PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 316, 17 June 1875, Page 3

PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

Wednesday, June 16. The Speaker took the chair at 2 p.m. PAPERS.

The Secretary for Public Works laid the correspondence relative to the transfer of certain reserves to the General Government, on the table. PORT LEVY WHARF. Mr Pilliett called the attention of the Government to the fact that an old vote of £250 had been omitted from the estimates for the Port Levy wharf, fl e would like to ask the Government if they intended to replace it on the estimates, as it was a work of considerable utility if carried out. The Secretary for Public Works said it was too late in the present session to put the vote on the estimates, but they would consider it during the recess. HIS honor’s message, no 10.

The Provincial Secretary moved—- “ That the Council resolve itself into committee for the consideration of his Honor’s message, No 10, and the amendments to The Education Bill, 1875, contained therein.” The message itself had been printed, and he hoped the amendments would be laid before the House in a short time. Mr Wynn Williams asked the Government what they were going to do when the House went into committee ? Was the message going to be considered seriatim or what was to be done ? He thought the House was entitled to know what was going to be done when they went into committee. The Speaker decided that it would not be in order for the Provincial Secretary now to address the Council, Mr Knight asked whether it would not be better to take the discussion before going into committee.

The Speaker —The hon gentleman can address the House on the question that I do now leave the chair.

Mr Knight was not prepared to take up the question at once; he was not prepared to lead off; but he thought it desirable that the matter should be settled. [Hear, hear.]

The Speaker —That will be for the chairman of committee to decide. Dr Turnbull would like to ask the Government whether there was any principle involved in the message? Mr Webb pointed out that it would be better,. if any principle was involved, that the message should be discussed in the House.

Mr Brown pointed out that the proper way to discuss the message of his Honor would be in the House; but to discuss the amendments was a very different thing, which ought to be taken seriatim in committee. If they were not careful to separate the message and the amendments, they would find the Bill which had been sent to the Superintendent and returned, forced to be allowed to remain on the table, as there was no means of getting the Bill before his Honor.

Mr Bluett said there would be a very easy way of getting out of that difficulty by refusing to pass the Appropriation Act until his Honor returned the Bill. [Hear, hear.] He should like to ask the Government whether they intended to make this a Ministerial question ; that was, to go out if these amendments were carried against them ? The Speaker ruled that the proper way to discuss the amendments according to the standing orders was to do so in committee. Mr Walker suggested that the motions should be divided. He would ask the Speaker if they could be divided.

The Speaker —The hon member can have them divided if he likes. Mr Walker would then move—“ That the resolution be divided so as to consider the message and amendments separately.” Dr Turnbull seconded the motion, which was agreed to. Mr Montgomery had hoped that the Government would have led the House in this matter —[Hear, hear and “No, no.”] then the House could have discussed both the message and reply to be sent to it. This was how other messages were treated, and it was the only course likely to result satisfactorily. [Hear, hear.] He thought the Government should lead the House in this matter—[hear, hear] —and was much surprised they did not do so. Mr W. B. Tosswill agreed with the hon member for Heathcote, that any resolution on the message should come from the Government Bench, and then the House could discuss the matter with a chance of some tangible result being arrived at. If they simply discussed the message, they would get into a desultory discussion, which would lead to nothing after all. He hoped the Government would do something in the matter.

Mr Walker said that as the Government appeared to be as much surprised as any one in that House at what had been sent down—[hear, hear] —he ventured to step in and to frame a reply to the message. What he objected to on the previous evening was that as a country member he felt sore that a new Bill should be sent down to them on the last day of the session for their consideration. [Hear, hear.] He thought that his Honor should have taken the course of laying this entirely new Bill before the House by message some time back, as they had discussed that Bill for nearly two months. [Hear, hear.] He was not aware whether this was constitutional, but he said that it would have been the means of getting them out of the difficulty in which they were. They had been for some two months and a half in session, and were to have been prorogued that day or the next, and yet they were now asked to consider amendments which would take them some fortnight more. Indeed, he desired to point out that this was very different from an ordinary message, as it enunciated principles which had never been brought forward before. [Hear, hear, and “ No, no.”] The hon member for Heathcote had said that the message was a statesmanlike one, and he (Mr Walker) did not intend to dispute this. The message bore evident marks of great thought and deep anxiety on a subject which they must all have at heart, but they were the remarks of of an enthusiast in the matter, and therefore

