THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Evening Star, Issue 3897, 20 August 1875, Page 2

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[By Telegraph ]

Wellington-, _ August 20. In th© House of Representatives yesterday afternoon, the Napier Swamp A uisance Bill was passed.

In reply to Mr T. Kelly, the Treasurer said credit would not be allowed to the district of Faranaki for the proceeds of the railway reserves sold to the General Government within the Province. They did not feel justified in opening up such questions, although regretting the way these reserves were disposed of’ Mr She< ban asked whether it was intended to take any steps towa”ds improving the en* trance to the harbor at Gisborne. The Treasurer eaid the matter was purely Provincial, and reminded the hon. member that the House had voted L 40.000 for public works in the North Island.

THE ABOLITION DEBATE

was then resumed by Mr Reeves, who said the magnitude of the question was so great as to involve the dearest interests of the Colony, and yet the Government asked them to dispose of such a question in the most rash and incon* siderate manner, and without that thorough consideration of the subject the country and had a right to expect. Looking back to the initiation of the question, they could not but be struck with the want of grasp and continuity it displayed, and be astonished at the haphazard and piecemeal way in which this subject bad been introduced and followed up. Referring to his Excellency’s opening speech ihe previous session, and to the Financial .Statement which followed it. it was impossible uo find any trace of the revolutionary proposals which came on the heels of the State Forests Bill. Clearly there was a connection between the two. He challenged Ministers to say whether, a single day before the State Forests Bill, a single word had been said in the Cabinet about the present revolutionary measure. If (hey auswered in the negative, then the measure was hasty and ill-advised • if not, th® House was deceived. The State Forests Bill was a flimsy pretext to hand over an immense proportion of the public estate, which had been placed in the custody of the iTovinces. After a ca^m deliberation, he must say that the Bill concealed a deliberate attempt on the part of the General Government to seize the landed estate of the < olony, The debate evoked on the State Forests Bill and the protests called forth by it were the sole cause of these Abolition proposals. But even when the Abolition resolutions were laid before the House, the Premier repudiated, and reiterated bis statement that there were no designs on Canterbury and Otago; and he could refer the House for proof to the hon. gentleman’s own words. When the House broke up at the end of the session, it was distinctly understood by the House and the country that so long as these Provinces carried on satisfactorily, it

would be no part of the policy of Minisceis to interfere with their institutions. ” • ’ j lO WOl the Government bad been carried on to the satisfaction of the majority of the inhabitants of these Provinces, and the Government had broken a solemn pledge. The last they had heard of the late Premier was when he told the people of Auckland he would employ a barrister of Colonial 1 reputation to prepare a measure which wouid be acceptable to the Colony. But that was the last they heard of it since, and when they assembled this session what did they find, but that the Government were taking up an attitude as if they meant to carry out nothing more than what was embodied in the resolution last session. What else could be gathered from the paragraph referring to the matter in the Gover nor s speech. In despite of all this evidence, they brought down a Bill to abolish all the Provinces. Was not this an instance of the divided mind of the Ministry ? He believed that the original intention of the Government was not to apply Abolition to the whole of the I rovinces, but they departed from their promises because they were influenced by the advice of their protector—he would net call him their friend—the member for Timaru. -(Hear, hear, and “hio, no.’’) He repeated it, and would say the Government had been guilty of a gross breach of the pledge given by the late Premier. He promised to hold inviolate the compact regarding the land fund, and it was insulting to their common sense to oasuistically say that they were not breaking that compact. 1 heir true and only control over the land lay in the Provincial Government, and without that it was a delusion— (“ No, no,” from Ministers)—the measure was hasty and imperfeet. It was a breach of faith, and it also exhibited plainly that Ministers had not taken sufficient precaution to determine whether they hart the > necessary power to .leal with the question. The diversity of legal opinion on the point made it abundantly plain that there were doubts on the point, and that the advice of the Imperial law advisers should have een taken. Did not bis Excellency ®r the Ministry, to satisfy doubts on the matter, consult Crown lawyers on the point ? At least ho understood the Minister of Justice to say so. Mr Bowen : I said I never said so Mr Reeves ; Then 1 do not know the meaning of words. You either meant that or nothing, and now you tell us you meant nothing. This Bill was entirely unworthy of the occasion. The main object of the Bill was to deprive the people of the power of electing their own Superintendents and Provincial Councillors. Were the Hoad Boards and M micipal powers oonfened by the Bill suffic lit to till the gap ? Certainly not. The Government merely displayed these to make way for the.r nominated agents. - (“No, no.”) Did they not appeal to the patriotism of (he Superintendents and beg them to milk themselves and take office under the General Government? It was therefore as clear as daylight that Government wished to secure the services of the Superintendents, and intended them to retain their seats in that House, so that they might acquire the nine votes of their nominated agents. These, with the three or four votes of the Native representatives, influenced by the Native Minister, would make a very pretty hand of trumps, and would place the House and the country at the mercy of Ministers. The chances of obtaining j utsico in the House if that Bill passed would ne more or less remote. He said the measure was imperfect. L'he confession of Ministers admitted it was only a selection of a measure. hey might have added it was a Provincial interregnum, in which the Governor would rule the country by Orders in Council. He could not give up what he had for such an unsubstantial return. The Bill did not appeal to the intelligence of the people, but to their pockets, their lowest instincts; but the promises held oat were shadowy, but not certain to be realised. What the Assembly did one day it could not undo the next. The fulfilment of these promises depended entirely upon the revenue, and if that did not enable subsidies to be paid they would not be paid. Going by the Financial Statement and that of Public Works, he could ice they would soon have to rely upon Customs revenue. That was very precarious, lecauae wages through the Colony had been in’ jreased 50 per cent. But that was due entirely ;o a large expenditure of borrowed money mstoms revenue always depended upon rates wages, and when borrowed money came to m end Customs revenue must at once decrease Lhe Hon. Minister for Works calcuSted argely upon the proceeds of the public woS* lvhiwK’- bUt^ h J re^ 8 differed fro “ Mm. while admitting that the policy of Public Works was the wisest ever enunciated in the colony, he felt we must not look to them fop evenue purposes. For the first few yews unon ;he initiation of the main lines in England, tC laid large dividends, but these disappeared 2 iranoh railways were opened. If a fewefour

