PARLIAMENT.

Evening Star, Issue 4181, 21 July 1876, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

[Bt Tklsqbafh,] Wilukoton, July 21. ' In the House of Representatives yesterday ■ afternoon, • • Mr Stout asked. (1) if all correspondence! between the Government and persons in Otago, in _ reference to the applications of Messrs Neill, Shennan, and others, for land, ■ have been laid before the House? (2) If not, if the correspondence not before the House is of an unofficial character ? The Hon. Major Atkinson said the wholeof the official correspondence had been laid upon the table. The Government had com- ■ munications from many persons down there, but as these telegrams were of an nnnffimt] nature they would not be produced. The motion was agreed to. Mr Murray moved that there be laid before _ the House a return showing what salaries officers of the General Government are permitted to receive as remuneration for services outside of their service to the General Government, the amount of such remuneration, and the nature of such services.

; The Premier deprecated the making of such motions without a word of explanation. To carry out the object of the resolution as set forth would be quite impossible, without* an Act of Parliament to enable them to investigate the private affairs of those entitled to accept employment outside of Government service. The non. gentleman proceeded to enumerate the different classes of General Government officers to whom the resolution applied--such as registrars of births, deaths, ana marriages all oyer the Colony, revising) officers, country postmasters, vaccinators,"? clerks who rendered outside assistance to Friendly Societies, the Solicitor-General (though he was not quite certain on that point), clerks of petty sessions engaged in business, signal-men stationed on the coast, and harbor-masters. Such a return would be enormously bulky, and impossible to supply. So far as it was obtainable within reasonable limits, they would do so. Sir George Grey said that if the system of Government were conducted upon the ordi* mry plan adopted in civilised there onght to be no difficulty in supplying the desired information.

On the motibn of Mr MiomdnVf the motion wu emended so as to include only officers receiving salaries above L 260 per annum.

Mr Thomson moved that the following words be struck out: “Amount of such remuneration and nature of such services,” and said that the Premier ought to have known what was really intended by the motion without dragging in country postmasters and registrars. Mr Murray also made similar observations, and said there were high officers in the Government service who, by outside work, made as much as their ordinary salary, and often neglected their departments in attending to outside work. On the motion of Mr Hodgkinson, it was agreed to appoint a * Select Committee to inquire into the rabbit nuisance. Mr Stevens moved for a return showing the contribution of the consolidated revenae of each Province during the financial year ending SOth June, 1876. The motion was agreed to. Mr Wakefield moved that the Speaker be invited to communicate the “ desire of'* the House to Sir David Monro and Sir Frauds Dillon Bell—former Speakers of the House —that portraits of those; shall be placed m the precinct of the House side by side with that of Sir the first Speaker of the House.

Mr J. 0. Brown had no objection, provided the House was not asked to pay the expense. —(Laughter.) The j don. Mr Bowen doubted whether it would be a complimentary thing to ask those gentlemen to go to the expense of procuring their portraits to adorn the Chamber of the House, because that would probably involve a journey to England. Mr Wakefield said he was grieved that the House should have receivea his motion in that way. He confessed he felt somewhat humiliated—(laughter)—by the manner in which the proposal was received, and he did not exempt tne Government.—(Laughter.) He certainly.would never have brought the motion forward had he thought it would have been received in such a manner.

In the adjourned debate on the Local Option Licensing Bill, Mr Eowe supported the Bill. It was mistake to call it prohibition, it was merely placing iii the hands of the people a power that they had in many other directions, and ought to have in this. He knew the benefits of such a measure, and he had lived for seven years in a place where no liquor was, and no justice of the peace, and they never needed ■one.

In reply to a question, the hon. member said the place was Kawau, where between 300 and 400 men lived.

Mr Harper opposed the second reading of the Bill, which would only introduce an expensive piece of machinery that would he productive of no good whatever. When notice would be given that au election was te take place respecting a house applying for a lieense, the publican would exert his utmost influence to secure the support of those whom he could prevail upon to vote for him, and to prevent those from voting who might be opposed to granting a license. Mr Hodgkinson supported the Bill, There were features connected with the liquor traffic that were anything but creditable to the Colony, and every means should he taken to lessen the great and growing vice of intemperance. Mr Manders opposed the Bill. The liquor laws required consolidation more than extension.

Mr Bryce opposed the Bill, but from very different reasons to the member for Wallace. The arguments that people should be trusted with this power as in other matters was not a fair argument. The cases were not analogous. He had no objection to see people trusted in this as in other matters by placing the control of the question in the hands of a Board—that would be an analogous case. Mr Stout replied, saying that a great argument why the Bill should pass was the enormous amount of money spent on liquor in the Colony—an amount of not less than two millions annually. Money spent injliquor did no good to anybody, and if it were saved we need have little cause to borrow, it had been said that England drank herself out of debt when the revenue from liquor became very large; but, if England’s working men bad saved that money instead of drinking it, would the country not have been better ■as well as richer ! It was a great mistake to suppose that the duties collected on liquor did the country any good. Take away from it the cost of the gaols, hospitals, and lunatic asylums—the largest proportion of which could fairly be put down to liquor—and there would be little, if any, margin left. The hon. gentleman then quoted from published reports from Canada, the United States,* and England as to the working of Srohibrtive laws, and the. great benefits owing from those laws by their tendency to dinunulit the consumption of spirits. It had been said that as the race was gradually becoming more enlightened and civilised there was less occasion for such a law. But it might as well be said that because murder and other crimes were, gradually becoming rarer, we thereforer need not invoke the aid of repressive legislation. He did not claim that the Bill was more than a step in the right direction, and that it would nave a tendency to lessen the drinking habits of the people. The question was not one they should look at standing with folded arms, while they they'saw the people becoming mere degraded. There were noble, cultivated men in the Colony who, through being given up to the demon drink, were a curse to themselves,'to their friends, and the Colony. If thcßiHconld only be the means of rescuing twenty'or thirty of these men it would have done scene good. Whether the Bill be read a second time or not, the question was one that would assert and re-asaert its claim to public a ttention. It must go on, it would go on, until it was eventually grappled with. The House divided, and the second reading of the Bill was carried by 38 against 28. The BiG was read a second time, and its committal fixed for that day week.

