) said the whole committee should be recast in order that it might consist .of members who had not already taken sides on the question. He would object to the change proposed , unless a new and unbiased committee ■were set up. Mr. J". A. HANAN (Invercargill) also signified hi 9 objection. Mr. T. H. DAVE Y (Christchurch East) asked the Minister: Did he not think it "a pretty hot proposition" to ask that Mr. Scott go off the committee and that Mr. M'Kenzie, a personal friend of Mr. Simpi son, should go 011 in his place? The fair thing for the Minister to have done would have been to. put members on the committee . who had taken no part in the discussion in the House. Mr. Fisher: You did not do that with the Hine Committee. Mr. Davey: .That does not matter. Two wrongs do not make a right. . .. Mr. Scott is going off to mako room for a. man who will report in Simpson's favour, nnd you know it. Mr. H, ATMORE (Nelson) said Mr. M'Kenzie wa3 a strong personal friend of Mr. Simpson, and he had already made attempts to smother the inquiry. It was proposed to put a particularly strong 1 friend of Mr. Simpson on the committee, instead of Mr. Scott, who would, presumably, have been impartial. He thought the Government would bo wiser, to withdraw the proposal. The Hon. W. F. MASSEY said the prot posal did not come l'rom the. Govern- ' nent. ' The' Hon. F. M. B. FISHER-suggested that Mr. ; Scott withdraw his motion. It liad been submitted at the instance of the member for Motueka, who, as member for the district, was anxious to be a member of tho committee. He (Mr. Fisher) had thereupon agreed that a member of the committee from the Government sido of the House should withdraw aud make room for Mr. M'Kenzie. Mr. SCOTT said he hid no objection to' serving on the committee, but it appeared to him'that the Hon. JV; M'Kenzie had some right to bo on the committee. He_ (Mr. Scott) had no idea that Mr. M'Kenzie was interested in one of the parties concerned. Now that he found there was much feeling on the matter ho yould withdraw his motion. Tho motion was withdrawn accordingly. A CANARD. . The Hon. W. F. MASSEY (Prime Minister) said ho wished to make reference to ei statement made by Mr.'J. A. Hanan the previous evening tnat one of the Public bervice Commissioners had thrown a file of papers at tiie head, or in the face, of tho head of one of the Departments. Tho Commissioner, mentioned was' Mr. Triggs, and the head of the Department was JUr. Campbell, Secretary for the Treasury. He read a letter sent by Mr. G'ampblell to the ' Minister for Finance (Hon.' J. Allen), in which he (Mr. Campbell) absolutely de-. niod that the Commissioner had ever behaved towards him in the manner.,stated, or in any ungentlemanly manner. Ho had had to meet the Commissioner on many occasions, and the relations between' them were of the most cordial character. Mr. Massey, proceeding, 'said that he hoped that this would be a warning to' gentlemen on the other.side of the House not to repeat such ridiculous statements, which did no good from a party point of view, and which caused annoyance to people whose names hdppened to be mentioned. Mr. Hanan said that his statement had beon put in the form of a question. "I askled," he said, "if it were true, and the Prime. Minister replied 'No.' I then said that I was very glad to hear it. I heard the statement from several reliable people." Mr. Fraser: Reliable people! They are jot very reliable!' • Mi'. Hanan said that he was prepared to mention the names of his informants privately. A member: They were pulling jour leg. Mr. llaiwui.l am, as I'.-siikVbeioKf, very glad that the statement was not true;. I SHOPS AND OFFICES The Hon. W. I*\ MASSEY (Minister for L&touT) moved Hie second reading, pro forma, of the Shojis and Offices Bill. Tho second reading was agreed to on the 1 voiacs, and tho Hill was referred to the Labour Bills Committee. a labour jill, 1 The Hon. W. F. MASSEY (AJinister for Labour) moved the second reading of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill. He explained tho purpose of the Bill, which was to give effect to the obvious intention of'the existing law, nnd to allow industrial disputes to bo settled, and to be gowmied by an agreement having the force of an award, without reference to the Arbitration Court. Errors had been made in the past unwittingly, and there were a number of industries in which the "awards" under which men were working had been discovered not to be valid. For this reason the Bill was being