ihoft Ham paid wall at first, their earnings would be swallowed up when the whole 900 miles were opened. He would remind the Minister for Works that in a short time the interest on loans would he over one million of money, and that by the time Our railways were thoroughly completed and appointed, we would have to pay ten or fifteen per cent, beyond the estimated present cost, and a further addition to the debt of the Colony would be soon after required. Look at the matter how they liked, in connection with this Bill, and they must admit that it was an ill-concealed attempt to get possession of the land funds. It arose out of the dire necessity of the Colony, though Ministers denied that. Had they boldly admitted that fact at once, he might have been found supporting them, but could not now. They were told there had been too much parish business, but this Bill would really give them a great deal more parish business. It would lead to one month sessions, and to the springing up of a class of professional politicians, instead of a more desirable class of men who could afford to devote their time to their country. Ministers told them public opinion throughout the Colony impalled them to push on with the measure. He entirely denied that. Opinion was divided, but the balance was in favor of postponing the measure. The Minister of Justice quoted to the House the words of Godley to show that when the functions of the Provinces passed away, the government of the country would assume a form like the United Kingdom, but the substitute proposed was more after the system of prefects in France. The hon. member pointed to the Superintendents as the embodiment of Ctesorism. When did that change of opinion take place ? Not long ago. The hon. gentleman was about to contest the Buperintendency of Canterbury, but now he was the Brutus who was ready to plunge the dagger of shame and patriotism into the bosom of the first Caesar of a Superintendent. The hon. gentleman here contradicted what he characterised as a most wanton and cruel attack upon a certain Superintendenfmade last night by the hon. member for Heathcote, and was repeatedly and loudly applauded from all paits of the House for his defence of a man who could not defend himself. _ The hon. member also said that some Superintendents were emasculated, but he could tell the House that the aentleman had made it widely known that he would act as Superintendent without salary if elected. But these people would not have him at his own price In conclusion, he would support the second reading, and give all possible assistance in amending the Bill in committee, but he would endeavor to prevent the Bill being passed finally through the House. Mr Curtis referred to the proposals of last year, and said the people had the whole year to consider. Looking at the details of the Bill, he felt hound to say it pretty fully met the wants of the case, and would make him support the Bill heartily. While free to admit the usefulness of Eoad Boards, he did not coneider they were capable of taking the place of Provincial Governments, and his doubts upon that point were relieved when he saw that the Government did not as yet intend to make tl em take the place of Provincialism. Eeferring to the legal doubts raised as to the

