The Globe. WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 1874. GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume I, Issue 39, 15 July 1874, Page 2

The Globe. WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 1874. GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

; (Per Anglo-Australian Press Tele-graph " ' Agency.) | Wellington, July 14. In the Legislative Council, = Mr Waterhouse, in moving his motion : regretting the increase of our indebtedness, j was very moderate in his language. He said, ! when four years ago the public works policy | was initiated, Mr Vogel had said £8,500,000 , were to be spent over ten years, or, including immigration, £0,500,000, which, however, . was To be reduced by the sale of 3,500,000 ’ acres, but in seven years only they had autho- | rised the expenditure of £9,816,000, and they had only about 1000 miles of railway to show | for it, and this sum would make the . total indebtedness of the colony over seventeen millions. The question was whether any increase to this would not , make too heavy taxation necessary. Still , there was nothing alarming at present, only ' more caution was required. They were apt at present to underestimate the weight on their shoulders. The feeling was attributable , to three causes First, the unprecedented , orosperity prevailing ; second, the full burden of interest was not yet felt, in consequence of the interest being deferred till [ the lines were completed ; and third, they were not paying the full burden imposed . upon the colony, in consequence of native ; troubles. There would be a large expenditure yet in connection with the native ques- , tion, which he advocated being borne out of I the public revenue. As for railways paying, ‘ he thought they would repay the interest, . and develop industries ; but to plunge too ' recklessly into them would render taxation ’ on their industrial resources necessary, which ’ would defeat its own object. They had increased their indebtedness as far as was con- . sistent with sound prudence. Dr Pollen said if he was to follow Mr . Waterhouse through his arguments, he would be obliged to disclose the financial , policy of the Government, which would be more properly done in the other House in a day or two. He moved the previous quesi tion. ; Captain Kenny opposed. ■ Mr Campbell supported. 1 The previous question was put and carried. , On the motion of Major Richmond, a call of the Council was fixed for July 30th. Dr Pollen laid on the table all papers re- ■ lating to Judges Ward and Chapman. The Regulation of Machinery Bill, Offences against Person Amendment Bill, the Justices i of the Peace Amendment Bill, were read a second time, and the Council adjourned. In the House of Representatives, i Mr O’Neill presented a petition, reaching more than the length of the chamber, for increased representation of the Thames district. It was received and read. Several other long petitions were introduced, but their purport could not be heard. Mr Bradshaw presented a petition from 1311 farmers, praying that i there be no alteration in the Distilleries Act, 1868, Mr Pearce presented a petition from Mr Andrew Young, coach contractor, praying ! for relief, in consequence of his contract for i the carriage of mails being terminated. Mr Vogel laid the Ward and Chapman correspondence on the table as they were re-

