Untitled

Evening Star, Issue 4197, 9 August 1876, Page 3

{Per Press Agency.)

On resuming at 7.30 p.m. Mr Hodgkinson supported the resolutions in a long speech. He said the plan proposed was simple and comprehensive. The Government ruined the constitutional edifice, tried to set up thirty-uiue paltry s. Hitherto part had been servile and subservient, otherwise the Premier could never get and then maintain his present position. The Government were cornipt, extravagant, and a disgrace to the Colony. He regretted that Mr Stafford had not the carrying out of the public works scheme the Colony would then have benohtted; st»il lie wa-s a mnn who struck the first blow at the Constitution. As long as the present Centralists system existed representative Government was a sham and a delusion. The hon membu-claimed for the proposals that they pro v’i .ed a good foundation on which to erect a superstructure which would secure better anfl more economic government. . tryce dealt chiefly with the arguments , ™ r ‘ , speaker, but on the question of oprrowmg said that, heavy as the debt undoubtedly was, our position in the money market was not so had ; and if the expenditure had been excessive the blame lay with the House for putting such pressure on the Government and on no member of it more so dian ou the -Superintendent of Otago, and t. men now were loudest condemning what limy ought to be responsible for! roue,ung the details of the scheme, it appears there was no provision to support a 1 cdoral Government, as each Province was to have ah the revenue within itself. Even U the arrangement were carried out the C 0^ (J " f 't evade certain respon Sibil it ics if war broke out in the North. The pre-cut Ministry were as well fitted to sit on the he .- lies a? any men jh the ! louse, and any change of Government would be a sh ;ck to the Colony. Mr Whitaker went more into an ex-

planation of the nature of the proposed scheme than any member of the Opposition. | The stumbling block hitherto regarding separation had been the apportionment of the public debt, but now, that being settled, there was no longer any difficulty in the way of arranging the whole matter, for which he cited several precedents. He recognised now that the Provinces were irrevocably gone, and the question was should they accept the Government’s or Sir George Grey’s proposals. The latter were the most simple and comprehensive. With all their experience of Provincialism no system of government worked so well as when the Colony was governed as two islands, with a Governor-General at Auckland. Under the present proposals they v ould have a Parliament in each island, sitting six or eight weeks yearly, with a federal parliament meeting at Wellington once every tour or five years to deal with the Customs, lighthouses, &e. This would bring better and more economic legislation. He saw no reason for disunion, and said the public creditor would be secured better than ever. The hon. gentleman c'ted South Africa, the United States, and the German Empire as instances of the popularity of Federalism. The hon. gentleman advanced a number of reasons to show why it was to the interest ef both islands that the scheme should be carried out.

Mr Bowen said Mr Whitaker was the only man on the other side who had said anything meriting a reply, the debate hitherto being mainly confined to gross personality such as he hoped he would never hear in the House again, and to which it was not to be expected any reply would be made. The hon. gentleman dealt mainly with Mr Whitaker’s arguments. He said when the Colony was governed as two islands and with a Lieut.Governor there was only fifteen thousand inhabitants, and the Government was anything but a happy one, as far as Wellington and Otago were concerned, and it would not be at all acceptable to-day. It was a mistake to refer to the Federal Government of the United States .as an illustration, as the Federal Government . possessed infinitely greater powers than was proposed to be given in this case. He wondered on what principle the public debt was to be apportioned, unless upon splitting the difference. Why was the seat of Government to be given to Canterbury unless as a bribe ? ihe hon. gentleman argued in favor of cultivating a generous and national spirit as compared with the Provincial Government, Then as to expenditure. By the end of the year nearly 1,000 miles of railway, at L 6.000 per mile, would be open, and that was some thing never before achieved in any colony or country. After using other arguments he deprecated the extinguishment of national feeling in favor of the Provincial or Island jealousy proposed. The House adjourned at 12.35.

ABOUT THE LOBBIES,

(From our Special Corresponded.) Wellington, August 9. Last night’s speeches were the best delivered in the debate. Mr Whitaker’s filling in of the details of the Separation scheme were full enough : —A Governor-in-t'hief, with two Lieut.-Governors; an Assembly meeting every four or five years and dealing with six stated subjects ; two other Legislatures to have fullest powers with responsible Governments’; the Governor-in-Ohief not to have responsible advisers but merely clerical assistance ; the Assembly only to have power to deal with Customs, Supreme Court, lighthouses, marine, laws, and weights and measures; if two Provincial legislatures agree upon the same law in reference to any of those, or upon mutual alterations in Customs, such law to at once come into operation without the interference of the Federal Legislature ; the Governor-in-Ch’ef to be charged with the duty of seeing the public creditor satisfied, to which end the whole Customs revenue paid into the Federal cheat, and if not sufficient, the land fund should be devoted to the same object; but if there is a surplus it shall be returned to the Province in the proportion that it is contributed. He contended that if separation were effected the North would be enabled to satisfactorily dispose of the Native difficulty, as they would give the Maoris fair representation, and treat them as equals of the Europeans in all respects. He intimated his intention of testing the feeling of the House in reference to increasing Maori representation.

Mr Bowen’s speech was equally good. He said Separation would check Colonial progress. It was not wished for, except by Auckland and Otago, who quarrelled over the land fund. He showed that the system of government sketched by Mr Whitaker had not worked well, and that the divisions of the country were intolerable. The country was in a chronic state of dissatisfaction, and even the Governor and his lieutenants did not agree. He warmly defended Sir Julius Vogel from the vituperative attacks of a section of the Opposition, and complained of a financial discussion being raised when the Treasurer had no opportunity of replying. There is reason to believe that Mr Whitaker’s speech does not give satisfaction to the section of the Opposition which sticks to Sir Geo. Grey, and in the lobbies it is said the latter repudiates MrWhitakers authority to go the length he did. Mr Whitaker’s defence of the wording of the resolution was natural, as he drew them out, and but for that it was not improbable he would have moved some amendment, as he was strongly urged to do so by his following. He is aiming to lead the Opposition. Mr Stafford took full notes last night, and it is likely he will speak to-night or to morrow. Mr Manders speaks this afternoon.