Mr.Macandrew read a telegram from Dunedin stating that the Taupo had gone up to the Rattray street Wharf, drawing 12ft 6in, and that she passed Maoandrew’s corner without stopping way or stirring up mud.

The remaining business was postponed, and the House adjourned at 6.30 p.m.

ABOUT THE LOBBIES.

(From our Special (Jomaponder.t.)

Wsuiseroir, July 20. In a clause of the Bating Bill, in which the Premier proposed to introduce an amendment providing for toe rating of mining property where it is already so rated as at the Thames, Mr Gibbs again raised the question of miners net paying local ratea having the power te vote; whereupon the Premier took occasion to refer to some of the objects of the Counties Bill. He explained that it was no imperative design of the counties tl at they should levy rates, and a great deal was given to counties—the export duty on gold, miners’ rights, surplus land * revenue, irrespective of rating. Holders of miners' righto could not have, under any circumstances, more than vote: and there was a farther provision that they should be registered. If they had property they would only have the vote as ratepayers. The .Counties Bill was supposed to discourage rather than encourage taxation. For general purposes special ratej would be more to the purpose, and would be fixed by the specification of the ratepayers. He was not disposed to make It optional for local bodies to rate mining property, believing the same to be sufficiently represented by other taxation which would go to the counties, bat that in particular situations where taxation was in force they should have the power to retain or abolish it. The Government would consider the question of coal mines, and if they came to a determination on the subject would re-commit the BUI. Mr Whitaker intimated bis intention of framing a clause that wonldwatisfy all parties. They should either rate the gold' that was in the mine, and not rate the gold that was on the snrfaee, or they should retain the gold duty and hand It over to the local bodies as taxation, which was the easier mode. He did not see why coal mines should be exempt, because the royalty they paid meant the rental payable to the Government.

Ultimately Sir J. Vogel said he would postpone the whole clause. As to the gold duty, his opinion was that if it was merely regarded as subsidy to rates the present duty of 2s was excessive; but if it was a substitute for a royalty there was a logical reason for continuing it, Ur Murray has a question on the Order Paper to ask if the Government will consult Parliament before appointing an Agent-General, as already stated. The land resolutions are but a cover to a stronger attack by the Opposition. Since the Government will oppose Mr Whitaker’s resolutions It is admitted there is no chance of coirying them, and Mr Wakcfield’sareregarded asllkelyto receive still leas favor, many viewing them as put forward os a red herring. Auckland to a wnn will support Mr Whitaker, and Otago as strongly oppose him. When the land resolutions are disposed of, if not immediately after the second reading of the Counties Bill, the Opposition will table their proposals for financial separation, which embrace one Government for each'island, and a Federal Government at Wellington, which shall have the direction of customs, postal, and federal matters. The Opposition whips say they can count on a majority of eighteen, while the other side say that not more than thirty-fire members will vet# for feneration, Simon Fraser asked the House to vote him a reward as the discoverer of theTaieri goldfields. ’ Mr Woolcook intends testing the feeling of the House rs the gold duty by moving its direct abolition.

Mr Stevens will ask the Government to adopt the

postal card system, and the House to affirm the destability of registering Crown grants gratis. The Otago members met at noon to- ’ay to con* aider the Auckland and Canterbury proposals, which will receive support, twenty members of our Province, excluding Messrs Taiaroa, Pyke, Manders, and Reynolds, undertaking to vote for separation. Auckland asks to be relieved of her indebtedness in respect to war expenditure, and if the scheme is carried it is exceedingly probable that Kelson will be proposed as the seat of the Federal Government. Mr Stout’s Losal Option Bill would not, it is said, have passed bad tbs publicans been quiet. Tbs bonnceable way in which they talked at their meeting in Dunedin made many vote for its second reading, in order to show them that they cannot influence political action. Some members also, for the same reason, abstained from voting. The voting on the Bill was t—Ayes t Atkinson, Baigent, Barff, Brown J. E., Brown J. C., Burns, Button, Carrington, Cox, De Lautour, Douglas. Gibbs, Hamlin, Hislop, Hodgkin son. Hunter, Hursthouse, Joyce. Kelly, Lusk, Macfarlane, M'Lean G., Murray, Ormond, Bead, Bees, Raid, Bo we, Bussell, Seaton, Sbrimski, Sheehan, Stoat, Swanson, Tawiti, Wakefield, Williams. and Woolcock. Ness; Ballance, Bowen, Brandon, Bryce, Curtis, Fisher, Fitnoy, Harper, Henry, Johnston, Kennedy, Kenny, Manders, Aynsley, O'Borke, Reynolds, Richardson, Richmond, Bollestoa, Seymour, Sharp, Stevens, Teschemaker, Tola, Mason, Whitaker, Wood R., and Wood W.

2.30 p.m. Thorough unanimity prevailed at the Otago caucus. Having full confidence in their committee, they left it to them to arrange dcflinitely with Auckland to-morrow proposals for separation, which will then be submitted to Canterbury and brought before the House. They say they have thirty-eight adherents irrespective of Canterbury. Mr Pyke authorises the statement that there is no truth in the reports eirsulnted that he is on aspirant for the Commisaionsrship of Police and other poets. Though a Separationlst, he will net support the present move, because doubtful of the bona tides of the scheme, an I considers the whole of the Otago members should have been consulted.