PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 304, 3 June 1875, Page 3

PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

Wednesday, June 2, The Speaker took the chair at 3 p.m. REPORT OP SELECT COMMITTEE. Mr Jebson brought up the report of the Select Committee on the survey of certain sections on the Hawkins, which was read as follows:—“Your committee have to report that section 3717, as applied for by Mr 1. B. Sheath on 19th December, 1871, was part of a coal reserve 197 in red, and that the boundaries of this section as proposed to be Crown-granted are not in accordance with the description published in Gazette, vol viii, August 20th, 1861; nor with the application made by Mr I. B. Sheath ; nor with the license to occupy issued by the Waste Lands Board ; nor with the boundaries as pegged off by Mr Harston (whose field-book the Chief Surveyor states cannot be found), when surveyed by him in January, 1866, a surveyor on the staff at the time ; and a subsequent survey by Mr Hoskyns, executed April, 1873, in accordance with a resolution of the Waste Lands Board, May 20th, 1872. Your committee also have to report that the said section has been surveyed by Mr Harston, January, 1866 ; Mr Kitson, December, 1870 ; Mr Hoskyns, April, 1873; and Mr Bain, July, 1873. As regards section 12371, purchased April 16th, 1868, by the Riccarton Trustees, your committee have to report that the evidence given before them leads to the conclusion that this section was part of the foregoing section 3717 as described in Gazette before referred to. [See minutes Waste Lands Board, May 20th, 1872.] In reference to section 16639, purchased by Mr I. B. Sheath, May 10th, 1873, your committee have to report that the boundaries of this section, as shown by map numbered 73 in the Survey Office, from which the application was made, and the license to occupy issued by the Waste Lands Board, have been altered since purchased, as shown by a map of the South Malvern road district, coloured in lines red and black, the alteration here alluded to appears to have been made in an amended application for section 14225, the purchase of which bears date the 11th December, 1873, nine months subsequent to the issue by the Waste Lands Board of the license to occupy to the purchaser of section 16639. Your committee find that instead of there being a road of one chain wide dividing sections 3717, there is about twelve chains. This arises from the southern boundary of section 16639 being removed northward a distance of twelve chains. In like manner your committee find that sections 19042 and 19044, the boundaries of which were set forth on the map No 73, and which sections were purchased on the 18th November, 1873, and licenses to occupy were issued on the same day, and in accordance with the boundaries as set forth on the said map, have also been altered since the purchase, as shown by a map containing colored lines red and black. An amended application to purchase 16928 was granted to Jane Deans, William Lyon, and Wm. Guise Brittan by the Waste Lands Board on the 17th day of November, 1874, ten months subsequent to the previous purchases made by Mr I. B. Sheath, and in the amended application the eastern boundary of this section has been removed about ten chains [to the east, and by removal of said boundary the two sections, Nos 19042 and 19044 have been severed, and access from one to the other entirely cut off. The number of maps relating to this part of the province is twelve, and your committee find that there are many discrepancies in nearly all the maps laid before them.— John Jebson, Chairman.” MINISTER OP EDUCATION. Mr Jebson moved—” That in the opinion of this Council it is desirable that a Minister of Education should be appointed, who shall be a member of the Executive Council, and a member of the Provincial Council.” He was led to move this resolution because be felt that it was necessary that there should be some one connected with the education department to whom the House could look for information on this matter. He felt that it would be more satisfactory if, as was the case with other departments of the Government, there should be some one responsible directly to the House. The Provincial Secretary said the Government had no objection to the principle of the resolution; but he would desire to point out to the House that it involved the creation of another paid political officer. If the House thought that this was desirable the Government would not object to the motion. It was for the House to decide upon the question. . Mr Bluett would vote against the motion because he could not see the necessity of creating another paid officer on those benches. [Hear, hear.] He felt sure that the Executive were perfectly competent to conduct the business of the education of the province, and for the reason he had spoken of he should vote against the resolution. Dr Rayner would oppose the motion, because he felt it would be wrong to mix up education with any political bias at all. Therefore he should vote against the motion; besides he thought it would have been much better if the proposition had come from the Government bench rather than from a private member. Mr W. B. Tosswill should vote for the the resolution, and for the reason that he felt perfectly certain that it was necessary that immediate personal supervision should be exercised over the education of the pro vince. It must be remembered that they were spending large sums of money, and it was in the highest degree-necessary that the Council should exercise a direct control and supervision, which could he thought be best attained by the appointment of a Minister responsible directly to the Council', and forming one of the Executive. As to the objection te creatitg another paid political office he did not think they ought to let a sum of £6OO stand in the way. For the reasons he had stated he should vote for the resolution of the hon member for the Rakaia. Mr Harper was in favor of the resolution, as he thought it would tend greatly to the success of the scheme if direct control over it were in the hands of the Council. Mr Jebson having replied, the motion was put and declared to be carried. Mr Bluett demanded a division, which took place as follows: — Ayes 18 Noes 8 Majority for resolution ... 10 The resolution was therefore carried. The following is the division list:— Ayes 18—Messrs Andrews, Dixon, Fisher, Harper, Higgins, Jebson, Jollie, Maskell, Montgomery, Parker, Pilliet, Potts, Teschemaker, Tosswill, J. N., Tosswill, W, B„ Turnbull, R., Webb, Wilson, I.