made retrospective. Tho Bill was such a simple one, and the matter was one of such urgency, that he did; not proposo to send it to the Labour Bills ComMr. *G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) did not approve of the Bill being pushed through without having basn reviewed by the Labour Bills Committee. The Hon. J. A. M.ILLAR (D lined in Central) pointed out that the Bill had beeiK before the Labour Bills Committee. All that the Prime Minister proposed was to make legal what had previously been supposed to be law. He thought it quite safe-for the House to pass the Bill without reference to the coiamittee. Mr. G. WITTY (Riccarton) said that the precedent of putting a Bill through without sending it to the Labour Bills Committee was a dangerous one. Otherwise he approved of the Bill. Mr. J. ROBERTSON (Otaki) said that, while recognising the danger of setting up e. bad precedent, ho approved of what the Prime Minister proposed. The matter was really omo of urgency. He said that the circumstances that had made the Bill necessary furnished a striking example of tlis trouble and irritation likely to be caused by a, too strict interpretation of tile terms of the law relating to industrial [I'^Diites. The Hon. W. F. MASSEY, in reply, Enid he would be, under ordinary circumonly too glad to - oomply ■ with t.V> request -of the member for Avon, I>„<- if )«n did so tho Bill could not como More the Hou.se again until Friday. The matter was so urgent, And the sub- ... j*of the Bill so simple, he could r frond Bill to th© Comniitteo. Tlio second reading was earned on tto voices'

THE STANDING OF MAGISTRATES.

GOOD' WORK AND EARLY RISING.

| TO INCORPORATE AMENDMENTS. J Tho Hon. A. L. HERDMAN moved the second . reading 1 of the Amendments Incorporation Bill. Ho explained that tlie objcct of the Bill was to permit , of statutes, which had been amended by subsequent legislation, being printed with the amendments incorporated. It did not mean, he explained, that all the amended Acts would be reprinted; a certain discretion would have to be left to tho law draftsmen as to what Acts ought to be reprinted. Mr; J. A. HANAN (Invercargill) and Mr. R. M'CALLUM (Wairau) Both approved the Bill. Tho second reading wag carried on tho voices. COPYRIGHT. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN moved the second reading of the Copyright Bill. He recited shortly the history of the law of copyright, showing that it was, until 1910, .in a cliaotio state. In that year a' conference was held in Berlin, at which the Powers represented agreed to a uniform standard of copyright. Tho objcct of this Bill was to make our law conform with that of Great Britain. By passing this legislation New Zealand had everything to gain and nothing to lose. It would bring the law relating to copyright not only into lino with that of Great Britain, but .with the law of France and other Continental countries, and of Australia. The whole question had been carefully considered. The greater part of this Bill was an exact copy of the Bill passed by the Imperial Parliament. He strongly recommended honourable members to pass the Bill. Mr. J. A. HANAN (Invercargill) said that the Bill presented a clear, definite,' and comprehensive statement as to tho international law. of copyright. The Bill, if passed into law, would enable a man to readily discover what rights he had in connection with copyright, either at Home or abroad. It showed how the nations were coming into line in regard to intellectual matters. f The second reading was agreed to on the : voices. ( ARCHITECTS BILL. CHORUS OF CONDEMNATION. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN moved the second reading of tho New Zealand.lnstitute of Architects Bill. It was intended, ho said, to incorporate tho institution' of the architects practising their profession in New Zealand. Mr. Davey asked whether the Minister would movo the second reading, pro forma, and refer the Bill to a committee. Mr. Herdnian said that he preferred to go on ,with the second reading, but would have no objection to sending the Bill to a committee afterwards. The Bill incorporated tho New Zealand Instituto of Architects as a body established for the advancement of civil architecture,' and for the promotion of the arts and, sciences and knowledge conuected therewith. The term civil architecture was nsed a3 distinguished from military architecture. Mr. Herdman went 011 to describe tho constitution of tho proposed Architects' Registration