they were entitled to look upon them with a great amount of caution. While saying this he wished it to be distinctly understood that he had the highest possible respect for his Honor the Superintendent, but the fact was it was totally impossible for the House to consider these very important and large amendments, amounting in fact to a new Bill, at the present time. What he would suggest to the Executive was that the reply he had to propose should be adopted, and that during the recess the Executive should discuss the matter of education with his Honor, and then come down with a statement, so as to put the matter clearly and plainly before the House. This he took it was by far a better and more statesmanlike course than coming down on the last day of a session with amendments in a Bill which had been under discussion for a long period —amendments which in reality meant the introduction of a totally different system, and one which radically changed at the last minute, what had been passed after great deliberation by that House. He did not know whether he would be in order in moving as an amendment a reply.

The Speaker —The hon member cannot move any amendment on the question that I do now leave the chair. It will have to be moved in committee.

Mr Walker would then move the following reply in committee—“ That the committee of the whole Council having taken into consideration the Message, No 10, of his Honor the Superintendent, cannot accept the amendments proposed by his Honor the Superintendent in the Education Ordinance, 1875, and respectfully request his Honor to accept the Bill as passed by the Council." [Hear, hear.J He hoped that the Council would adopt this as the reply to his Honor’s message.

The question was then put that the House go into committee to consider his Honor’s message and agreed to on the voices. The question was then put that the House go into committee to consider the amendments presently. Mr Wynn Williams said that the amendments were not in the hands of hon members yet. 1 A Voice—“Yes.”] Dr Turnbull said that he had always said that the Government were afraid to meet the Council until they had deferred to the wishes and advice of a certain body of the House. f“ No, no,” and Hear, hear.] There was a principle in these amendments and also the message, but he said that, as on former occasion the Government had shown themselves unfit, totally unfit, to lead the House in this matter. [Hear, hear.”] Mr Webb desired to point out that unless a reply were before the committee, there would really be no question when he got into the chair.

After some remarks from Messrs Jebson, Dixon, and W. B Tosswill,

The Provincial Secretary said it seemed to be considered by some members that the Government had found fault with his Honor for sending down such a message as he had done. Now there was no such an idea in the mind of the Government at all, and he might say that the Government intended to stick to the Bill, as they could not agree to the amendments being made in a Bill over which the Council had spent some two months. This was the position the Go. vernment took up, and they did not intend to recede from it. If hon members thought that the Government blamed his Honor they were utterly wrong, as he had taken a perfectly constitutional course. The motion for going into committee on his Honor’s message was then agreed to. The Clerk then proceeded to read the message, a number of hon members leaving the House.

Mr Walker moved the following reply,— “ The committee of the whole Council having taken into consideration Message No 10 of his Honor the Superintendent, cannot concur with the amendments forwarded by his Honor to the Education Bill, 1876, and respectfully request his Honor to accept the Bill as passed by the Council." He felt that there was not time to consider this important measure, and therefore either the House would have to adopt |the reply proposed or prorogue for a month, and allow the matter to be considered by the people, as it would be necessary to do this instead of adopting a new Bill like this on the spur of the momenta

The Speaker suggested the substitution of the word “ views” for “ amendments,” as they were not yet before the committee. Mr Walker agreed to the suggestion. Mr J. N. Tosswill said, as one of those who opposed the Bill passed by the Council, he felt himself bound to raise his voice in favor of the principles contained in his Honor’s message, One of the main principles in his Honor’s message was the maintenance of schools by local rates. He found that the opinions held by hia Honor on this point were identical with the views of the National Education League, and they were the views consistently urged by several members as well as himself. They were in the minority, but still they held the opinion that property should be rated to support education, as it was mainly beneiitted by it. This was the view consistently held by several hon members, but they had not tested the House on it. His Honor, it seemed to him, recognising that he had been elected by the people, felt it to be his duty to send down his opinion that the proposals in the Bill would have a repressive tendency on education, and he had acted constitutionally.