Noes B—Messrs Bluett. Buchanan, Gray, Hay, Rayner, Turnbull, J. S., Walker, Westenra. TOLLS ON WEKA PASS BO AD. Mr Harper obtained leave to postpone the following 'motion until Tuesday next, viz —“ That in the opinion of this Council it is desirable that the tolls on the Weka Pass road be abolished.” SCHOOL OP AGRICULTURE. Mr W. B. Tosswill moved—“ That the resolution of this Council passed on the 19th of December, 1872, under which a reserve of 100,000 acres has been made as an endowment for a School of Agriculture be carried out in its integrity.” He desired to point out to the House that the establishment of a school of agriculture was a great necessity, and he trusted the House would agree to the motion. He might say that he protested most strongly against the action of the Canterbury College in taking possession of this reserve. In a few years the revenue arising from the reserve would be large, and he thought the best thing the Council could do was to appoint trustees who would see that the reserves were administered, Mr Bluett seconded the motion. He wished no harm to the Canterbury College, but he desired to point out that the taking of this reserve was an act of injustice; in fact, it was robbing Peter to pay Paul. In other countries these colleges and schools had been established, and the result had been most satisfactory. He trusted the House would pass the resolution. The Provincial Secretary said the Government were not in a position to say how the Canterbury College had become possessed of this money, but at any rate the Board of Governors had allocated the money in the direction contemplated by the Council. They had applied this money to the payment of the salary of the Professor of Chemistry and his assistant, and the Professor of Chemistry had turned his attention very largely to the question of agricultural chemistry, which he thought was carrying out the intention of the Council as far as possible. There was another point, which he wished to bring under the notice of the House. If they withdrew this £IOOO and funded it, the Council would have to compensate the College to that amount by voting a sum of similar amount. If the House was in favor of this being done well and good, but he put the case before them. As regarded the success of similar institutions, he thought there was a diversity of opinion. Under all the circumstances, and looking at the fact that the Professor of Chemistry had been carrying out the views of the Council, he thought the hon member had better let the matter stand over for a year. Mr Montgomery pointed out that none of the revenues of these endowments came direct to the College; they came through the Treasury, the Government providing for the salaries, &c, of the professors. Now as regarded the carrying out of the resolution in its integrity, he thought that the appointment of a Professor of Chemistry, and one skilled in agricultural chemistry was doing this. He trusted that the House would at once divest itself of the idea that the College had appropriated any of the revenues of this endowment. What they had done was to recommend to the Government that the revenue arising from this reserve would be fitly appropriated to the payment of the salary ol an agricultural chemist. [Hear, hear.] Dr Turnbull said that the hon member who had proposed the resolution had done well in bringing this matter up, but nothing that he had said should in any way be allowed to reflect upon the Canterbury College, because the funds were really being used in the direction indicated by the resolution of the Council. He (Dr Turnbull) thought it would be better to leave this matter alone until 1880, when it would be quite time enough to begin to take action in this matter. He trusted that the House would clearly understand that the Canterbury College was in no way chargeable with undue interference or injustice, Mr Walker thought that the mattershould be allowed to rest, as if they proceeded to interfere with it, there would be a disturbance of the fixity of arrangements entered into by the College, which would be very disastrous not only to the College itself, but to the cause of education throughout the province, in view of the fact that the College Governors had received the services of an agricultural chemist, which he thought* was carrying out the resolution of the Council. Mr Jebson did not think the mere giving of three lectures on agricultural chemistry by one of the professors of the College was carrying out the resolution of the Council of 1872, which was what the resolution of the hon member for Riccarton asked for. He should therefore support the resolution now proposed. Mr Harper said that he could see no hardship in being asked to carry out a former resolution, and he should support it. As regarded the remark of the Provincial Secretary, that agricultural colleges were not a success at home and elsewhere, he might refer to the Royal Agricultural College at Cirencester, where he (Mr Harper) had been a student, and which was a thorough and complete success. Mr W. B. Tosswill, in reply, said that h« might say that last session the late President of the Executive had tpld him (Mr Tosswill) that the Canterbury College looked upon this reserve as their property. Now, the express condition in the resolution of 1872 was that the proposed School of Agriculture