Board. It would consist of six people, three appointed by the Government, and three by the governing body of the present institute. Sir. Wilford said that there was a good, deal of opposition to the Bill in Wellington. Mr. Herdman said that he understood that the two parties which had taken opposite sides regarding the Bill had-late-ly come to an agreement. A clause which had been objected to when the Bill was last before the House had been deleted. In any case he would be glad to accent such amendments, in oommittee, as would make the Bill a satisfactory measure. Mr. J. A. HANAN (Invercargill) said that lie knew that there was opposition on the part of a certain number of people in New Zealand to any legislation tend : ing to create ii close corporation. Per--1 sonally, ho thought it desirable to improve the status of architects in this country. Considering tho rights that had been conferred upon plumbers and .surveyors, it was difficult to deny similar rights to architects. He would support the Bill. Local Bodies Affected. Mr. G. V. PEAItCE (Patea.) said that one or two of the clauses might affect the local bodies. In almost all cases where a local body had an engineer capable of drawing plans for a bridge, he was capable also of drawing plans for any house or building the council might require. Such on engineer might be unable I to qualify as an architect, and it appeared ' that, under tho Bill, 110 would be debarred from drawing the plans for a cottage under penalty of a fine of <£50. There seemed a danger that tho Bill would create ft close corporation for the benefit of architects at the expense of the rest of the community. 1 I Mr. G. LAURENSON (Lyttelton) siipI ported what "Mr. I'eavco l\ad said a\>out the danger of creating a close corporation. 'He mentioned; as bearing on his conI tention, that the stately monument erected in Edinburgh to Sir Walter Scott had been de.signed by a working stonemason. He urged that lie Bill should be referred .to a committee. Mr. G- J- ANDERSON (Mataura.) took a similar view of tho position. In tho south, and in other parts of the Dominion, lie said, there were a number of contractors who drew plans to the. satisfaction of loco) bodies and others, and it was wrong that they should be excluded as was proposed in the Bill. The Bill should not pass, at.anyrate until it had been thoroughly investigated. Mr. J. H. BRADNEY (Auckland West) endorsed what had been said by the last three speakers on the ground that they should not impose any more difficulties than at present in the way of a working man who wanted to acquire a home for himself. (Hear, hear.) Mr. T. At. WILFORD' (Hutt) opposed the Bill, mentioning as one reason doing so that it would tend to excludo women who might wish to practise as architects in tho future. In liis opinion the Bill should cover everyone who thought he could draw plans, "whether they were members of this ring or not." The very fact that all architects agreed in supporting the Bill made him suspicious. Mr. D. BUICK (Palmerston North) said ho would like his constituency to have a good opportunity of scrutinising the Bill before it was gone on with. "A Gross Injustice." Mr. G. M. THOMSON (Dun'edin North) said that it would be a gross injustice to prevent skilled contractors from dong work which they now did satisfactorily. He had never known an architect who knew anything about the law of acoustics and if a Bill of this kind was to be passed it would be necessary to see that architects were thoroughly trained in this and other matters. - Mr. A. S. MALCOLM (Clutha) said that he wag glad to note the prevailing opinion of the House in regard to the Bill. Ho suggested that the Bill should be distributed to local bodies in the Wellington district and elsewhere, particularly small local bodies, which were most liable to suffer under tho Bill. Mr. R. M'CALLUM (Wairau) said that if he were an enemy of the Minister for Justice he would wish him to put this Act upon the Statute Book in its present form. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) said that no doubt tho whole House would unite in an attempt to. raise and elevate the standard of architecture in the Dominion. It was otherwise with the proposed pennl clause. Working people in particular who had oottaee homes erected tor thomselvea