Mr Fisher said that he was opposed to the reply, and he might say that he must express his surprise at the action taken by the Government, who, when the life of their Bill had been taken out of it by the message, they said nothing at all on it. He should oppose the reply. Mr Montgomery thought the Government should express some opinion upon the message of his Honor and the amendments. The truth was that the Government tried to press on his Honor’s message on the previous evening, and the Government supporters, amongst them the member for Mount Cook and the member for Lyttelton, were opposed to this being done until the reply was before the House. They were now asked to decide the amendments before they had discussed them. By the reply they were asked to affirm “That the committee of the whole Council having taken irto consideration Message No 10 of his Honor the Superintendent, cannot, concur with the amendments forwarded by his Honor the Superintendent to the Education Bill, 1875.” Now how could they decide upon these amendments until they had heard the arguments on the amendments. He thought that the Government should lay their views before the House, that they should go through the message point out where they objected to it.

however, came, like Canning's knife grinder, and said—“ Story, sir 1 bless you, I have none to tell.” They came down and left the discussion to private members and allowed it to go on in a desultory manner which could lead to no practical result. He really did hope the Government would place the House in possession of their views on the message, and then he and others would have something to say on the matter. The Provincial Secretary said that after the pointed manner in which the hon member for Heathcote had asked the Government to say what their opinion was on the message of his Honor the Superintendent, he supposed that it was incumbent on him to state what were the opinions of the Government. His Honor in his message said that the Board of Education should be re-instated, and the Government did not agree with this, and for reasons which had been over and over stated in that House, the principal one of which was, that the control of so large a sum of money as was annually voted by that House should be more directly under the control of that House. His Honor’s message further said that free education should be established, and here the Government did not agree with him, because they did not consider that this was a proper time to bring this forward. The Education Ordinance, as brought in by the Government, provided for a certain portion of the amounl required for school buildings, &c, being con tri outed by the districts; but his Honor wished this section altered, in which the Government did not agree with him. I he Ordinance also provided for certain school fees being raised, and the Government could not agree with his Honor that this should be done away with. There was a categorical answer to questions of the hon member for Heathcote as to the Government opinions on the subject of his Honor’s message. [Hear, hear.J Mr Joynt had foreborne to speak on this subject, because not only did he wish to hear the opinion of the Government upon this question, but he hoped to bear a more detailed statement than the mere categorical reply given by the Provincial Secretary to the question of the hon member for Heathcote. He must say that the reply now proposed seemed to him to suggest something not quite consonant with fact. They were asked to say that they had considered his Honor’s messsage; but the effect of what they had done, or were asked to do, was to send back his Honor’s message with the very terse reply, “ We cannot agree to your mesage, and return it with the Bill.*’ They had not as a matter of fact considered the message at all. But he knew that he might speak for a week, and unless the Government would kindly suggest to their supporters that it might be considered, it would not be so. This it seemed to him was not at all courteous, nor giving to the message that consideration which it deserved. He would much rather like to see the Council say that there was not time to consider the message, and not say that they had considered it when they had done nothing of the kind. Now he must say that he considered the province was fortunate in possessing at the head of affairs a gentleman who would be able to take such a statesman-like and broad view of the question. He must say that he had read the message with unmingled satisfaction, not alone because it was in accordance with his own, but because it contained views which were well worthy of consideration, not only by the members of that House but also by the whole province. [Hear, hear] His Honor said—“lt will be learnt from my remarks as to the position of a Board or Council of Education in relation to any permanent system, that I consider it would be inadvisable, on general grounds, to devolve the functions now performed by the Board of Education in this province upon the Executive Government, in addition to those already belonging to it under the existing Ordinance; and I have failed to learn any special reason for the sudden abandonment of this important feature of a system which has been the growth of many years of careful deliberation, and under which results have been attained of which the province has just reason to be proud, In the last four years, while the population of the province has risen from 47,500 to 70,000, the number of attendants in our public schools has risen from 4096 to more than 10,000. The number of school buildings in the same time has grown from sixty-nine to eighty-six. Such progressive results cannot but reflect great credit on the administration of the Board under which they have been effected—latterly, in times of great pressure, when unwonted efforts have been necessary to keep pace with the requirements of the population.” Now this was just the objection raised by hon members when the Bill v» as introduced, and he said that the greatest amount of consideration should be given to the remarks made by the Superintendent on this question. No one would say that his Honor approached the question with any warmth of feeling, such as might obtain in the Council when hon members had to get up on the spur of the moment to reply. His Honor had considered the whole question fully and calmly, and now when the Bill was referred to the Superintendent for his assent, he brought down just the same arguments and opinions as were brought forward in the early part of the discussion on the Bill, He contended that the message of his Honor deserved the fullest consideration, and he considered that they would not be acting as the representatives of the people should act if they refused as they were asked to do, to consider this message and threw it back again, as it were, to his feet. It was true his Honor went further than the hon members who had opposed the Bill, because he said—“ Our best policy would, I believe, be to make education free in all Government schools, and such a result is, as I think, but a corollary upon the adoption of any responsibility by the State in the matter of education.” In point of fact, he was of opinion that the education should be given in Government schools free. The message of his Honor was perfectly clear, for he said, —“ I venture to state my view? on the point, though the province may not have full power at present to change the system in this direction, because I wish to explain presently my objection to any change in an opposite direction, and because I would gladly see the province, where it has not itself the power to effect a desirable change, use its influence to obtain it through the Colonial Assembly,” and further on he stated —“ The sources of revenue for the maintenance of such a system as I have indicated, would be—(l.) A proportion of the consolidated revenue, bearing a fixed relation to population, and distributed, through the Central Board, to the local authorities, under Lproviaions analogous to those of the revised in Ipglaad. (2.) Bates to be raised upon