should not be in connection with the Provincial College ; therefore they were not carrying out the resolution in its integrity. He was extremely surprised to see a gentleman holding the position he did in the Council opposing a simple act of justice, and more so to see the Governors of the Canterbury College stand up one after the other and try to get hold of this money. If the Council passed this resolution he (Mr Tosswill should move that trustees be appointed to carry out the resolution of 1872. The motion was then put and agreed to on the voices. tenure op pasturage leases. Mr Harper said that as it was so late in the session to discuss an important matter such as the one contained in his resolution—- “ That in the opinion of this Council resolutions should be considered during this session with regard to the tenure of the pasturage leases”—he would, acting under good advice, ask leave to withdraw the motion. [Hear, hear, and laughter.] The motion was therefore withdrawn. agricultural and pastoral association. Mr Gray moved that the House go into committee to consider the following resolution;—“That his Honor the Superintendent be respectfully requested to place on the supplementary estimates a sum not exceed-

ng £250 for tbe Canterbury Agricultural and Pastoral AssociationHe would desire to remind the House that this society had done a great deal of good to the province, and had not only a provincial but a colonial reputation. He trusted, therefore, that the Council would pass the resolution, as the association was in reality doing a great deal of good. Mr Bluett seconded the motion, and hoped the Government would support the motion. Bethought the association could come with a very good grace to the Government and ask them for tho small sum of £250. ~ . The Provincial Secretary said, despite the pathetic appeal of the hon member opposite (Mr Bluett), the Government would oppose the resolution. The association had had large sums of money from the Government, and the last time this had been done there was an understanding that the sum voted was to get the association out of debt, and that no further application would be made; Therefore he looked upon the present application as outside that understanding. He had been led to believe that the midwinter show was a dead loss to the association, and if this were discontinued—which was only for the benefit of one or two breeders —the funds of the association would be sufficient to carry them on. It was the hope of the Government that the district association would soon come up to be selfsupporting, and that thus the grant now paid to them would not longer be required. The Government could not support this vote, because they thought that this association should be self-supporting. Mr WALKER pointed out that the railway benefited very largely by the operations of this association, and therefore he thought it had a fair claim to a share of the public funds in return. [Hear, hear.] Mr Fisher was sorry that the Government could not see their way clear to support this vote, because the association was one well worthy of support at the hands of that Council. The shows of the association were the means of attracting a large number of persons to them, and thereby indirectly a large revenue was returned to the province through the railway. Mr Higgins hoped that the grant would be acceded to by the Government, as there could be no doubt that the association had done a great deal of good in the province. Although the hon Provincial Secretary had opposed this vote, he did not despair, because the occupants of those benches had shown on very much graver questions than this a continuity of diversity of opinion, which gave him great hopes that the Government would yet relent. ' MrW. B. Tosswill hoped the Government would accede to this vote. They had / granted a vote of £SO on account of the Lyttelton regatta, on the ground that the railway receipts were augmented. If this held good as regarded Lyttelton, the same rule should be applied to the large number of persons travelling over the line to see the show. Mr W. White supported the motion, because he believed the shows of the association had been productive of a great deal of good to the province. (Cries of “Question.”) Mr Gray having replied, The motion for going into committee was agreed to on the voices. In committee, Mr Gray moved the resolution, which was agreed to, reported to the House and adopted. OPAWA EXTENSION. The Secretary for Public Works moved —“ That this Council recommends his Honor the Superintendent, in terms of section 9 of the Immigration and Public Works Act, 1873, to apply to his Excellency the Governor to proclaim the railway known as the Opawa extension of the Washdyke and Pleasant Point line of railway, for which appropriation was made in the Appropriation Ordinance, 1874.” Tbe motion was agreed to on the voices. ENDOWMENT FOR CHRISTCHURCH. Dr Turnbull asked leave to postpone the following resolution :—“ That his Honor the Superintendent be respectfully requested to place on the supplementary estimates the sum of £60,000 for tbe purchase of land as an endowment for the city of Christchurch.” He might say that he advocated the endowment of other municipalities, but as the Government had expressed a wish to consider the matter more fully, he would ask leave to postpone