THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Evening Star, Issue 3913, 8 September 1875, Page 3

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[By Tklegbapu ]

Wellington, September 8. Ib tlm Legislative Council yesterday the Legist-ration of Mining Companies Kill was read a second time.- 'lho Oatnaru Waterworks Bill, to give power to borrow L 60.000 to supply the town with water from the Waitaki River, incited discussion.

Mr Holmes said it was borrowing money at a loss of three per cent, to the country. Dr Pollen said the borrowing clause followed the wording of the general Act, which fixed eight per c nt. as the limit. He thought no difficulty would he f( nnd in obtaining money for an enterprise of this kind. Mr Waterhouse said the Bill authorised borrowing of an amouat much in excess of any amount hitherto allowed to any municipality. The population of Oamaru was only about 3,000 when they incurred a liability of L 4.000 »-year, and when their income amounted to a little over L 2,000, He questioned, also, if the work could be carried out for LOO, 000. During further discussion it was pointed out that Mr Waterhouse, in his estimate of the income, had not included the water rates, which would alone amount to L 4,000, and therefore be sufficient of themselves to pay the interest of the proposed loan. The Bill was ultimately read a second time. The Plans of Towns Regulation Bill was read a second time.

In the House of Representatives, yesterday afternoon, Mr Harrison asked if the Minister of Justice Would appoint a Deputy-Commissioner of Stamp Duties at Greymouth.

, Mr Reynolds said the Government did not intend to make any such appointment at present.

In reply to Mr J. C. Brown, Mr Reynolds said the Government intended to erect a telegraph and post office at Havelock, Otago, and expected it would soon be ready. In reply to Mr Bradshaw, Mr Richardson said the Government intended to introduce a Bill to amend the Adulteration of Food Act as soon as other business permitted. Mr Murray asked if the Government intended to take measures to prevent the overloading of vessels. Mr Reynolds explained there were several Acts containing provisions to prevent overloading and overcrowding of steamers and sailing vessels already, and the Government were then taking proceedings in one case. In reply to Mr Stout, Major Atkinson said as far as the Government knew no advertisement had been issued calling for tenders for the conveyance of immigrants, but all the New Zealand shipping companies had been communicated with on the matter.

On Mr Buokland’s question as to whether Superintendents could legally hold seats in the House, Mr Sheehan said he considered the question a n'ere quibble, and he hoped the hon. gentleman’s own case rested upon better ground than that, He thought, as the Speaker’s duty was to keep order in the House, it was the duty ©f the Government to keep up the status of members. Mr Stafford denied the correctness of the latter view, and said the House would be acting in a manner derogatory to itself, and parting with its rights, in allowing Government to become the arbiter in such cases. Sir George Grey said the honorable and manly course for the Government would be to say whether there was or was not any ground for the motion. The duty of the Government was to lead the House upon the matter, and if there was anything in it they should postpone all other business until this question was disposed of. Mr Richardson said the Government had already stated they did not think there was anything in the objection raised, but they did not deem it their duty to take any action regarding the motion. Mr Joseph -hephard raised the question of whether those persons referred to by the motion were entitled to vote upon the question. The Speaker ruled that they were, Mr Stout said if the objection held good, members of nil Corporations, Road Boards, Education Boards, &c., would become disqualified. Mr Luckie thought the point was a strictly legal one, and a committee was not the best body to decide upon the question. He thought Government acted very discreetly in taking a neutral position in the case, otherwise they would lay themselves open to a charge of making this move for party purposes. Mr Wood thought the course of the Government was not creditable to them. The question was not one that could be decided by the House or by a committee. The Supreme Court was the proper tribunal to settle suck doubts as those raised. Mr Cuthbertson thought that to discuss such a motion was a waste of time. If there had been any good grounds for the doubts raised it would have been decided long ago in the Supreme Court. Ho hoped the motion would be withdrawn.

Mr Buokland asked leave to withdraw the motion, and said he would test the point in another way. Mr Macandrew objected and pressed his amendment that the motion be made general, and apply to everyone taking public money. A division was taken, and the amendment was lost by 40 to 23, The motion was withdrawn.