the local rate rolls, and administered locally.” Now there was no mistake about this; this was clear enough, and he might say that many hon members went as far as his Honor on this subject. He (Mr Joynt) said that, as the province had made it a national and a compulsory matter, education should have been made as nearly as possible free. Now he thought this was a political truism almost —if they made it nearly a compulsory system, they should also make it free. They should not with one hand give education and with the other impose burdens. His Honor went further, and said that wheu free he would endow the system —first, out of the consolidated revenue, and secondly, by rates, to be raised on the basis of the rate rolls, and administered locally. With regard to the first of these propositions, they had been told that it was very unwise to attempt to support it out of the consolidated revenue. The supporters of the Bill now seemed to be very zealous to have the Bill upon a very secure foundation, but he would say that there was nothing more unstable than the land revenue, and therefore it seemed to him that the two best modes were those proposed by his Honor, because if the consolidated revenue failed they had the rates to fall back upon. Therefore his Honor’s financial proposals seemed to him not only to be sound, but also such as should commend themselves to the minds of every thinking man. But what had one hon member done? Why, after hearing the clerk read the message once, he had stood up and told the House that his Honor’s views were not only not statesmanlike but feeble. Well, his Honor was well known as a broad and deeply thinking man upon this subject, and the House, be considered, should take his Honor’s message carefully and respectfully into consideration. Instead of that they were telling his Honor that he should keep his views to himself until a more convenient season. The same hon member that he had referred to had said that the Superintendent should have said that he would veto the Bill, but it would have been arbitrary in the extreme if he had done so without first sending down for their consideration the views held by him. This would have been a great mistake, but what he wanted to point out was that the views of his Honor were put before them in a terse and thoroughly temperate manner. Therefore he begged the House to pause before passing such a reply as the one now before the House, as it was tantamount to rejecting the consideration of the message. He really hoped the message would be considered respectfully and fully, even if the debate took a week.

Mr Knight thought that they were discussing the message now, although the hon member who had just sat down had told them that they would not do so. Those who opposed the reply should say in what way they desired to amend it; as he (Mr Knight) did not oppose the reply, hence he would not attempt to amend it. . The hon member had told them that this was a new matter, but still he had said that the arguments and views held by his Honor the Superintendent had been advocated by the hon member weeks back. Mr Joynt wished to coirect the hon member; he did not say that he was advocating the views of his Honor Jthe Superintendent, because he did not know until he saw the message, what his Honor’s views were.