ceived, not as despatched ; but the inaccuracies were very slight. Mr McGillivray gave notice of his intention to move for a return of colonial distilled spirits to the 31st of March, 1874. Mr J. Gillies gave notice of his intention to move for a committee to enquire into the Ward and Chapman telegram question. Ten days’ leave of absence was given to Mr Pyke. Mr Vogel in moving the second reading of the Westland Loan Bill, said it need cause no apprehension among, hon members. It was of a very harmless character. The Bill was ordered to be committed tomorrow. On the adjourned debate on the second reading of the Telegraph Act. Mr Luckie took objection to imposing £lO penalty for accidental injury to telegraph lines. He hoped the Government would reconsider the clause. Mr J. Shepherd thought such persons ought to be left to the ordinary operation of the law, and the clause withdrawn. Mr Vogel said he had not yet had an opportunity of consulting the AttorneyGeneral upon the new clause proposed by the member for Rangitikei. Major Atkinson’s proposal, however, wonld not be a feasible course, especially in small offices, because it would prevent any check whatever. It would be feasible to do so at the head office after the telegrams had passed through there, to post them at the nearest post office instead of storing them ; but the adoption of the practice would entail an expenditure of £I2OO a year. He would not bring down the proposal himself, but would have no objection to its consideration in committee. One disadvantage of the proposal was, that by the proposed plan (sending them at once to the post office) they would not be accessible to sender and receiver as at present. Mr Richardson moved the second reading of the Regulation of Mines Bill, and said it was founded mainly upon a Bill introduced in the British Parliament in 1872, and another introduced into the Victorian. Mr Sheehan asked the Speaker if the Bill affected the goldfields matters in any way, and being replied to in the affirmative, said the Bill should be referred to the consideration of the goldfields committee. Besides, this would ba a favorable opportunity for embodying the suggestions of the committee which reported upon boilers. Mr Richardson said a Bill embodying those suggestions was being prepared by the Government. Mr O’Neill also thought the Bill should be referred to the goldfields committee after the second reading. Matters were dealt with in the Bill which would require the consideration of such committee. Mr Buckland thought the Bill provided for everything. Mr Joseph Shepherd supported the second reading, but thought the Government should have introduced two Bills—one for gold mining and one for other kinds of mining. He also thought the Bill should be referred. Mr Steward pointed out several deficiencies in the Bill. It had no provision for lighting mines, fire damp, &c. Mr Tribe opposed the Bill as unnecessary. It certainly would be productive of mischief in his district, where great difficulty was experienced in finding room for refuse from below. He hoped it would be left over for another session. He also objected to the Bill being brought into operation at the option of the Provincial authorities. Mr Bradshaw supported the Bill generally as a good one, that would have prevented many accidents had it been in force. He thought the Bill might be so amended as to throw the onus of proof of efficiency of material employed on the owners and managers of mines. Mr Richardson said there could bo no doubt as to the great need for the Bill generally, but whatever happened to the Bill that portion relating to coal mines he hoped would be carried into force. He could not see what good the goldfields committee could do the Bill. He thought the Bill was so drawn up that any alterations requisite could be made in committee. The Bill was read a second time, and the third reading fixed for that day week. Mr Vogel moved the second reading of the Savings Bank Amendment Bill. The principal object of the Bill was to make the amount on which interest was payable increased from £6OO to £IOOO. It was ordered to be committed on Friday. Mr Reynolds moved the second reading of the Municipal Reserves Bill, and explained that the Bill provided that powers to make reserves for public purposes would include power to make reserves for municipal purposes. Mr J. Gillies woull not oppose the second reading, but would propose considerable amendments, so as to make the Bill apply to all corporate bodies, as well as merely municipalities and road boards, with regard to all kinds of reserves for purposes of public utility. Mr Mervyn thought the Government ought to have dealt with the question more exhaustively than by that Bill. Mr Shepherd said that if the reserves had been made on the scale in several of the provinces which they had been informed, such reserves should be made upon the authority of that House, and that House alone. Mr Reynolds trusted members would give notice of the amendments they proposed to introduce. It was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday. Mr Vogel, in moving the second reading of the Supreme Court Judges Act, said it had been introduced chiefly through the projected retirement of the present Chief Justice. He then referred to the highly satisfactory manner in which he had, during a long series of years, performed his duties, and the very great estimation in which he was held. Mr Vogel pointed out several colonics in Australia which had fixed the rate of retiring allowance for judges. The second clause of the Act provides that the superannuation allowance of judges over sixty years of age, retiring after fifteen and less than twenty-five years of service, is to be one-half their salary. He thought that the sliding scale of pensions should not be applied to the judges, on the ground of public policy, if on no other. Ho thought it was of the highest importance that the judges should be dealt with in this way, as an incentive to them to hold their appointments as long as they possibly could. Mr J. E. Brown said it would ho better for the Government to bring in a special bill to deal with the present case. The Bill was read a second time.

The Civil Service Act Amendment Bill was moved by the Premier, who explained that some such Bill was absolutely necessary for keeping up the civil service to that state of organisation consistent with the requirements of the public. The Premier detailed the provisions of' the Bill, which relate to the abolition of offices, compensation for loss of office, re-appointments, misconduct of officers, retiring allowances, and mode of providing for pensions and all owances. With regard to the system of pens l fEf,he gave, as his private opinion, that some prospect should be held out to officers to expect a pension after long and faithful service. Such a system had been seen to be highly desirable. He could not agree with those persons who said, “ Oh, they ought to make provision for themselves.” That would not be found to answer in practice. Mr Gillies objected to the third clause, which was brought in to meet a special case, which should rather have been provided for for by a special Act, Generally he would support the principle, but must set his face against the pension system, which the Premier thought so well of. Mr Reader Wood could not see that the House could object to a tax of 2£ per cent being deducted from their salaries for the purpose of making a pension fund. The House then rose.