would suffer injustice if such a provision were passed into law. The architects ought rather to seek such legislation as would induce progressive men to join the institute in .order to gain increased Mr. J. A. YOUNG (Waikato) said the Bill did not define architecture and yet proposed to penalise unlicensed persons who practised as architects. Mr. A. HARRIS (Waitemata) also contended that care should be taken to guard the interests of persons of moderate means. Tho Hon. A. L. HERDMAN said that he quite freely admitted that it was possible an injustice might be dono to some people if tlta Bill passed in its■ present lorin, and he was quite willing to Tefer it to a committee. It should bo possible to pass a Bill that would assist to raise the standard of architecture in New Zealand, and at the same time enablo peoplo to build houses without having to employ some highly qualified man at great expense. New Zealand architecture compared badly with architecture in Australia and othter countries. He did not think that tho Bill as it stood would militate against the interests of couintry people or of persons who had erected houses under the workers!" dwellings scheme. On Tuesday life would move to refer the Bill to a special committee, so thatvit might be licked into a shape that would commend it to members of the House. The second reading was agreed to. THE PEOPLE'S COURT. STATUS OF MAGISTRATES. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN moved the second reading of the Magistrates' Court Amendment Bill. Hon. members, he said, might disagree with some details of the Bill, but they could hardly object to the principle which it embodied. The Magistrates' Court was the people's court, and discharged important duties. • Hitherto magistrates' salaries had been voted annually by tho House, and increases had figured in the Estimates—a highly objectionable procedure. He. did not agree with a suggestion that had been made that magistrates should be placed in the same independent position as judges enjoyed under the Act of Settlement, but he did think it desirable to hare the salaries of magistrates fixed. They could then be increased or decreased only by an amendment of the Act. Theoretically every magistrate in New Zealand was on the same footing, but a custom had grown up of regarding the senior stipendiary magistrates in cities as belonging to a higher grade than magistrates in the . smaller centres. The Bill practically created two 1 classes of magistrates. The Government considered that it was warranted in fixing the salary of an ordinary magistrate at .£7OO, and that of a senior. magistrate at .£BOO. He believed that if the Bill passed it would be possible to get a better type -of. man to take up the position of magistrate than had been tho case in the past. In saying this, he did not wißli to cast any reflection upon those who now held office as magistrates, but in the past he had known a Magistrate to receive a salary of only w£4so. Men of the best type could not be obtained at such a salary. In effect, they were placing Magistrates in New Zealand upon the same footing, at County Court Judges in England, who performed similar duties. These Judges were appointed by the Lord Chancellor, and each of them, no matter where 110 was stationed, received a salary of ,£ISOO a year, fixed by statute. Since the year 1900 additional duties had been imposed upon magistrates. They heard Railway Appeal Board cases, applications under the School Attendance Act, breaches of the Factories Act, and applications for exemption from vaccination. Magistrates presidecf at the hearing of Teachers' Appeal Board cases, disputed local elections, breaches of the Shops and Officcs Act, 1901; offences under the sale of Foods and Drugs Act, eases under the Infant Life Protection Act, breaches of award under tho Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, workers' compensation claims, proceedings under the Defence Act, and cases under the Reformatory Institutions Act, 1909. 111 addition, magistrates heard applications for widows' pensions and military pensions. An Estimate of. Cost. Tho Minister said that tho Justice Department hod made an estimate of the additional cost to the Dominion by reason of the changes. It was proposed to pay the salaries trom the date of the passing of tho Act. The cost for this financial year would be .£IOOO, leaving out of account tho increases to which magistrates would have been entitled this year. Next year, when the scheme was in full operation the additional annual oiitlay would bo .