HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3141, 22 July 1881, Page 3

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Thursday. The House met at 2.30 p.m. Bellamy's. Sir William Eox gave notice that he would move that the sale of intoxicating liquors in the Parliamentary buildings be prohibited. QUESTIONS. Replying to questions, it was stated that the Government would give members of the House every facility for at anytime visiting the gaols, lunatic asylums, or Hospitals; step 3 had been taken to abate the rabbit nuisance at the railway embankment and reserves at Thornbury, but those efforts had in a great measure been stultified by the laxity of the neighboring proprietors ; the Government did not propose to sell or dispose of the Government buildings at Hokitika or the buildings at Ahaura and Reef ton ; the extra traffic would not justify the extra expense of a special train twice a week to meet the Middle Island West Coast mail coach at Springfield ; the imposition of a duty on maize was at present under the consideration of a select committee, and, until the result of that committee's labors was known, the Government were not prepared to say what course they would pursue in the matter; it was a mistake to think that the Government had given any indication of their intention to withdraw the capitation allowance from tbe Volunteer corps in Poverty Bay ; the Government viewed favorably the proposal for getting the law affecting patents being amended so as to lessen the trouble and cost of obtaining them. THE NO-CONEIDENCE MOTION. Mr Sutton resumed the debate on the noconfidence motion. He criticised Mr Reader Wood's speech, contending that it did not touch the real question at issue. He defended the House against the imputation that it did not possess capacity to redress all grievances brought before it. The position in which Mr Ormond had placed himself was a most anamolous one, and the country would blame him and any party with whom he allied himself for the action taken in postponing for another session at least the passage of the Redistribution of Seats Bill, so anxiously looked for. Captain Russell also spoke in favor of the Government. Ifc was plain, he said, that the effect of carrying Mr Ormond's motion would be to bring into office a class of men whose avowed policy was to restore provincialism. The policy enunciated by Mr Saunders was impolitic in the highest degree. The complaint about want of means, of redress was unfounded. No complaint against County Councils or Road Boards had come from without. All the cry against them had originated within that House. But for the premature repeal of the New Provinces Act of 1857 he quite believed that this difficulty would not have arisen, as it contained ample powers for establishing a system of local self-government in accordance with the principle of the counties system. He approved of the principle of the Roads Construction Bill, and suggested some slight modifications in tho Crown and Native Lands Rating BUI. Mr Seymour recognised in the proposals of the Government an attempt to give finality in the assistance to be rendered to local bodies towards their works. He defended Marlborough at considerable length from the aspersions cast upon its provincial administration by Mr Saundei s, and concurred in the opinion expressed by Captain Russell as to tho favorable results which would have followed a more lengthened experience of the New Provinces Act. He considered that the country had local government enough, and he did not see what further machinery of that kind was wanted. Mr Taiaroa condemned the rating of native lands. The debate was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment. The House resumed at 7.30. Mr Bunny continued the debate. He strongly condemned Mr Ormond's amendment, and supported the Ministry. He thought a change of Ministry at the present time would be inopportune and disastrous, and he could not give a vote likely to so result. If the present Government went out no one could say who would come in. He thought abolition had been a great mistake, and so far he agreed with Mr Ormond ; but it was done and could not be undone, and now their duty was to do. the best they could to improve tho institutions they had. Mr Weston thought the amendment did not bring the question of the past administration of the Ministry into direct issue, and he could not vote for it. At the same time he could not approve of the present proposals of the Government; either they went too far or not far enough. The Government should gracefully withdraw their proposals. In reality there were no powers proposed to be given to the large bodies which they did not already possess. He could not approve using the public trust funds in the way proposed for local Government purposes. Doing so would impair the credit of the colony. He condemned the proposed Public Works Board, and objected strongly to the proposal to rate Crown lands. lie also objected to the rating of native lands without the concuiTence of the natives. He did not think the issues raised by the present debate sufficiently important to justify going-to the country upon. If the proposals were adopted this probably they would be repealed next session by the new Parliament, and no harm could be done by letting them stand over. He characterised Sir George Grey's bill as even more wild and visionary than the Treasurer's proposals. It was really a scheme of separation in disguise. The country would never accept such a scheme. He especially condemned the proposal to have elective Judges. Tho reference Sir George Grey had made to the present Judges was unkind, unjust, cruel, and utterly unfounded. He thought the House was too cumbrous a machine for the work devolving on ifc now, and that the Government was called on to do a great