Before going into Committee on th« Abolition Bill, Major Atkinson proceeded to reply to the arguments used in the debate, and thanked the House for allowing him a reply then instead of on the night of debate. He was extremely gratified when the member for Akaroa stated that it should be in the power of the Government to remedy defective administration in those parts of the Colony not so well off as others. Coming from such a quarter, that admission was significant as an acceptance of the position taken by himself. Before going further ho would inform the House that the land funds of Otago and Canterbury would V. e all exhausted in two years.— (“ No !” from Mr Macandrew.) Major Atkinson would show that it was so presently. Irrespective of abolition or no abolition, the land funds of the various Provinces were liable for railways and public works within their respective Provincial boundaries. Members on the other side seemed to forget this, and think the case was affected by abolition. The Government were, determined, as far aa they were concerned, that no land should be «old for mere purposes of revenue. They intended, as far as possible, to make the land available for th** settlement of those whom they were introducing, and those bred on the soil, who intense'i to settle upon the hind. The hon. member accepted the figures of Mr Montgomery regarding Provincial finance, and proceeded to show that, with these figures, he was quite justified in the hopes held out. He estimated that, in 1877-8, the following would be a fair estimate of the land fund of th« various Provinces Auckland, L 60.000 ; Taranaki L 23,000 ; Wellington, 1,100,000 ; Hawke’s Bay, L 17,000 ; Nelson, 1,17,000; Marlborough, 1.6,001); Canterbury, 1,116,000 • and Otago, L200,0U0. lie did not think those es timates exaggerated. These amounts would be realised with proper management. In these calculations he had taken 3 per cent, profit over and above railway working expenses Without pledging the Government in tin matter in any way, he wished to see some scheme by which the land fund could be relieved from the various charges now upon it.— (Hear, hear.) The Government were fully alive to the necessity of the matter, and would endeavor lo provide for public works b.-irt" curried on without those charges. The horn ■mrtlsrnan then proceeded to show the details bv which he arrived that the revenue in Otw', in 1877-8 (?) would be 1,34-1,474, and that tiuTre would then be a deficit of'over L13,00U on her total expenditure. ’ Mr Macandrew : That is Colonial finance. Major Atkinson said his calculations were based solely upon Pr ovincial Estimates, and lu had no objection to be corrected if wrong. As for Otago and Canterbury, the land funds ot these Provinces were almost entirely pledged for interest and sinking fund on railways, and that, too, by law, and irrespective of ’aboli tion. 'i here could, therefore, be no great, inducement for a Color dal Treasurer to look forward to in the way of laying hands upon the land funds of Otago and Canterbury, when, if his figures were correct, and ho believed they were, there would only,be ja mere trifle left after engagements were met. Taking