it till next day. Leave was given, and the motion postponed accordingly. railway to akaroa. Mr Pillibt moved—“ That the Governbe requested to place a sufficient sum upon the supplementary estimates to procure a reconnaissance survey from Little River to Akaroa Harbor, with a view to the construction of a railway to Akaroa." He might say that the Peninsula had a good claim to participate in the improved means of communication with other parts of the province. It was admitted on all hands that the harbor of Akaroa was one of the finest in the colony, and by the construction of a railway it would be enabled to be utilised. Mr Wbstbnra seconded the motion. Mr J. N. Tosswill said he should move an amendment to the effect that a survey should be made from Lincoln to Akaroa, via Little Xiver. The Secretary for Public Works said the Government bad no objection to place the sum of £2OO or £BOO on the estimates for this purpose, though he was afraid it would npt expedite the construction of this line, as the General Government had a decided objection to constructing any more of these branch lines. Mr Montgomery was glad to see that the Government had acceded to the request of the resolution. He would suggest that the resolution should be amended so as to connect the line with the main trunk line. After some discussion, Mr Tosswill withdrew his amendment. Tbe original resolution was then put and •greed to on the voices. MANDEVILLE AND RANGIORA DRAINAGE. Mr I. Wilson moved—“ Thatthe engineer’s report on the state of the drainage works in the Mandeville and Rangiora drainage district be laid on the table.” The motion was agreed to. RAILWAY SIDINGS. Mf J. N. Tosswill moved—" Thai with a view of affording every possible facility for the erection of produce stores adjacent to the stations upon the railways, excepting those upon the Lyttelton and Christchurch railway, sidings leading from the station yards be granted to the owneis of adjoining property upon payment of *hn annual sum." He might say that he had telegraphed to Otago to the railway manager to ask him what was the practice there. He was informed that tidipgi were granted on tbe fol«

lowing terms—earthworks and sleepers by the applicant, and rails by the Government, no charge being made for sidings. The manager still further informed him that the trucks were allowed to remain twelve working hours on the sidings, the trucks to be discharged and loaded by the applicants and remaining at their risk. If these sidings were found productive in Otago where the railways were in the hands of the General Government, he did not see why they should not be so here. He trusted the Government would see their way clear to carry out the system here. Mr Jbbson seconded the motion.

Dr Tubnbull quite agreed with the resolution, except as regarded the clause excepting the Lyttelton and Christchurch railway. There were a number of important industries growing up along this line, and he thought they were quite as much entitled to the use of sidings as the grain stations. He would move as an amendment that the words “ excepting those upon the Lyttelton and Christchurch railway be struck out..” Mr Andrews seconded the amendment. The amendment was negatived on the voices. The Secretary for Public Works moved the insertion of the word “ may" after the words “ station yards.” - The amendment was agreed to. The motion as amended was then put and agreed to on. the voices. RAILWAY TOLLS AND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE, 1875. On the order of the day for going into committee on this Bill being called on, Mr J. N. Tosswill said in order to arrive at the reason which had led the Government to introduce the Bill, be would refer to the financial statement made by the Provincial Secretary. That honorable member informed the House that the Government could not see its way to estimate the profits upon the railways during the current year at more than £4460, for two reasons. Firstly, that the branch lines a-’d extensions would involve a direct loss of £12,544, which would have to be made up out of the profits of other lines; and secondly, that the loss from the reduction in the rates was so great, that it would produce a difference of £25,760, and he hastened to add—“ The Government have, therefore, prepared a Bill for a Railway Tolls and Management Ordinance, which will give power to the Superintendent to levy the required tolls, &c.” These, then, were the reasons which had led to the introduction of the Bill, and he felt bound to admit they would have very great weight but for one circumstance. If he was not mistaken they were based upon erroneous data. The Provincial Secretary estimated the earnings of the railways at £161,064, of which sum £17,694 was estimated as the result on the Rakaia, Malvern, and Oust extensions, and £9462 as the result upon new lines to be opened during the year. .The expenditure upon these latter was estimated at £22,006, thus leaving the estimated direct loss of £12,544. At the time the estimates were prepared the railway authorities had no reliable data whatever to go upon, their figures were of necessity based upon very imperfect estimates, and they had, moreover, no means of ascertaining with any degree of certainty when the various lines would actually be opened. Their figures were but approximations, and no