THE SUPERINTENDENCY.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2472, 18 January 1871, Page 2

THE SUPERINTENDENCY.

MB MACANDREW AT THE MASONIC

HALL,

At the close of Mr Macandrev's address, a person, whose name we did pot learn, asked him who introduced steam vessels into the < 'olony, when he replied, he believed he had the honor of doing so. In reply to another question, ho said—-If Mr Vogel succeeds in his mission to the United Stat a, .the advantage that would atfcrue to the Colony was Incalculable, as it would open up a d inand for wool and flax and other products of the country. In fact, he looked upon the benefit of the Californian ser.vicL less on account of its postal facilities than as opening up commend a] relations with America. ‘ ’ ' ’’

Mr Bowens : Will you oblige this meeting

by telling ns why you supp rted the maximum compensation proposal to the squatters ?—lt was on this ground : These Otago land questions had become such intolerable nuisances to the House of Representatives, that every member dreaded an Otago free fight ; so a meeting of the Otago members of both Houses was held to see whether they could not agree upon something and suppoit it. All agreed to differ, and that the amount should be settled by a majority of those present. As 3s 61 was the sum decided upon in that private meeting of members, when the measure came before the House I felt bound in honor to vote for that amount (Cheers.) Mr Stout: When did you discover that the Provincial Council were thwarting you on the construction of the Clutha Railway 'flu the special session which was called in 1869.

Why did you not then do as the majority of them requested you, appeal to the country on the question (cheers) ?- -1 will be candid and answer that question: Although the majority of the Council—l think it was a bare one—expressed a desire for a dissolution, they at the same time gave me to understand that, unless it could be brought about without the Superintendent resigning, they would rather the dissolution should not take place. I can assure Mr Stout, whatever he may feel, it is not such a pleasant thing to run the gauntlet of an election of this kind.

Your explanation amounts to this—(Loud cries of “No speech.” Mr Stout tried to speak several times, but was not allowed for some time). 1

Mr Mauandrew : If I recollect rightly, at the same time the Council proposed a resolution in favor of a dissolution, it was proposed that power should be sought to enable the Superintendent instead of the Governor to dissolve the Council. The power not having been granted, when the Council met next time I put it to them if they still desired a dissolution, I was prepared to comply. Thau sooner than rim the gauntlet of an election, you would submit to ba thwarted by the Council ?—I do not pretend to cope with this question as a logician. I have no doubt Mr Stout is strong in logic.

Mr Stout appealed to the Chairman, and wished to know whether, on asking a question, he should be allowed to be personally attacked in the manner Mr Macaudrew had attacked him ?

The Chairman* : ’Mr Stout has appealed to me on a question of right- -but I really cannot see in what way Mr Macaudrew has attacked him.—(Cheers.)

Mr Stout : Did you not designate the Hundreds Regulation Act as “ an obnoxious Act”?—l made use of the words, “the socalled obnoxious Act.”

Do you agree with the principles of that Act? —I cannot say that I do. It was an Act of expediency. How do you explain your vote ? Do you approve of the Act?- -No, I cannot say that I do. 1 may say it was on my own amendment that the sting was taken out of it. Do you know what’the sting was? Id^

not think you do, so I will tell you what 1 call the sting. As the Act was originally brought up—it was not brought in by me; I never saw it until I saw it iu print—there was no provision in it limiting the amount of compensation, and it was quite competent to receive 20s an acre. My amendment went to limit the compensation; and because I had the misfortune to propose an amendment and carry it, I am set down as the author of it.

Did you approve of leasing the runs to the rtinholders under the Act of 1866?—N0, certainly not; and I went so far as not to give my consent to renew leases. Were there any that did not come in ?—1 believe there were some.

How was it that you extended the time to one year?—lf you ask Mr Keid he can tell you. The Act was draughted by Mr Reid for aught I know to the contrary. The Act was founded on a resolution of the Provincial Council, draughted under the supervision of the Provincial Solicitor, aipl by him transmitted to Wellington. Really I cannot tell you what induced the Provincial Council to pass it. The Chairman reminds me- tint that particular clause was introduced by the Waste Lands Committee. I may mention that one of the first things 1 did was to instruct the Waste Land Board not to grant renewals in virtue of that clause. Did the 1870 Act in other respects carry out the resolutions of the Provincial Council ? —Yes, T believe so.

Were they carried out i» respect of fencing ?—lt is a very unimportant question. T am quite willing to answer all 1 cm, but I do hope Mr Stout will have mercy on us miserable sinners.

Why did you support the Hundreds I’cgulat'on Act, 15(59, when your Executive telegraphed to you not to piass it until approved by the Council? —I supported the Act in order to get the sting taken out of it, well knowing it would otherwise have passed as it was altogether. Why did you-not support Mr Howorth ? I think the meeting should bear in mind I am not now a candidate for the General Assembly.

