THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Evening Star, Issue 3907, 1 September 1875, Page 3

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[Bv Teleokavh ]

Wellinuto.v, September 1. In the Legislative Council yesterday, Mr Eonar moved—“ That in the opinion of this Council it is desirable that the law relating to the conduct of art unions, lotteries, and similar undertakings throughout tho Colony be taken into consideration by tho Government, with a view to the preparation, on as early a date as possible, of a Bill regulating the same.” Mr Waterhouse seconded, remarking that the mania for gambling had reached religious people.

. Pollen said the Government were agreed m the necessity for taking the matter into consideration, but could not deal with it this session, owing to the unusual pressure of business,

’i he Auckland Institute Bill passed its third reading. The Napier Council Empowering and Waterworks _ Loan Bill, and Campbclltown Athenieum Bill, were read a second time and passed through Committee with amendment. In the House, of Representatives yesterday afternoon, The Minister for Immigration, in reply to Mr Macandrew, said trie (Question of the claims of immigrants who have paid their passage to the Colony under the impression they would got land to the value of Ldl), hut who have failed inadvertently to obtain certificates

of th* Agent-General, as required by the Act, waa at present under the consideration of the Government, find he Loped in n few days to bo in a position to make a distinct statement of the intentions; of the Government. Ho felt there was a good deal of hardship in some of the cases. The Minister would be glad to consult with the hon. member on the subject. The Minister for Public Works, in reply to Mr Thomson, said the Government <lid not in tend to take any action relative to the Waite peka railway deviation, as the work would eu,t too much, and the report, of the Public Works Committee was opposed to the recommendation of the Jfinjiueer-in-Chief. Mr O’Conor called the attention of the' House to a question of privilege regarding the Speaker’s action upon an adjournment being asked for on Friday night, when Mr J. C. Brown was speaking. In doing so, he statu l that he understood the Speaker to say there was a great difference between the huu. member for Tuapeka and the hon. member for Hutt. The hon. member detailed, to the best of 1m recollection, the circumstances of the case. What he wished to put forward was, that all members of that House were equal in the eyes of the Speaker and entitled to equal consideration : he said, therefore, that the lulling of the Speaker on that occasion was inconsistent with the dignity and honor of the House. Mr Richardson pointed out that the Speaker’s attention was engaged! at the time talking with himself, and he had consequently not heard Mr Brown’s address.—(Cries of “No, no.”)

The Speaker explained, at considerable length, that he was engaged about that time in considering a recent important ruling of the Speaker of the House of Commons, and had not the slightest idea Mr Brown asked for an adjournment, as, when he looked round, he saw the hon. member still standing, and resumed bis book : when, immediately, the hon. member for the Buller accused him of partiality. The Speaker explained, also, the reference to the member for the Hutt; he had been speaking over two hours, and the member for "Wairarapa came up to the chair and requested that the usual short adjournment should be accorded the member for the Hutt, who was tired. The Speaker also dwelt on the impropriety of making accusations of partiality and favoritism.

Sir Donald M‘Lean pointed out that the whole thing was a misapprehension, and hoped the matter would drop.

Mr Bolleston asked for Information as to whether certain land transactions did not come under the Disqualification Act.

Sir Donald MT-can said he had already answered that question as far as it was possible to answer it at present. iSMr Rolleston said there were several other cases besides the one replied to which information was wanted upon. •sif George Grey asked, in reference to what fell from the member for Avon, whether the opinion of the Solicitor-General on the matter should not be placed upon the table. Mr Bowen said it was a very unusual procedure to lay opinions of law officers upon the table. It was not the custom in the imperial Parliament, and the demand for it was generally resisted by Ministers, unless upon exceptional and very important occasions. Alto gether, the practice was very inconvenient, as had already been found by the present Government, Their legal adviser was placed at a disadvantage by noticing present to defend his opinion.

Mr Sheehan dissented from such a doctrine altogether. When the Government hid not a legal adviser, who was also a member of the Government, the least they could do would be to lay his opinion before them. Major Atkinson said, in reference to what fell from the member for Avon, that supposing any member of the House came under the Disqualification Act, it did not effect the Government in any way, but it would the House.

Mr Stout, while agreeing with what fell from the Minister of Justice, maintained that upon this question of privilege, brought forward by the member for Avon, tire Government, by their own act, made it an Executive question, though it was not really one at all.

Mr Reid wanted some information regarding a certain table as to Provincial expenditure made by the Colonial Treasurer. He thought it was the duty of that hon. gentleman to inform them how he made out such large sums that would be available for expenditure in each Province. Speaking for Otago, he could not make the Treasurer’s figures coirespond. There were several discrepancies in the statement he would like to see explained,—(The i reasurer ; Hear, hear.) He was afraid those figures were calculated to mislead the people of the Colony upon this important question. These statements were simply deluding and misleading. He hoped the hon. member would take an early opportunity of correcting these erroneous statements, which were not becoming to that House. The hou, gentleman then proceeded to criticise the figures submitted by the Treasurer. The revenue of the country was not affected one way or another, and the pretence that any more means would be available under abolition than there would be without it, was only made with intent to deceive.

Mr Wood said the House was not fairly in a position to debate these appropriation clauses, as the Treasurer had not furnished them with any information to show them what would he their effect upon the land fund. He regretted that the statements made by the Colonial Treasurer, showing the meat surplus available ,for different Provinces should have been circulated by means of the Press before the hon. members had an opportunity of seeing how these surpluses were obtained. Takamoana said he would like to have the Abolition Bill translated.