£3200. Mr. Isitt: Money well spent. The Minister said that in arriving at his estimate he had deducted nothing on account of the increases that magistrates would have been entitled to this year or next year. Mr. Davey: How would it affect their retiring allowance? Tho Minister: They will get more if they came into the service before the i3OO limit was fixed, but if a magistrate entered later, the limit would, of course, apply. Extending Jurisdiction. The Minister said that the only jurisdiction exercised by magistrates 111 New Zealand at the present time was the extended jurisdiction. The ordinary ' and special, jurisdictions were inoperative. The Government had thought it best to abolish tho ordinary and special jurisdictions, but to give magistrates jurisdiction in regard to partnership eases up to ,£2OO. There wore a number of small partnership cases in the country and bush districts with which magistrates had hitherto been debarred from dealing. It was for the convenience of bush-fellers and small contractors in the country districts that such 'cases should be disposed of as speedily as possible. The Bill also gave special powers in connection, with the appointment of a magistrate at the Chatham Islands, , where the class of man wanted was one who was half doctor and half magistrate!. Mr. J. A. HANAN (Invercargill) said the Magistrate's Court was undeniably I the people's Court, and there was the greater necessity for this reason to secure the best men. lor: the Magisterial Bench. Otherwiso there might be appeals, so expensive as to be impossible for the poor men. The object of Parliament, should be to make the Courts accessible to the people. Ho was certainly in favour of raising the salaries of magistrates to such a level as would induce the best men in the legal profession to take positions as magistrates, but ho waa not quite prepared to say that salaries ought to be faxed by statute. Ho would rather like to see how some of tho appointees were going to shape before fixing their salaries. Ho would like to see the powers of magistrates increased, to permit of their dealing with certain matters such as'bankruptcy and probate work, now taken by judges of tho Supremo Court in Chambers. Generally he would support the Bill. ■ Mr. R. M'CALLUM (Wairau) also thought the powers of magistrates should be further extended. The Bill was read a second time on the voices. INCOME TAX. EXEMPTIONS FOR CHILDREN. The Hon. J. ALLEN moved tho second reading of the Land and Income Assessment Amendment Bill. In one particular, he said, the Bill proposed to encourage the birth-rate. At present the income tax law gavo an exemption up to -C3OO, but under this Bill it was proposed to grant a further exemption to parents with families. It was proposed to allow now a further exemption at the rato of .£25 per year of incomes for each child, but the exemption would not hold for more than four children, or for children above the age of 1G years. There was the further limitation that no exemption would apply in cases where the income from all sources was JJ7OO or more. The total cost of the - concessions would be between .£15,000 and ,£20,000 a year, but members would eee that this loss would be made up by the increase in the grndnation in the nW taxing Bill. The Bill would not como into operation until April 1, 1914. The last clause of the Bill permitted the Government to make inquiries not only from banks and companies, as to the income from deposits held by them, but also from local authorities, who now frequently received large sums in tho aggregate on deposit. Mr. J. A. HANAN (Invercargill) doubted whether the Bill would do much to encourage the birth-rate. He would have likKd to see the Government do inoro to help the poorer people in the community. He would sunnort the Bill. ' Mr. J. H.'BRADNEY (Auckland West) said ho would have liked to see the Government do something for tho people who got less incomes than .£3OO a year, Mr. G. FORBES (Hurunui) eaid hn