blame should be attached to them if they did not prove to be quite correct. He had obtained a return which showed that the various lines now opened, and to be opened during the year, would be equivalent to seventy-two or seventy-three miles open for twelve months, and would proceed to calculate from the return of the actual working of the Malvern and Rangiora-Cust lines (thiity-five and a half miles) what the loss would be. From the return upon the table the loss upon the above lines for four months was £ll2O, or at the rate of £3360 per annum; consequently the loss upon seventy-two or seventythree miles might be put down not at £12,544, but at (say) £6BOO, leaving a difference of £5744, which might fairly be claimed as profit, as the Provincial Secretary had said, it was to come out of the profit of other lines. And this was not all, for the working of the Malvern and Rangiora-Cust lines showed that the loss would be £B7O less than was estimated, so that altogether the probable profit might be fairly estimated at not £4460, but £11,074, to which might be added all that could be saved out of the 84 per cent which went in working expenses made last year would produce a difference for this year of £26,760. The hon member founded his calculations upon a statement made by the late Secretary for Public Works, that the reduction of the rates made last August had produced a loss of £12,000, but he omitted to notice the statement which followed, that in consequence of the reduction the passenger traffic had enormously increased, He also altogether overlooked the fact that he had himself just before in his statement given an estimate, furnished by the traffic manager, in which the loss for last year by reduction of rates was put down, not at £12,000, but at £7520. The traffic manager had made a deduction from the £12,000 for increase of traffic, &c, but not so the Provincial Secretary who took the first figures which came to hand, and, without looking into them, made ibis calculations of a loss of £25,760 ; whereas, if corrected by the traffic manager’s figures, they were wrong to the extent of about £IO,OOO. Hon members who had followed him in these figures would see that he had shown that there were reasonable grounds for expecting a profit from the railways of at least £II,OOO, and also that the reduction of rates had made a loss, not of £25,760, but of about £15,000 or £16,000, and he would ask in the faee of these figures had the Government shown any good or sufficient reason for their intention of going back to the old rates. A charge for cranage and a moderate increase of the wharfage rates might be necessary, although he could not see why ships at the wharves should not be charged a tonnage rate also; but an increase in the present haulage and terminal charges would be most pre’udicial, and would impede the occupation and settlement of the country. Under the Bill unless the House gave a very decided expression of opinion they probably would charge—from Rakaia to Lyttelton, wheat 5Jd per bushel, oats 3|d per bushel; from Ashburton to Lyttelton, wheat 7d per bushel, oats 4f d, the figures being approximate. What the rates from the Rangitata would be he had not had time to estimate, but, like those from Ashburton, they would be simply prohibitive. It was said that the Government did not intend to include grain; but could they possibly ex elude one commodity, or with fairness increase the rates upon imports and not also upon exports. Let themrather turn their attention to reducing tbe cost of working the

lines. He protested against the “ trust in us” policy of the Government, and hoped the House would insist upon a most distinct and explicit statement of their intentions with regard to these changes, which were, in his opinion, quite uncalled for. [Hear, hear.] Mr Jebson said that nothing could be clearer from the schedules themselves what the Government intended to do. He believed there was room to cut down the working expenses of the railway by 30 per cent, but he did not think the Government had had sufficient time to come down to the House this session and state what reductions could be made in the railway working expenses. He hoped, however, that the Government would give the matter every consideration during the recess, and come down next session and propose such reductions as could be made. Mr W. White contended that the present railway charges were quite high enough, and he did not think the House should place such power in the hands of the Government as was sought to be done by the Bill. Mr Bluett thought that perhaps the Government had been hasty in bringing down this Bill. No doubt there had been a loss incurred, but he thought that if an improvement was made in railway management a less number of men might be employed. He was of opinion that if the proposed rate of charges was adopted, that instead of the railway being employed for the transit of goods that people would fall back upon the old methods of conveyance. He pointed to the increased passenger traffic on Saturdays, consequent on return tickets at single fares boing issued, as a proof that low rates of fares would pay. He should oppose the Bill in its present form. Mr Walker said he would not vote against the Bill, as he believed that a maximum scale was attached to every Bill brought in, but would support it, trusting