Major Atkinson replied to Mr Reid and Mr Wood. He would only be too happy to furnish all necessary information, such as that asked for now. Une thing, however, he could not agree with, and that was the making out that the Government had a considerable mine of wealth that the country was not aware of. All he claimed was that the revenue of the country was ample to provide good government for the whole of the Colony, and it was by the proper management and division of this that the Government intended to supply the deficiencies of the Government in different parts of the Colony. The hon. gentleman here examined the Otago Appropriation Act, and quoted from that to support the figures he had laid before the House, and which were denied to be correct by the hon. member for Taieri. These figures were susceptible of proof or disproof. All that Otago had, to meet the various public works she had voted, was L1(H,040. The hon. gentleman wont very minutely into financial details to show that his proposals were fully justified by facts._ He submitted to the House that the question should be looked upon as a whole ; but when hon. members got up. like the Ikui. member for the Taieri, and told them Unit the Council voted so much, they should also have informed the House how far the Council was able to meet those votes. It was time a change should be made jin the system of distribution, or they would never be able to deal with such I‘rovinces as Auckland! and Westland. The Government believed that by their proposals local bodies would receive a more certain and larger income, and that the House would hrfree to consider the requirements of the various parts of the Colony ; and, irrespective of the way in which the revenue is collected, that good and reasonable Government be given to people in all parts of the Colony. As regards the charges of juggling about the way in which a land fund was to be created for Auckland, he might affirm to the House that Auckland would be very well off regarding its land fund, as it was intended to provide for her out of confiscated lands. If any other lion, member had any better plan to propose it was his duty to lay it before the House, The Government had not the slightest desire to keep any information back from the House on any point whatever.

The House Went into Committee of the whole, A desultory discussion took placa here. The Treasurer promised Mr Sheehan that 1m would furnish an approximate return of h.;w Inexpected to be able to save Ldo,ooo in Provincial departmental administration. He also promised Mr Wood that he would cause to bo prepared thejfull information required regard ng the land fund ,in the different Provinces before agreeing to resolutions in Committee. !Sir 1A D. Bell gave his opinion upon the present of the country. He said the

two great difficulties before the country wore how to deal with the laud fund and the general revenue, and ho thought, it would he tin- svisest course to make only such lin mcMl proviM-w - as would keep everythin.; ;.o ng quietly mud the new Parliament was che'.-d. They wonlo soon have to lake into consideration the re! »• five burdens of taxation, er.d ro Impose ta\>s upon property which ban been so increased in value by pidffh' wm ks. The House rose at -VdO p. ui. IqK'U vosm.’uv.; l-i.-t id.do. v. wa *d. ei-i-.,;! !o take the discussion upon 'ln. fin usc i.'.l elan of the Abolition Bill on I iiurfeley. at (.--M p.m. instead of at. tl.dO p.ro. The second reading of the. Branch Railways Bill was moved by Mr Biciiaraam. Sir Macandvcw said lie would not op] ewe the •second loading, as to do would be like beating the air, but lie could u>.l ivliaiu iiom expressing the opinion that the Hill Would have the effect of putting a. slop u> the const motion of railways by private oouipauit .7, The title ot the Bill should have been “A Mdl to di-cm.i-rage private companies limn taihvay enterprise." It was an instance <d that hgid.-uloo which bad for its object tic placing of increased power in the hands cl Ministers. Mr T. L. Shepherd thought the Bill \v..s, if anything, liberal. ' Mr Sheehan approved of the principle of encouraging private enterprise. Me objected to the clause giving power to appropriate reserved ground; public reservcsshouhl be placed on the same tooting as private property. Mr Fitzberbert opposed the Bill, which meddled too much with prac.lic d workings. He specially referred to (ilru-e l-'I, giving power to the Governor from time to time to ievoke lb" regulations. Mr J. E. Brown supported the Bill. Mr Bradshaw said the Bill was ■■ dcr.bdcd to discourage enterprise. Mr Tyke looked upon tb.c 1 ’.ill rs eonternug a boon.

Mr Stout apprehend'.',:! that the Bill empowered the Government to give a monopoly how and where they pleased, v, inch lie contended was a dangerous power to be placed in the hands of any Ministry. Mr Reid concurred in lie' remaiks of the member for Cnvcisham. Tin* Bill placed too much power in the bauds of the. Minister lor Railways. Mr T. Kelly did not apprehend any disastrims effects from the exercise ot lie- powers vested in Ministers.

Mr I’caree approved of the controlling power cif the Bill, but with regard to its general teinis was of opinion that it might be largely i mpvnvc 1 in Committee.

Mr Buckland and Mr Hati i-.on .-iipported the Bill. Mr .Stout called for a division, and (he second reading was carried Uv -K) t<> 1-. The second reading of the Debtors end < S ••ditors Bill was moved by a!r I’owcn. wlm explained the new features in the Rili, the chief objects of which are to enable debtors n> make arrangements with creditors without th" inb-i----venlion of the Court, to piovi ie protvetioi: lor honest debtors, ami, if subsrqnen !y f;uu‘e*:-i’ ! -l in aurasriug wealth, to en.dde. creditors to

recover. After some discussion, Mu- d.-batc \va.- ad journed. Mr Stout and others j» commended Unit the Bill should he first submitted to-.a comm iti-e of mercantile men. The House adjourned ai midniul.t,