HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Feilding Star, Volume XVII, Issue 95, 18 October 1895, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

The House met at. 2 30. The Alcoholic Liqnors Sale Control Act Amendment Bill was received from the Legislative Council with amendments! Hon. Seddon said no one regretted more than he did the great difference of opinion that existed between the two branches of the Legislature on this Bill. Seeing that the Bill had been unanimously passed by this House he thought the only course he could pursue was to ask the House to refuse to agree to any of the amendments made by the Council, . He therefore moved in this direction and that Hon. Seddon and Messrs McNao, Meredith and Mitchelson be appointed a Committee to draw up reasons for disagreeing. He thought this was a fair selection. Mr Geo. Hutchisou said if these gentlemen were to meet the Council as representing the House the Premier was taking the best step to prevent a compromise being effected this session. ■ Mr W. Hutchison asked whether it was not, useless to appoint a Conference at this late stage of the session. (Hon. Seddon : No). He thought the House ought to refuse to have anything more to do with the Bill this session, and he moved as an amendment " That no further action be taken this session." Mr G. J. Smith seconded the amendment. He complained that only merribers of moderate views bad been selected on the Committee, and asserted that in milking this selection the Premier had pliiced an insult upon a large section of the public of New Zealand. Sir R. Stout had taken a very keen interest in this question and yet he bad been utterly ignored. He (Smith) did not think the Conference ought to be held and the House would be best consulting its dignity by refusing to have anything further to do with the Bill this session. Mr Montgomery contended that Mr . McNab bad as much' right to represent the temperance party as Sir B. Stout. Mr Earnshaw said the amendments hod been carried in the Unper House , by such large majorities as to ensure that no compromise could be arrived at. The liquor interest bad the advantage on 'the' committee proposed by the Premier* Hon Seddon deprecated the inflammatory and abusive speeches that had been ; made that afternoon. Such utterances ■ would do no good and would only weaken the position of the House in the 'matter. It would show a sign of weakness to adopt the course suggested in the amendment. Sir R. Stout spoke in support of the , amendment. The House should take a bold step now of declining to appoint a conference, and tackle the question afresh early next session. The Hon. Mr Beeves thought nothing would be gained by irritating the other Chamber and treating them with discourtesy, and it was not in the interests of the Bill to refuse to appoint a conference, The Hon Mr McEenzie said Government saw no objection to putting Sir R. Stont on the committee. After further lengthy discussion Mr W. Hutchison's amendment was lost by • 46 to 12, and it was declined to disagree with all the amendments. The Hon Mr McEenzie then moved the names of the committee to draw up reasons, including that of Sir B. Stout in the number, but Sir B. Stout declined to act. The Hon Mr McEenzie therefore moved that the Hon Mr Seddon and Messrs Mitchelson, McNab, and Mere* dith be appointed the committee. This was agreed to on the voices. The amendments by the Legislative Conncil in the Stock Act Amendment Bill were agreed to. It was decided, on the motion of the Minister of Lands, to disagree with the amendment of the Legislative Council in clause three of the Land for Settlement Act. The Council by this amendment struck the District Land Registrar off the Land Purchase Board— A committee was appointed to draw up reasons for disagreeing. Mr Seddon announced that he would bring down the Public Works Statement on Monday evening. In moving the committal of the Shop and Shop Assistants Bill, Mr Beeves explained that the measure would enable those places which had selected Saturday for the half -holiday to change the da y if they so desired. In committee on the Shops and Shop Assistants Act Amendment Bill on clause 4, Sir B. Stout moved an amendment to place hotel bars on the same footing, as shops under this Act. This was carried by 30 to 27. Clause 5 which provides that in any proceeding for breach of the Act relating to closing day the onus of proof should be on defendant, was struck out by 32 to 21. A new clause was added allowing offices to close on the same day as shops when any other day than Saturday was chosen for the half-holiday. Mr G. W. Russell moved a new clause to bring offices in the public service under the Act in the same way as private offices was lost by 37 to 12. The Bill was reported and read a third time and passed. The Honse rose at 1,25.