Mr Knight did not mean to insinuate that the hon member had had conferences on the subject with his Honor, but what he meant was, that the views of the hon member for Kaiapoi happened to coincide with those of his Honor the Superintendent. No one would for one moment say that his Honor had approached this subject with any warmth of feeling, nor would any one attribute this to him. Now as regarded the message itself. His Honor wished to reinstate the Board of Education, but he (Mr Knight) was opposed strongly to this. The Board itself had done good work for the public, but the expenditure of public money had now got to be so large that they could not control it, and further than that the work to be done had got to be so much that a chairman could not be found to do the work unless there was an honorarium or a salary attached to the office. Well if a salaried officer were to be appointed there must be responsibility to some one, and no one could deny that the Board was totally and thoroughly irresponsible. The Board spent money as it liked and upon the recommendation of local committees, which could not always be depended upon. There was no doubt that the Board had done good service, but the real credit was due to the honorable the Speaker who had carried out the system with an empty exchequer. They were told by his Honor that “ In the last four years, while the population of the province has risen from 47,500 to 70,000, the number of attendants in our public schools has risen from 4096 to more than 10,000. The number of school buildings in the same time has grown from sixty-nine to eighty-six. Such progressive results cannot but reflect great credit on the administration of the Board under which they have been effected—latterly, in times of great pressure, when unwonted efforts have been necessary to keep pace with the requirements of the population.” But let them look at the other side the expenditure. During those four years they had expended about a quarter of a million of money, and they certainly should, under such a large expenditure, have a direct system of control by the people, and there was no better way of doing this than having a representative of the people in that chamber directly responsible to the House. Some portions of the message, it seemed to him, were contradictory. They were told that it was necessary they should have—- “ A certainty in its financial arrangements which shall render it as little as possible subject to alternations of parsimony and extravagance, which so frequently obtain in politically administered departments, according to the fluctuating changes of bad or prosperous times,” His Honor wished to make it permanent, but at the same time they were told they could not have any permanency. His Honor seemed to have overlooked the fact that the only way to make the provision for education permanent was to make endowments, but there was nothing about it in the message. They were also asked to consent to free education. Well, he (Mr Knight) had moved in this way in 1872. but he had attached to it the condition of it being compulsory. [Hear, hear.] Well, now there was nothing about it being compulsory in the message, which showed that it had not been so carefully considered as was attempted to be made out. Jf the.\ offered free education without making it compulsory, they would find that their schools would not be attended fully. He