to the good sense of the Government to carry out its provisions in a moderate way. He com plained of the destruction of property sent by railway through carelessness. He trusted that when the railway management was got better in hand, and the break of gauge done away with, that these complaints would be put an end to. The Pbovincal Secretary said that there was no difference between the schedules of the old Bill and the present. It was true the Government could raise the rates to the maximum, but that was not saying that they would do so. An hon member had referred to what was done in Otago. He the (Provincial Secretary) believed that the Otago rates of charges were quite equal to the maximum rate in the schedule of the Bill, and it must be remembered that the Otago Government laid down very stringent conditions which had not been done here. He might state that the Government did not intend to interfere with the passenger fares. With regard to the remarks of the hon member for Lincoln, which had been so constantly applauded by the hon member for Heathcote, who seemed to have taken the hon member under his protection, and seemed to imagine that the Government had not brought down anything so satisfactory as that brought down by the hon member for Lincoln, especially as they had not consulted the hon member for (the Heathcote on the figures on which their proposals were based, the fact was that the Government were following out the line of policy proposed by the late Government, and he did not see why they should not be free to adopt any part of the policy of the late Government of which they approved. With regard to the figures quoted by the hon member for Lincoln, no doubt they would appear in full force in the public prints to-morrow, to the admiration of the public, but the hon member seemed to have forgotten that when the present Government came into office they could do nothing but accept the estimates made by the heads of departments, who were more cognisant of what was required than a Government just coming into office, and the Government had thus accepted the estimates made by the traffic manager. The hon member for Lincoln had challenged the figures of the traffic manager. Mr J. N. Tosswill —I challenged the figures of the Provincial Secretary. [Hear, hear, from Mr Montgomery.] The Provincial Secretary— The hon member for the Heathcote says “ Hear, hear.” I say that the hon member for Lincoln challenged the figures of the traffic manager. Mr J. N. Tosswill —l pointed out that the Provincial Secretary had made a mistake, which involved a difference of £IO,OOO. [“Hear, hear,” from Mr Montgomery.] The Provincial Secretary said that the traffic manager in his estimates for 1875-6 had put down as receipts from new lines about to be opened £9462, and receipts, twelve months, from the Bakaia and the Oust Extension £17,694. The estimated expenditure was as follows ; Engineer’s—new lines, £13,326; traffic—new lines, £B6BO. These sums added together come to about £22,000. As he (the Provincial Secretary) said in his financial statement, how then could it be possibly shown that there was anything but a loss. He (the Provincial Secretary) would say there was the traffic manager’s own estimate, and the Government could not do otherwise than adopt it. The hon member had said that Government should add as a profit anything they might save in management. Of course the Government would do so at the end of the year, but how a Government just come into office could be expected to say what those savings were likely to be, he (the Provincial Secretary) was at a loss to conceive. But the hon member at his very best failed to show what the profit would be; in fact, he failed to show whether the new lines would produce any profit. Therefore the Government must endeavor to find some means to make up the losses which might accrue. In order to prove that the late Government anticipated a deficiency on the railways, he would read an extract from a statement made by the late Secretary for Public Works (Mr Maudeb The hon gentleman speaking on the reductions which had been made, said :—“ These reductions took effect on the 24th August last, and are estimated by the department to have reduced the receipts by a sum of £12,280 14s 2d.” And further on the hon gentleman said :—“ It is therefore premature to judge to what extent a deficiency may be realised, or how far the expectation of increased receipts from a better developed traffic will serve to overtake the expenditure. For some time to come, however, it appears to be the opinion of the railway authorities that a deficiency at the present rate of traffic will occur, How to provide for this will be matter for consideration, whether by raising the rates on passengers and goods, or by reducing the number of trains. Perhaps the

