WAR REGULATIONS

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 285, 26 August 1920, Page 6

WAR REGULATIONS

THE BILL IN COMMITTEE LABOUR MEMBERS' PROTEST The War Regulations Continuanco Bill was again before the House last night. This Bill might as easily be called, the War Regulations Repeal Bill, because one of the purposes of it is to repeal certain war regulations, or the right of tho Government to mako dhem or sustain them. If the Bill does not. pass the_ right of the Government renains as it. was in the war period. The Bill proposes to continue certain war regulations which it is considered advisable to retain, and to repeal those regulations no longer necessary in peace times. The second reading debate was taken on Tuesday night and was adjourned incompleted. In the delate list night several members appealed lor special consideration for Syrians. These people, it w.is urged, were just as bitter enemies of the Turks and fte Germans as wero the British, and they ought not to be considered any longer enemy aliens. Incidentally the Leader of the Oijpo6ition (Mr. Mac Donald) expressed complete approval of the Bill. Much as he prized "liberty of the subject" as an ideal, he did not think that any part of 'i)ie Bill could be taken out of it with advantage. There was in it nothing to justify tho reproach that it would enable any one group of people to place its iod\l on the neck of any other section or sections. The Prime Minister replied at 8 p.m. First he answered questions about . Syrians, saying that he had a great deal of sympathy witli them. They had been good citizens in the war period, and they had been protected from hardship in possible, cases "being dealt with -individually. There would be no difficulties placed in ■ the way of naturalisation. So also he thought!. the time had come when alien enemies who had been good citizens during tho war should be restoi'ed as speedily ns possible to the position they occupied before the war. .'.-.-■ Mr. Massey proceeded to refer to the debate of the previous night; which, he said, had not been, particularly edifying, or up to tho proper standard of Parliament. If the House did not want the Bill he was prepared to drop the Bill, and the Government would keep all the powers it. now had. Mr. Massey proceeded to refer to the Bill in detail, explaining the clauses that,had been revoked in the Bill. ! The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was committed forthwith. In Committee, tho Labour 'members heatedly opposed the Bill. They argued that if the Bill did not pass, the war regulations would automatically expire at the close of the period ior which they had already been extended. The Biil proposed to continue in times of'pence regulations dealing with sedition and strikes, although these regulations had been framed to meet war conditions. Mr. Holland declared warmly that the. Labour group was going to resist tho Bill, and he and his supporters on tho Labour benches carried on the debate without much assistance from the rest of the House. Mr. Parry (Auckland Central) charged the Government with entrenching itself ."behind barb wire" by taking power to say who should come into New '/.( aland, who should be put out of New Zealand, and what should bo s-iid in New Zealand. The Prime Minister had used the coal strike to wiii tho general election. Members: A good issue, too. Mr. Parry told the House that the Government was taking power to imprison men without, right of trial by jury for the offence of "seditious intent" and "seditious tendency." Mr. Massey said the War Regulation relating to seditious intent was being repealed. Tho regulation regarding seditious strikes'was to stand. Mr. Glenn (Rangitikei) issued 'a challenge to Mr. Holland, who had invited the Prime Minister to meet him before a meeting of workers, admission to bo "by membership card of the Labour Part}'." Mr. Glenn invited the Labour leade'r to-resign'his'seat and contest Rangitikei at once, and offered him AWi towards his exppnses. Mr. Holland did not accent the challenge. ■ Mr. Massey, replying to sor-» other Labour speeches, said that he hnd asked for the drafting of a cl,au=e that would concede the rieht of trial by jury in charges of sedition. ./ Tt win apparent that the opposition of the Bill had no mora new s rcum en Is (KMinst it, and more than oncp lieforo 11 p.m. the Chairman' of Committees had to remind speaker*" of a rule against "tedious repetition." , At 114.5 e diviiiV- was teV.»n on a Lalxmr 'motion by Mr. .T. M'Comlw to report proves. Thi* was defeated-by % votes to 7, the absentee from the Labour '"iirlit beinpr Mi'- Barbara, who wi>* not ™ the ITnu«e. . The Bill was reported with amendments at 1.15 a.m.. and the House rose. FREEHOLD V. LEASEHOLD THE TE AROHA SECTIONS. The familiar freehold versus leasehold issuo occupied the attention of the House of Representatives for, an hour yesterday afternoon. The Government has introduced- a. Bill proposing to concede the option of freehold to the holders of leases in Te Arpha. The clauses of this Bill were embodied m the "Washing-up"- Bill at tho end of last session, but were struck) out at the instance of leasehold members, who insisted that Ihe.matter was too important to be dealt with in.that way. Yesterday tho new Bill was reported from a committee, with a recommendation that it should 1m allowed to proceed without amendment. ■ , Mr. Witty (Riccarton), one of tho lew confirmed leaseholders left in the House, protested that the Te Aroha sections were tho property of the people, and that public interest was being sacrificed ;b the "greed", of a few tenants. These tenants, he argued were holding the land on particularly cosy terms, and their object in asking for the freehold must bo speculation in tho land. Another leaseholder followed in tho person of Mr. Forbes (Hurupui), but he miprised the House by supporting tho Bill. He explained that the Te 'Aroha tenants held their sections on mining leaso, with perpetual right of ,renowiil at rentals of about .£3 per annum per section. Tho State interest in the land was negligible, since the rents went to the local body under the mining law, while the local ixidv would be better off if it lost Uw small rental revenue, and had the right to rate the land. Tho Government had better get what it could by the sale of the leases. Mr. Fraser (Wellington Central) confessed to knowing nothing about the matter, but thought that the freehold should not be granted. Mr. Hanan (invercargill) declared that the Bill was reactionary, and ought to be regarded as "an act of public pillage." Mr. Atmore (Nelson) assisted Mr. Hanan to talk out" the report of the committee, so that the Bill remains in a state of suspense until another opportunity offers of gettins it back to the House. . PUBLIC TRUST AND RECENT COURT DECISION. Tho recent Supremo Court decision that laud could not be taken under the Public Works Act for the purposes of a site for the Public Trust Office was mentioned in tho House of Repre-K-iifativr-s yesterday by Mr. T. M. Wilford. Ho asked the Prime Minister whether he had read tho judgment of tho Chief Justice, and whether he did not consider that'the position of tho Public Trust Office did not warrant the ' introduction of legislation giving the : office power to acquire land for the purposes of the office. Mr. Wilford thought that, this must be considered to bo a public purpose. ' Mr. Massey said that ho had read the judgmont. All he could say in reply was that he intended to have tho matter placed before Parliament in the very near future. He did not know whether legislation was necessary, but if so it would be considered before tho sna of the session.