Why did yoit not support Mr Howo th in his action un the second reading "'—Because I should have been stultifying all my previous action. I have no doubt that’s a splendid sentiment for the Echo. 1 told you that the Otago members with Mr Howorth, agreed upon a coarse of action and I consider be stultified himself by acting contrary to his agreement. Do you not think, since you were changed from being the squatters’ friend that you would —(The determination to put ifr Stout down became so mauife t that we did not catch the closing part of the sentence. He stood some time, hut notwithstanding the appeals of the Chairman and Mr Macandrcw his conduct was so disapproved of by the meeting that whenever ho attempted to speak he was hooted into silence. At length he managed to put his final question.)— Would it not bo better to plunge the squatters into Lake Wanaka than to drive them into the Pacific, as you promised to do hi 1867? —(The meeting wished Mr Macniidrew not to answer the question.) Mr MacaxDr i)'; I haye-po doubt it is very clever, and when Mr Stout proves to me that } have ever promised fo d’b so, I'will ausweV him. (Mr dago here ipade .himself remarkable by hissing?) . Mr Millar (who with difficulty obtained a hearing) : There is one simple question recurs to me which Mr Stout has not asked--1 would hire to know who was the member of the Executive who drew up the resolution giving the squatters pre-epemption to 640 acres ?—I think you will excuse my answering that question. It is a point of honor that what passes in the Executive shall not be repeated.—(Loud cheers )

Mf Millak '■ I was a member of that

House, and I will answer the question. It was Mr Donald Reid.

Mr Jago : How can you reconcile your support of the Hundreds Regulation Act of 1869 with the speech you read to us this evening?—l can reconcile it easily. I do not consider the Hundreds Regulation Act anv fundamental alteration of the Act of 1866.

Mr Prosser (amid much interruption) ; I wish to know on wh it principle you hypothecated the jetty dues as security for the interest on the Port Chalmers Railway ?—I hypothecated them in accordance with a resolution passed by the Provincial Council, in order ti get over the difficulty of nob being able to give security on the general revenue. They do not conn under the control of the General Government, and 1 think it was a fortunate thig we had power to hypothecate them. As I said before, Ido not think that railway will cost the Province L 5.000. In 1867 you were an ultra-Provincialist, and declared the separation of the Northern from the Southern Island was a panacea for all the evils which we labor under. Will you tell us what you have done to bring about the separation so desiderated ?—I believe still, as I believed in 1807, that it is the panacea; lja.it certain things are practicable, and others impracticable ; but as yet we have found this impracticable. I ask Mr Macaudrew what he lias done in furtherance of that pledge ? I confess nofhing has been done. Did you endorse the sentiments of Mr Stafford, who said the financial scheme of the General Government would render Separation impossible? No ; fortunately, what I said is on record ; and I believe I am giving a right account of it. Mr Siierwin : In lefercuce to immigration—would it not be preferable to bringing in twenty families to give funds for prospecting the country—say L‘2,090 or L 3,000 ? Unfortunately, we have offered bonuses iu every shape and form, arid have found it useless. There must be a want of enterprise, or this encouragement would not be disregarded. Bo misses do not seem to have the desired effect. Is it judicious to proceed with the Port Chalmers Railway and dredging the river at the same time?—l think it is very necessary —both are necessary. Ido not think the dredge so usefully employed where she has been working as in deepening the water near the jetties We have a good channel 12 feet deep, and I think we might b.e content until we get an equal depth at the jetties. In answer to other questions: —lf the Oaniaru Dock can he done for L 40,000, I think it a most desirable work. Ido not profess to be an engineer, but we have competent men who say it can he done. If the whole land of a country were sold it would be an effectual settlement of the land question in that country. He was not prepared to answer as to what course he would, take in regaul to mining on piivate property. It would be foolish in any man to make up his mind on the spur of the moment especially as it is a point on which a Superintendent of a Province is not likely to have much to say. He believed the Clutha Railway could he constructed for Lolf.lO a mile. If not the General Government had not power to go beyond that sum. He did not vote for the Loan Allocation Repeal Act nor appear against it; he was not iu the House when it passed. If the entrance t) the Kakauui Biver could he opened for vessels to go in at all times of the tide, L 12,009 would be well expended there. Ho was in favor of encouraging native induslry. He had offered bonuses for whale fishing and all sorts of things which had not been responded to. He thought it essentially necessary that a steamer should be subsidised to trade with the Southland ports. An Elector : Are you in favor of receiving working men’s deputations in a gentlemanly manner ? Certainly. Would you be disposed to term them loaf rs if they waited on you respectfully ? (Several Voices, “Mr lleid did.”) It is tot very likely. Mr Prosser moved an amendment on Mr Brown’s motion that “ Mr Macaudrew was a fit and proper person to li 1 the office of Superintendent,” affirming that he was not a fit and proper person. It would be impossible to give a fair report of- his speech for his observations were frequently inaudible in consequence of the continued disapprobation of his course of argument. We understood him to say, he had a-rived at the conclusion he expressed through having read “Every speech in the Provincial Council and General Assembly made by Mr Macaudrew since 1867.”

We gave the result arrived at by the meeting yesterday. [A typographic error occurred in yes ter* day’s report. The word Provincial ’ was eiven in place of “ responsible ” Government in one part of the speech.]