deal they should not be troubled with. This being so, he thought the proposals of Mr Saunders might be moulded into a useful f ?■"!"■, Bather than impose taxation in the manner proposed, he would prefer increased Customs duties or a, tax on wool. While condemning. the Government policy and recognising in Mr Saunders' scheme the elements of practicability he admitted that the Government had had much unpleasant work to perform and had done ifc well. He was not now, on the issue raised, ready to eject them from office and hurry on a general election, to be probably followed in a few months by a second election enormous cost to the colony. In a few months they would all in ordinary course go to the country, and to precipitate a dissolution now was unnecessary and would be mischievous. He would vote against the amendment, and if the Government bills were pressed on he would also vote against them. Sir George Grey explained that his remarks about the Judges were made in consequence of some remarks made by a Judge of known centralistic tendencies to a jury a few days before. He would have no hesitation in repeating the statement under similar circumstances. Mr Hall strongly condemned the remarks made by Sir George Grey about the Judges, and which had been made worse by his explanation. He denied there was any public demand for a change in their governing institutions. All that was desired was for the assistance necessary to enable the existing institutions to satisfactorily perform the duties devolving on them. He defended the action of the Government in stopping public works, and showed how necessary such a course had been to preserve the credit of the colony. And yet, notwithstanding the drag put on, two millions had been spent on public works during the last twelve months. As long as the House retained, as ifc should do, the sole power of legislation ifc would be impossible to relieve it of dealing with local questions. He defended the existing local bodies, as distributing the work of local government among the people and producing excellent results. Sir George Grey's proposal was to establish, not nine, but twenty provinces. Mr Hall then at considerable length criticised Sir George Grey's proposals. Referring to Mr Saunders' proposals, Mr Hall expressed perfect readiness to go to the country on the question of the provinces. In reply to Mr Wood's assertion that the local government question had not been in the original programme of the session, Mr Hall quoted the Governor's speech to show by its reference to the bill for local public works that their proposals were by no means sudden or unthoughfc of. He pointed out the large powers possessed by the counties under the present system, and he admitted that the Eoad Boards were even more useful bodies than the County Councils. If fuller powers were not possessed by these bodies to obviate the necessity for constant reference to Wellington, it wa3 owing to the action of the provincial party in the House who had. twice prevented a Road Boards Bill being passed. If the people wanted a system under which to work out their own destinies in local government the present system afforded the opportunity for extension and improvement towards that end. The Government desired to decentralise as far as they possibly could, but would strenuously resist the cutting up of the colony into a number of petty, feeble, and useless States. They proposed to extend and improve the County Council and Road Board system, to give them increased powers by delegation and otherwise do away with the necessity for frequent reference to Wellington. They also proposed to give those bodies reasonable pecuniary assistance to enable them to perform their functions. Such were the Government proposals. The Government did not pretend that the proposals were perfect, and they would in committee have gladly accepted any amendments calculated to make them more perfect. If Mr Ormond had only wanted these proposals to be relegated to the constituencies Le should have worded his motion in a less hostile fashion. Unless the Government possessed a majority in the House they would not endeavor to carry a Redistribution Bill through. If the present motion were cai'ried, either Mr Ormond would have to take office with his new friends or they must go to the country on the present basis of representation. Mr Ormond could not escape the responsibility of the action he had taken. In conclusion he felt ifc his unpleasant duty to say that Mr Ormond had acted very wrongly in moving the amendment without giving notice to the Ministry, among whose supporters he had up till then been numbered. He could find nothing in Mr Ormond's speech to his constituents which could have led the Government to expect such conduct. The very essence of party government was that the members of a party should trust each other. Mr Ormond's desertion without notice deserved the most severe condemnation. Whatever might be the result of the division he could look back to the administration of the last two years with satisfaction, and with gratitude for the generous support given to Ministers by their party —a support which had enabled the Government to achieve whatever good results had attended their administration.

Sir George Grey thought the Ministry deserved commiseration. After living a long time from hand to mouth they had now got to the end of their tether. He and his friends had been accused of trying to restore provincialism. They had never dreamed of anything so insane. They knew that nations never went back. Once institutions were done away with they could not be restored. Their defects must be remedied. What he now proposed was to take a step in advance, not to go back. His speech had been cruelly misrepresented by Mr Weston, who either had not read it or was ignorant of law. He (Sir George) did not often approve of the actions of the Government, but he did approve of what they had done in removing from the judicial bench a man who was so grossly ignorant of law as the member for Grey Valley had shown himself. As to Mr Hall's objection to the term " President,'' it was a title which had been adopted by the Gtago Provincial Council in an Ordinance some ten years ago. The existing institutions had been set tip by men who desired to preserve their ill-gotten wealth by fettering the people by means of plural voting. He hated the system, and those who supported it deserved to be scouted. The time had now come to change this system, and to establish a form of government under which each man should have but one vote. He hold that the people of eacli district were quite capable of exercising all the powers which that House exercised. Evidently the Premier was afraid to trust the people. Those who wished to keep the people from exercising power should vote with the Government. Those who wished the people of New Zeaiand to enjoy their rights would vote for the amendment. Sir George then at considerable length defended his proposal for elected Judges, pointing out that many English Corporations elected their own Recorders. He thought that turning out the present Ministry would, instead of retarding, facilitate tho passage of a good Redistribution Bill. They should turn out a set of men who let circumstances create a policy for them, instead of making a policy create circumstances. He urged that the contributions of each man to the propertytax should be made public. Ministers cheered that. Lefc them do it, and once more show that they were incapable of devising a policy themselves. They were willing to take a hint from others. He appealed to all who loved New Zealand and wished to give it free institutions to go into the lobby with him. Mr Saunders defended Mr Ormond's conduct and stated that he himself had privately endeavored to get the Government to alter their proposals, but the answer he got was that they would not budge an inch. He had therefore no

option but to adopt the course he had taken, although when he spoke before Mr Ormond he had no idea of the consequences about to follow. In conclusion he announced that he could not vote for displacing the present Ministry until he knew who were going to take their places. He would not wish that there Bhould be a return to Grey and Sheehan. He would therefore vote against the amendment. Mr moved the adjournment of the debate, which was agreed to, and the House rose afc 12.50.