THE MORATORIUM A SIX MONTHS' EXTENSION. Amendments mado by .the legislative Counoil in tho Statutes Ropeal and Expiring- Laws Amendment and Continuance Bill were agreed to by the House of Kepresentatives lost night. Mr. Massey eaid that the important amendment by the Counoil was the ex. tension of the Mortgages Extension .Act from December 31, 1920, the date fixed by the existing law, to June 30,1921. He proposod to ask the Houso to agree with this amendment. Mr. Witty: "What is the object of continuing it? Mr. Massey said that money was particularly scarce, and the object of the extension was to safeguard mortgagor* from hardship. Mr. Wilford: You aro going to have trouble if you make mortgages all come due on one date. Mr. Massey: I don't think bo. People havo been making their, arrangements, 1 and 6ome havo found it' impossible to make them. _ These have asked for an extension of time. Mr.,Wilford: It will help the loan? Mr. Massey: It will not help the loan in the slightest degree as far as I am able to judge. _ Wo can get the money for the loan without any help of this kind. The motion was agreed to. • EXPIRING MISCONTINUANCE DURATION OF MORTGAGES EXTENSION ACT, 1919, EXTENDED. Tho Statutes Repeal and Expiring Laws Amendment and Continuance Bill wes yesterday committed in the Legislative Council. Sir Francis Bell introduced a new clause designed—(l) to extend to June 30, 1921, the duration of the limitations imposed by tho Mortgages Extension Act, 1919, upon tho rights of mortgagees under existing mortgages; and (2) to make June 30. 1922, the date to which the Supreme Court may in certain cases extend tho term of a mortgage. The Bill was reported with this amendment, and was read a third time and passed. customslevenue A return presented to the House of Representatives shows tho chief sources of- Customs revenue for the' year 1919. ■ ( Tho figures arc as follow:— ' .Spirits, .£622,811., Apparel, including gloves, hosiery, cor. sets, furs, hats, and millinery, ■?5C4,140. Tobacco, .£490,483. Cigars, snuff, cigarettes, ,£472,256. . Piece goods, including silks, sarins, velvets, and woollens, .£254,929. Motor-cars and materials, .£213,782. Cutlery, hardware, tinware, and metal manufactures, .£152,790. Drapery, laces, haberdashery, ribbons, ,£121,690. ■ Tea, .£116,432. Many analler items brought tho Customs aiitt excise revenue up to .£4,549,987. LIABILITY OF BANKS , li, . ■. ■ In Committee on tho Law Amendment Bill, the Legislative Council yesterday struck out tho clause concerning presumption "f survivorship, and altered tlu title of the measure to Bills of Exchange. Amendment Bill. As reported from Com-, mittee, the Bill contained only tho clause providing that a bank shall not be liable by reason of its having paid a fraudulently altered cheque when the cheque lias been so drawn as to afford facility for fraudulent alteration. As on previous occasions, the Hon. C. Louisson spoke against the proposal contained in this clause, but the clause was carried, 'upon a division, by 20 voteß to 8. Sir Francis Bell, in supporting the measure, said that it would have the effect of bringing New Zealand into lino with England, Ireland, and Scotland on an important point of mercantile law. The BUI was reported with the amendments noted.