power of the Assembly to abolish, he disagreed with the action of the Government in not seeking the opinion of the Imperial law officers or. the matter; considering the close connection of the Attorney-General with the Government, they ought not to have accepted his opinion as final. He gathered from the remarks of the ion. member for Selwyn, that another legal objection wasTaisod, namely, that the Compact of 1856 prevented the Assembly abolishing the .Provinces. But he would answer the hon. gentleman with his own words. What the Assembly did one day they could undo the next, and there was no doubt the Assembly had most ample power to abolish, if it chose to dp so, notwithstanding the Compact of ’56. His reasons for supporting the Bill were different from some speakers. He supported it in the hope of seeing the one simple code of legislation apply throughout the Colony, and thus avoid the conflict and confusion arising out of such miscellaneous legislation as was seen in the different Provinces. It was wise the Government did not attempt to replace all that legislation at one stroke with some attempts at a perfect system, for that would be impossible. They could not devise a grand system to put an end to the many evils of Provincialism in one session—it would be the work of many. Eeferring to the pressure which it was said was brought to hear upon the Colonial Treasurer, the hon. gentleman said that if the Bill was passed, it would render such pressure impossible in future. How was it that the piesent Treasurer made this statement so clear and intelligible compared with previous statements ? Was it that he had greater ability than the previous Treasurers? No; it was that, for the first time, this year the Statement was not rendered incomprehensible by the various Provincial charges, which previously had made nearly every member in the House despair of understanding the finances of the Colony. In supporting the B 11. he did not do it with the idea that Local administration would be greatly improved. There was a more centralising tendency than that of the General Government. Constantly were Provincial Go vernments called upon to interfere to protect out-districts from the centralising tendencies of Raid Boards. He did not support the Bill because of the greater advantages pro vided for out-districts; indeed, he thought they should get more than the Bill gave them. He did not believe any economy would be effected by the change, because it led to long Parliaments, and consequent expenses, as in all the other Australian Colonies. He did not approve of the localisation of the land fund, which simply meant that the districts which least need would get most in that respect. The Timaru and Gladstone Act would be an entire failure. That was a feature of the measure which he hoped the Government would re-consider and amend. Objection had been taken to Provincial districts being retained, but that was a great advantage It would be absolutely necessary to retain Provincial boundaries for some time, so as to enable them to charge interest upon Provincial loans to the districts and people who benefitted by them. That was one strong reason for his supporting the Bill. In the interests of the Province he came from, he felt bound to sup Sort that part of the Bill. To do away with ‘rovincial boundaries, and spread the liabilities over the w hole Colony, would defraud Nelson out of half-amillion of money. It appea’ ed to him that the voice of the people from all parts of the Colony favored Abolition,—(Hear, hear, an _d hioses.) He said it did, though there might he a difference of opinion as to what was to replace Provincial Governments, but he chd not attribute very much weight to xhese public meetings. Each person looked anthem from his own Point of view. Like the man who, when “ked, which are the intelligent people? he •aid, Those who cheer me and who are the mob ? “ Those who applaud you.” The House rose at 5.15 p.m. At 7.30 p.m. Mr Ward, of Wairau, addressed the House m strong opposition to the Government measures.

At 8.30 Mr Stafford rose, amid loud applause. He said many members had told him this was a great occasion, but the House had risen to the occasion. They had never heard members make more intelligent and able speeches for the faith that was in them. Never did the syren of an expiring Parliament shine more brightly. There had been many new members come amongst them, but he did not think they had lost anything by the change. He much regretted the loss of the late member for Kangitikei, but the mantle of Elijah seemed to have fallen upon successor. Various positions during this session and in connection with the Bill before the House had been attributed to him, but he repudiated all the honor sought to be conferred upon him. He was only one of the rank and file. The Bill was not his not that of any private member, it was that of tlu Executive of country, and they aloue were responsible for it. They alone deserved any

credit. Members, he was sorry to say, in their desire to wound these gentlemen, did not refrain from wounding their sensitiveness. He deprecated the constant harping with great disingenuousness, in both writing and speakers of what was called the bribes to the Bnl, and in the same disingenuous spirit reference was made to the changes made in the capitation; but it was carefully concealed that when those changes in the capitation tax were made that very many of the Provincial charges were taken over. That in fact that a great boon was conferred