deficiency will have to be met by acting in both directions.” In the face of this statement, and considering that the hon member for Lincoln had failed to show what the profit would be, if any, he (the Provincial Secretary) would ask what were the Government to do 1 The hon member had said that the Government had failed to show how they proposed to reduce the expenditure, but he (the Provincial Secretary) would point out that it was a most difficult thing without experience to bring forward anything like a definite proposal for reduction. It was true that they might have come down and proposed a reduction of £SO here, and £IOO there, but such reductions would be wholly insufficient. With regard to the question whether they intended, to make any difference between import and export goods, it appeared to the Government that a difference should be made. In exports, if a certain reduction was made in the rates of carriage, the reduction would benefit those who directly exported the goods, whereas in imported goods the Government considered that a difference of Is per ton would not benefit the consumer, but only the importers, therefore the Government considered that the increase should be made upon imported goods, and not upon exported ones. With regard to the Bill now before the House, ne might state that in point of fact there was very little difference between it and the old Act, the chief difference was in the first four sub-sections of section 11. The schedules had not been altered, but it was the intention of the Government 'to rearrange the charges on the railways. Of course there must be some maximum, but it was not the intention of the Government to come up to the maximum in the changes which it might be necessary to make. He would say no more, but would merely remark that whatever alterations might be made in committee the Government had a fair right to count on the support of those hon members who had supported the late Government, as well as on the support of the members of the late Government themselves, for the course which the present Government were pui suing had been clearly indicated by the members of the late Government before they went out of office. MrW, B. Tosswill said that what was wanted was to know whether it was the intention of the Government to raise the rates for the carriage of produce. The Secretary for Public Works said most distinctly that it was not. (Mr Peacock—“ Not quite”) He (Mr Tosswill) so understood him, and he failed to gather from the statement of the Provincial Secretary whether such was their intention or not. He hoped that the reduced scale of carriage would have a fair trial, and he thought that if a reduction was made in the working expenses there would behardlyneed of raising the scale of charges.

The Secretary eor Public Works said it was absolutely necessary to raise the rates of wharfage whether the railways paid or not, because a loss had been incurred, which would have to be met. He did not think the Government had the slightest intention of raising the rates for the haulage of grain, and the Government did not intend to do more than charge such rates as would result in the railway returning a reasonable amount of profit.

Mr Dixon would like to see the low rate of charges on the railways maintained for at least one year, so that they might gain experience as to their operation. The Hon G. Buckley pointed out that there was not one sixth of the labor employed at Port Chalmers as there was at Lyttelton. There was not a single shed there, and no storage facilities were provided, The charges of Otago were very much higher than in Canterbury, During last session pressure was brought to bear upon the late Government, under which they made the great mistake of reducing the rates of carriage, which did not benefit the consumer but put money into the pockets of the importers, which ought to have gone to the railways. He might state that the charges made for wharfage did not pay working expenses. As far as the Government had timfe to look into the matter they considered the rates for imports should be increased. Mr Montgomery said he thought the discussion had not been unprofitable, and he would put it to the Provincial Secretary whether it would not have been better to have replied to the figures brought forward by the hon member for Lincoln rather than have replied to them by a sneer. He (Mr Montgomery) did think that the hon member for Lincoln had shown that the Provincial Secretary was wrong in his figures. With respect to the late Secretary of Public Works statement, it might be remarked that that gentleman referred solely to the branch lines. As to the raising of wharfage, he (Mr Montgomery) was of opinion that an increase might be advan+ageously made at a wharf which had cost a very large sum of money. He rose principally to say that the object of the hon member for Lincoln had been gained, as it had elicited from the Government what they intended to do in the matter. The motion was agreed to, and the House went into committee. Sir Cracroft Wilson said that before proceeding with the business, he wished to make a personal explanation. The other night the late President of the Executive had intimated that it was his (Sir Oracroft’s) fault that the report of the Bakaia commission had not been before the House. He (Sir Cracroft) would now read a telegram which he had received from Wellington, by which it would appear that the report had not been received by his Excellency, and therefore it was supposed that it might have gone astray. He (Sir Cracroft) hoped that the House would absolve him. of having withheld the document from the House. The Bill having been considered as far as the schedules, the chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again tomorrow.

Notices of motion having been given, the Council adjourned until this day at 3 p.m. i