THE NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE.

Evening Star, Issue 2999, 28 September 1872, Page 4

THE NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE.

We continue Mr Ormond’s speech : MR FITZHKRHEI'T ANSWERED. There is another item [which shows why Wellington should be thankful to this Government] —purchase of Native lands. Large bloc ;s have been acquired during the term of office of this Government. A large estate has been added to tho possessions of the Province of Wellington—an estate which will go a very long way towards paying off the Provincial indebtedness. Thab I say, is something to show that the interests of the Province have not been disregarded by the Colonial Government. Then there is the Wellington Debts Bill, for which the Province certainly has to thank my honorable friends here, and not me, and in doing so they may perhaps also thank them for the existence of the Province at this n oracnt, for without the aid afforded by that Bill, they could nob have done what has been done for the Province up to the present time. The honorable member for imam, 1 believe. last session accused the members for Wellington for selling themselves to the Government for the Wellington Debts Bill. If he comes on to these beaches, he will have to buy them a good many times as he goes on Then there is the Fielding arrangement, which also would not have been gained by the Province of Wellington but for the exertions of my honorable friend the Colonial Treasurer; for it is pretty well known that Colonel Fielding would have left, and not have entered into this arrangement, which has proved so great a boon, and I believe will prove a still greater boon, to the Province, hj -d it not been for the exertions and tact of my honorable friend. Last, but not least, tho Wairarapa Railway was carried by the Government agaiust the remonstrances of many of their principal friends in the House, and in spite of the opposition of the honorable gentlemen on the other side, whom the honorable member for the Hutt now wants to bring over and put on these seats. '1 hese are among the benefits which the Superintendent of Wellington might have remembered when he picked out the few causes of complaint which he chose to lay before the House. The honorable also referred to tin unconstitutional action o r tin late Government in intercepting this debate by bringing down the public works statement and tho tinaucial statement of the Colo-aal Treasurer. Ido not pretend to 'possess sufficient knowledge of the subj-ct to say how far that action may have been uucoustitut'onal ; but whether it was unconstitutional or not, it was the honest and proper course for the Government to take. For months past the ■ pposition Press of the > olony had been so Lely circulating unfair and untruthful siatcuums in regard to the Government, that the country had begun to believe there was some truth in those statements, and the Government, by bringing down the public works and financial statements, took the only course which was open to it. Very little exception has been taken to the financial statement of my honorable friend the Colonial Tieasurer. The only member who has touched upon it, to any extent, is the honorable member for the Hutt, who took very good care not to do so until my honorable friend had spoken ; indeed, it was thoroughly understood on both sides of the House that the honorable member for the Hutt did not dare to make his speech until my honorable friend had spoken. His more manly course would have been to have made his speech, and hare allowed my honorable friend to reply to it. However, 1 have so much to do in answering charges against my own department, that I shall not say anything further on this point. Another statement which he made, inferred to the time when he was Commissioner in England, and when he urged, as he told the House, the retention of the troops. It is very unfortunate that the honorable gentleman is not present, because 1 am going to question the accuracy of his statement, and to show that, at any rate, the honorable gentleman is getting to a time of life when his memory is not so good as it was formerly. The honorable gentleman, in his speech, said this :

“ He was also engaged in urging strenuously the retention of the troops in tbe Colony. It would be remembered there was a great delay in the departure of one regiment. Few knew the reason of t hat delay. The Colony might thank him for that. Although not the only one responsible for that, he had a share in it. 1 '

That was part of the speech of the honorable member for the Hutt, and 1 believe this is not tbe first time tbe honorable gentleman has made that assertion, Air Stafford : No.

Mr Ormond : Well, the House will be able to judge whether he is entitled to take credit for urging the retention of tbe troops, when 1 read from his own letter on the subject. Lord Carnarvon, in a despatch, dated the Ist December, 18(56, oiler to allow a regiment to remain in the Colony on certain conditions. Mr Fitzherbert, being informed by the Duke of Buckingham that such an oiler bad been sent to the Colony, wrote to his colleague, Mr Stafford, on the 29th of February, 1868, as follows “ 1. understand from his Grace the Duke of Buckingham that a despatch ha* been forwarded to his Excellency the Governor of New Zealand, leaving in his hands the decision as to the detention of the regiment in New Zealand. My object in writing to you is “to record my opinion in very distinct terms, that Ministers should decline absolutely to advise his Excellency to retain the one regiment; and should, in an equally unequivocal manner, record tbe determination of the Colony not to contribute anything towards the maintenance of the troops if kept by the Imperial Government. 1 should not have written, you may be, sure, to give my opinion on a Cabinet question whilst at this distance, were it not that upon a question of this sort 1 am perhaps a better judge here than you can be in the Colony. “If you do not speak in clear language you will be misunderstood, and the Colony will be misjudged as to the bona Jides of its conduct in the past with regard to the removal of the troops, and it will become much more difficult (to say the least) to obtain an abatement of the Imperial claim.” To which Mr .Stafford, in a letter dated the 21st May, 1168. teplied as follows : “ 1 have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of tbe 29th of February last, and to state that the Cabinet, in accordance with the determination repeatedly expressed previously, will continue to decline to advise the retention of the one Imperial regiment now in New Zealand, or to contribute towards its maintenance.” Mr Stafford : I do not wish to do anything irregular, and if the honorable gentleman objects, I will, of course, sit down, as I

shall have an opportunity of commenting upon the matter in reply. But I wish to remove the impression that there is any inconsistency between the statement made by Mr Fitzherbert the other day and that letter. That letter was written at a date when the whole Cabinet was opposed to the retention of the troops on the terms offered. Subsequently, the West Coast war broke out, and Mr Fitzherbert, with other gentlemen in London, who had been opposed to the retention of the troops—Mr Sewell, to w.t—saw the gravity of the position, and stronjy urged the Imperial Government to retain them. I have Mr Fitzherbert’s correspondence on the subject. It is a question entirely of dat°s, and Mr Fitzherberfc was perfectly correct in stating that during the latter part of the time he was in London he was strongly urging the retention of the troops in ISew Zealand. Mr Ormon d ; 1 do not think he mentioned any parti alar time, whether it was later or earlier : it is simply that the honorable gentleman is getting to a time of life when his memory is not so good as it was. Mr Stafford’s reply to his letter is dated 21st May 1808. Mr Stafford : Mr Fitzherbert left in January, 1809. MtOkmond: Another statement of the honorable gentleman showed either very great carelessness or the failing to which I have alluded. It was, that of the eleven millions that have been borrowed, ten were borrowed under the Premiership of my honorable friend the member for llangitikei. The honorable gentleman was not at all above carping at my honorab'e Fiend the Colonial Ti’easurer, and, in his very pleasant way, held up my honorable friend as caring very little about thousands—millions were nothing to him. Well, it appears by the honorable gentleman’s statements that millions are very little to him edther, for in speaking of the amount of the loans raised under different Governments, he was altogether wrong. He was a million or so out in the indebtedness of the country, although oue would think that an honorable gentleman who may be styled the possible Colonial Treasurer elect, would have been correct in the figures which he laid befoie the House. The total amount of loans which have been authorised is L1‘2,126,400, of which, instead of ten millions, 1-8.400,000 was authorised under the Premiership of my honorable colleague, L 1.900,000 under the Premiership of Mr Stafford, and Li,871,000 under ihu Premiership of Air Domett. These figures are derived from a return furnished by the Treasury.

(To be continued. )