ttpaa the Province*.—(“No, no." Yes, ve«. w ) He regretted that that old veteran legislator, the member for Auckland City Wesl, did not think it beneath him 1o try to stamp upon tbe young men of the House, instead of holding out the hand of fellowship. Notably he singled out as objects of his contempt the Colonial Treasurer and the Minister of Justice. These werethe men, they were told, who were not fit to occupy their places. The Treasurer had again .md again distinguished himself in the field as well as the senate ; the Minister of Justice had for yearsoccupied a high andimportant office, and raised himself as high as a man could by his integrity and high ability. When, in the early part of the session, he used the word “revolution ” in connection with this measure, he did not use it in the sense it was used by a journal inspired by the hon. member for Auckland City West (the ‘ Star.’) He bad no idea of imbruing his hands in’.the blood of his fellowmen ; no idea of powder and brands held aloft. No; his idea of revolution was the power of reason, represented by tire united sense of the people, such as was seen in the Corn Laws, Catholic Emancipation, and other great and peaceful revolutions infinitely greater than us. The hon. gentleman, in most eloquent terms, referred to the fall of ancient Greece in consequence ol its petty local prejudices and dissensions. What might have been a nation that should illuminate a world, had sunk lower than the children of Ishmael, whose hand was against every man, and every one against his. Coming down to modem times, had they not seen through similar disunion in France, a nation of serfs, and an order of nobles, and what terrible calamities flowed from it? Later still, had they not seen the herculean efforts of the United States, who shed their best blood to prevent their great nation being destroyed. The hon. gentleman, referring to the occasion when ho was elected first Superintendent of Nelson, said he realised the difficulties of the position. He visited an isolated portion of the Province, and in compliance with the earnest wish of the inhabi tants he got a road opened up, paying for it out of his own pocket, and would it be believed that the Council never reimbursed him that money, and it was a debt to this day? Soon after, he recommended the Council to bring out immigrants, under the inducement of small grants of land. Yet, though there were millions of acres of waste lands the Council absolutely refused—they said there was no more than they wanted for other purposes. That was his experience of the Provincial Councils. He had seen nothing to admire in them. As to his ideas ef nationality, he could tell the House that the day that he first occupied the Government benches of the Colony, he made up his mind he was not of Otago, or Wellington, or Auckland, but of New Zealand, and he hoped that during his political career he had done something towards establishing a national feeling. The hon. gentlemen then referred to the various political changes which had taken place in England, and in fact by which constitutions had been overturned and built up in a different fashion. He could not but admire the audacity of the member for Auckland City West when he said that the Constitution Act

forbade the Legislature to alter the constitution of Provincial Councils. He could tell the House that that hon. gentleman was one of the first to break through the Constitution, and put this country and Imperial Parliament to considerable trouble. The hon, gentleman proceeded to detail the different instances in which, at the request of this Colony, the Constitution Act had been changed, and when new Provinces were created under a power as good and valid as the Constitution Act, they had appeal after appeal against them, but in any that were created he ventured to say there had been no diminution of power, or liberty, or happiness. The hon. member for Auckland City West told them the Imperial Parliament had been petitioned in regard to the Province of Westland, though he ought to have known it was not so. He could conscientiously say that there was no one single clause in the original Constitution Act that that Assembly had not power to annul. Referring to the various legal opinions given regarding abolition, he would say that while having the_ very highest respect for Mr Gillies as a political power, and considering him an ornament of the Bench, he did not give the opinion referred to by the member for City West as a legal adviser, but as a political partisan.—(Applause.) Contrasting the powers of Provincial Councils with those of the Assembly, he asked what were those vested in the House ? The powers of founding Courts of Justice, and of determining what the working man should contribute towards the requirements of the State. These were the powers which guarded the liberties of the people. Why, the Provincial Councils could not impose a fine upon scabby sheep without coming to that House. Reference had been made to the officers to be nominated to supervise the affairs of the Provinces, They bad been called satraps, but why this should be a term of reproach he could not see. The name in its real meaning was not objectionable. These officers were only to be afjpointed till next session. Then, to come to (Superintendents —whom they had, like the Russian cannon at Balaclava, to the right of them, the left of them, and in front of them—how were they representatives of the people? Look at the kon. the member for Avon. Why, he dared not dismiss his Executive or appoint or dismiss a single officer without their consent. He counted as only one, and was perfectly helpless. Then there was the member for Port Chalmers, the Superintendent of Otago, He, too, was bound to act ju ac mrdance with the advice of his responsible .advisers Another Superintendent last session had told the House he had often signed documents ha did not approve of, because advised to do so by bis Executive. He could say that when the Superintendents were not in constant conflict* with their Executives they were the abject slaves of them, and was it to be said their AngloSaxon blood required Provincialism for the protection of their liberties ? He would tell the people of New Zealand, if they wanted to build up a palladium of liberty, they should not be distracted by any little petty shamfights, which were occupied in passing dograxes. Let them turn their undivided attention to this their own supreme Legislature, and make that the guardian of their liberties. If this Legislature had not the legal power, it had the Constitutional power to make such changes as the time and occasion required. He would vote for the passing of the Bill, The hon. gentleman sat down amid loud applause, after speaking for an hour. Cries of “ Divide,” and “ Question,” After a long pause, and the Speaker having asked if any other member wished to address the House, he called upon the hon. Treasurer to reply. Major Atkinson rose, whereupon Mr White, of Hokitika, rose hurriedly, and spoke against t he measure.

The House adjourned at midnight. iXearly every member was in his place and the galleries were crowded during Mr Stafford’s speech.