Mr Montgomery’s figures regarding the revenue, the Treasurer said there would be spent this year over two millions on public works, and quite two millions next year. They were, therefore, justified in expecting an increased revenue. What was their experience in former years ? It was that it took four or five years to bring the Customs revenue to the lowest ebb ; and he contended that the revenue could not fall off very rapidly, because people would not in any one year reduce their usual expenditure to its lowest limit. To accept the figures of the hon. gentleman as to the revenue of the Colony in 1877-78 would be t > admit the Colony was in a state of insolvency ; and he could not accept such a contingency and make a provision for it. His hon. friend also brought into these calculations the increased departmental expenditure, hut he held that the House would never consent to an increase in estimates with a falling revenue. The Treasurer then detailed the various savings ho proposed to effect in providing suitable government for the Colony as compared with the present cost of Provincial machinery, and endeavored to show that he would have a surplus of L 185,000 after providing for the whole of the services of the Colony, instead of a deficit of 1.219,000, ns was made to appear by Mr Montgomery. In estimating what he would receive from the land fund he had taken it as a whole. The Treasurer gave what he considered would be the deficiencies of the different Provinces in 1877 and ’7B. He maintained that his figures answered all the charges that the Government had designs upon the land fund of any Province, and also proved that all the promises made could be easily fulfilled ; therefore, from a financial point of viewalone, abolition should bo earned out as speedily as possible. He maintained the Bills ho bad given notice to introduce in no way altered the principle of tha Abolition Bill. The Government utterly repu Hated all those charges which had been made against them that they were only animated by a desire to seize upon the land fund. Their solo desire was to secure for the Colony a system of Colonial finance. In conclusion, he desired to say the Government would not abandon one single principle of the Bill. Mr Montgomery explained that what he said was that it was the duty of the Colony to see that proper government was provided for all parts of the Colony, but he never contemplated that there should be a common purse, because he held that the land fund should be held sacred. The hon. gentleman proceeded to dispute the figures adduced by the Treasurer regarding the land fund, and said that he should have taken his average for a period of ten years, not six, as he had done when he gave his estimate of the revenue of 1877-78. He did not make it so low because he thought the revenue would decrease to that amount, but because ho thought that our taxation should bo reduced to at least L 3 10s per head, and if there was any deficiency, to make it good by altering the incidence of taxation, and making landed proprietors contribute fairly for the large benefits tlioy got from immigration and public works. The hon. gentleman proceeded la show that the estimates of the Treasurer were inaccurate in many items. A weak point with the Treasurer was that he was not prepared to redem the pledge of the late Treasurer, and redeem the outstanding Treasury Bills of the revenue. The House rose at 5,30,

On the house resuming last night Mr O’Rorke took occasion, before going into committee, to express his opinion of the Abolition Bill. He quoted Sir J. Vogel’s words upon one cccasions when he said that “taking away the functions of the Government meant political life and prosperity at one central point and political paralysis at the extremity of the Colony.” He denied that any part of the Colony was in favor of a change, and pointed as a proof to the election of Messrs Stout, Ward, and others. He would like to see the Premier test the matter : in Auckland and go to the poll against the member for Auckland City West, who had been called the “great proconsul,” and who with greater truth might be called the “Apostle of Provincialism.” The Bill was a system of biibes ; but the Auckland people, with all their poverty, spurned them: they would not part with what shreds of liberty were left to them, and they were right; for all in the Bill was delusive. He foresaw that if passed there would follow' political torpor, political stagnation, and political degradation. Mr Macandrew made .a last appeal to have the Bill remitted to the country. He said the Treasurer pretended to have discovered the philosophers’ stone, and could make something out of nothing. If in two years’ time Otago was to show » deficit of L 13,000 under all the able administration of the General Government it was a bad look for the Colony, towards the whole revenue of which Otago contributed one third. When the glamor thrown over the people passed away, they would see, when they had not a sixpence of their laud fund left, what was the real meaning of this Bill, The only way to save a little of their land fund was either to borrow more money or apply the pruning knife to the gigantic system of central administration—cut away the California Service, and abolish the Native and Defence Departments. He challenged the Government to go to the country and announced that he would oppose the Bill at every stage. Mr Stout then moved an amendment, the purport of which was that the Ministry should have time to mature their measures, and when matured submit them to constituencies, by dissolving the House. MrT. L. Shepherd rose to combat certain assertions made by Mr Stout, and opposed the amendment.

Mr Reynolds made a personal explanation that ho was satisfied he was carrying out the wishes of bis constituents.

Sir George Gr°y, and Messrs Wood, Reid, an I Fitzhcrbert supported the amendment, and earnestly joined in the entreaty that the Government would not press the Bill this session. Mr Reid said they could not possibly pass it. He for one was prepared to sit there for six months until the Bill was amended to his satisfaction.

A division was taken, and the amendment was negatived by 44 to 22. The House went into Committee and progress was immediately reported. On a motion by Mr Stout, after some animated discussion, as to whether the Bill should be proceeded with at 2.30 or 7.30 on Thursday, the former hour was carried, the Government supporters being strongly opposed to any further giving way to the demands of the Opposition for delay. The House adjourned at 12.30.