supported tlie Bill for the leason that it proposed to levy taxation on a fair and equitable basis. The man who reared a family paid more taxation than the man who did not, and he was therefore entitlod to a relief from income fax. Mr. 11. ATMORE (Nelson) said lio would oppose the Bill for the reason that tho concession to the men getting more than JC6 a week would make it more difiicult for tho Government to help tho men who needed it most—thoso who wero striving to bring up a family on ,£2 Bs. oi «£3 a week. He also held that if tliero was need for an exemption, it should not be limited at four children. If it were necessary to relievo the man with four children, how much more necessary was it to relieve the man with eight children ? Mr. H. G. ELL (Christchurch South) said that before he supported the Bill ho would like to know from the Government whether they were going to take any taxation off the working people of New Zealand. Mr. D. BUICK (Palmerston North) said he" would have liked to see the exemption increased to ,£SO per child, and he did not think there should be exemption only for four children. He would heartily support tho Bill. Mr. A. HARRIS (Waitemata) thought the man with .£3OO a year and only foulchildren could well afford to pay his in-come-tax. Rather ho would have liked to havo seen an exemption of £50 pel child oyer the number of foun in n family. Mr. G. LAURENSON (Lyttelton) thought tho Bill of very little importance. Mr. J. B. HINE (Stratford) said ho would not support the Bill. He did not think the man with an income of .£3OO or more needed relief, and he agreed with | gentlemen on the other side of the House that the Government should help ths poorer people rather than the people with moderate incomes. Mr. Guthrie: Are you going 'to join them ? Mr. Hine said he had always exercised his independence to some degree in the House, and he claimed a. right to express his opinion freely. Mr. L. Jf. ISI'IT (Christchurch North/ said ho would vote for the measure as being one of tho homoeopathic doses of re. form they might expect to get from the Government. The Hon; J. ALLEN, in reply, said ho was very much amused at the Opposition, and lie challenged them to call a division on the Bill. Their argument was that they would vote against the Bill because there was no reduction in Customs tariff. But this was not a Customs Tariff Bill. Let them wait until the tariff proposals | camo down. Nor was this a paltry instalment of reduction, and it would mean that a considerable deal of increase in in-come-tax would have to bo paid by some of them, under the graduation proposals. He again challenged them to put on record in a division their opposition to the Bill. When the question was put, Messrs. Hine and Atmoro called "No," and they wero thereupon named as tellers for the noes. After a division the second 1 reading was carried by 47 votes to 7. • Following was the division list:— Aves (47).—Allen, Anderson, R. P. Bollard, Bradney, Buick, Clark, Coates, Colvin, Davey, Dickie, Dickson, Escott, Forbes, Eraser, Glover, Guthrie, Hanan, Harris, Herdman, Herries, Hunter, Isitt, Laurenson, M'CallumJ Mac Donald, Malcolm, Mander, Massey, E. Newman, Nosworthy, Okey, Pearce, Poland. Pomare, R. H. Rhodes, T. W. Rhodes, Robertson, Scott, Sidey, R. W. Smith, Statham, Sykes, G. M. Thomson-, Veitch, Wilkinson, Wilson,. Young. Noes (7).—Atmore, Brown, Ell, Hindmarsh, Hine, Payne, J. C. Thomson. LAND THANSFER. HIGHLY TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN moved the second r.eading of tho Land Transfer Amendment Bill, which, he said, consisted of a scries of highly technical amendments in tho existing law! Mr. J. B. HINE (Stratford) referred to tho practice of certain oil companies in Taranaki in their .methods of securing oil options over farm lands. Tho farmers wero usually unaware that they were hazarding anything in disposing of tho oil rights, but tho companies, after securing them, lodged caveats against titles, which meant that farmers could not dispose of their lands by sale or lease without tho oil companies' consent. He would suggest that the Minister should arrange that such rights to oil should bo registered against the title in the same way as a mortgage. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN, in replying, asked the member for Stratford to put his question regarding oil rights in Taranaki on the Order Paper. He would then inquire into the matter. The Minister promised also to consider suggestions made by other members. The second reading was agreed to. GOING HOME EARLY. THE WEEK-END. It was now a couple of minutes past ten o'clock, Mr. Herdman having replied (on the Land Transfer Amendment) as soon as- the House resumed after tho supper adjournment. The PRIME MINISTER moved the adjournment of the House. (Hear, hear.) Ho was glad that- his motion was being so well received. H© wished' to congratulate members upon tho Teally good work they had done that day, and to make a suggestion—that on any other occasion when equally good work was done he would be glad to move the adjournment as early as he was doing on this occasion. The House toso at 10.4 p.m.