contended that while they were erecting: buildings which were perishable, it was not fair to ask posterity to bear a portion of the cost of building these temporary schools as they were asked to do by ids Honor. They found this statement— 11 Any radical change from a machinery which has so long been in operation, should not, I submit, be made, except on the clearest proof of its necessity, and with sufficient evidence that it is called for by the people generally. I am not aware that at the recent elections the desirableness of such a change as that now proposed was brought prominently under consideration. In view, moreover, of possible constitutional changes, it appears to me unwise to precipitate a change in a portion of the system which would form the readiest connection with a more general system.” Yet, in face of this clause, they were asked to agree to a system of free education, which he did not believe the people had asked for. This fully proved his contention that the address was contradictory. As regarded the increase of contributions, the arrangement made that it should not take place until the end of the financial year would meet all objections to this, as according to his Honor’s idea Provincial Councils would have then ceased to exist. As regarded the doubling of the school fees, he (Mr Knight) would like to see the amount doubled or quadrupled. They were told— 11 The propoi al to double the school fees payable under the Ordinance appears to me open to serious objection. It would impose an additional burden upon a large number of men who have families to support, and who already, in proportion to the permanent interest they have in the country, contribute largely through indirect taxation on the necessaries of life, to the revenue of the colony. These contributions towards the Government of the country would give a fair claim to a large number of the population to participate free of cost in the benefits of an education which the State admits it to be its duty to place within the reach of all.” But if this was a reason why they were to have free education, he said that they should give free education to all and not to a class. It might be a very popular thing, and might catch votes; but he objected to it being done unless all were served alike. He (Mr Knight) contributed as much to the Customs revenue as the working man, and he said that his children were entitled to free education as well. [Hear, hear.] But they could not give it to them. He considered that they should pass the reply as framed by the hon member for Ashburton. Dr Turnbull said that history repeated itself. Some years ago the then Provincial Secretary, when put in a corner by some impetuous member of the Provincial Council, said—“Them’s the Super's opinions, and I sticks to them,” Well, the Executive now said — ll Them’s our opinions, and we’ll stick to them.” They were afraid to get up and say why, but without rhyme or without reason, they simply said that those were their opinions, and invited the Council to treat his Honor’s message with contempt, Did not this shew itself most pointedly in the retirement of the Provincial Solicitor from the Government? They treated the written opinion of the Provincial Solicitor upon a very important question with contempt, putting it away, so that it even could not be found when wanted. [Sir Ceacroet Wilson : “ No.”J _ There was no doubt that the Provincial Solicitor was out of place in the team which aspired or pretended to lead that Council, in a position into which he had been somewhat cajoled. His Honor the Superintendent, through a long career in educational matters, had gained for himself, throughout the province, the reputation of an authority upon education matters, and had now expressed the views he had held during a long series of years and had not now brought them forward to catch popularity. [Hear, hear.] He (Dr Turnbull) did not known, and had never heard, that any member on that bench had ever attained to be an authority on educational matters. [Hear, hear.] The hon member for Lincoln (Mr Knight) had said that it was a farce to say that the working classes could not afford 2£d per week for education: but was it not a farce for a wealthy Government to charge per week for the education of the working man’s children? A great deal had been said of the obnoxious nature of the changes proposed by his Honor the Superintendent. Now, the fact was that his Honor had not proposed any change; the obnoxious changes bad been proposed by the hon members on the Government benches, and those were in the first place the doing away with the Board of Education. If there was any measure which would be provocative of anger against the Government, it was the doing away with the Board and placing the control of education in the hands of a political Government holding far too much patronage altogether already. It was a fact that it was not so much the Board as the Ordinance under which they worked which was at fault. Hon members would agree that the system of education must possess fixity of administration and fixity of finance, which they could not get under the proposition of the Government in the Bill. He quite agreed with the proposition of the Superintendent in taking the maintenance out of the consolidated revenue, and if this were done—by which means all would contribute alike—then it was only fair that free education should be given. The hon member for Lincoln had said that his Honor had not brought out the principle of compulsory education ; but the State, when once the principle of free education was settled, would arrange these details. He quite agreed with the argument that it would be unfair to charge one half of the cost of school buildings on to posterity, and he still contended that the cost of these buildings should be defrayed out of loan. He could not, in view of the interests of the constituents he represented, give a silent vote on this subject, because he should have felt it his duty, as he did now, to remonstrate against the contemptuous manner in which the Executive had treated the statesmanlike message of his Honor the Superintendent. [Hear, hear, and “No, no.”] After some remarks from Messrs Jebson and Higgins, Mr Wynn Williams said he thought they had occupied the time by considering what was really an absurdity, because they were to go into committee on the amendments, and were now discussing a reply which simply said that they would not consider them. One hon member had said that it was a farce to say that the people of the province could not pay per week, and after quoting from the message about the contribution to the revenue and turning it into ridicule, went on to say that he also paid taxes. Now this was quite right, but the fact was that the

taxation fell very much heavier on the poor than the rich, the hon member for Lincoln said, 11 Well, let’s give free education, but let it be to all,” and the hon member for Rakaia followed up by asking why all the schools should not be free. But he would desire to point out that up to a certain point only would education be free, and beyond this, if anything more was required, parents could send their children where they pleased. Hon members who were opposed to them said that they were talking to their constituents— [“Hear, hear” from Mr Maskell] — well, as he had told that hon gentleman, he (Mr Maskell) had no constituents, but the real fact was, that they in that House spoke to their constituents on every occasion, On the hustings they made all sorts of promises; but when any one got up in that House and spoke of the hardship of taxation they were told that they were speaking to their constituents, Why the hon President of the Executive had given the most solemn pledges to his constituents that he would support the Education Bill as then existing; but now he was the most persistent supporter of a radical change such as that contained in the new Bill. No one could deny that this was a radical change, and had never been submitted to the constituencies; therefore the hon President of the Executive had broken the pledges he had given to his constituents. Of course it was perfectly useless to say much on this question, as the Government had a majority ready to come down and vote as they liked. The hon member at the head of the Government was laboring under a delusion if he thought he was governing the Council, because the real fact was that the Government were at the mercy of that majority, which, in reality, governed them. He was sorry that the whole afternoon had been spent in considering a reply which would be utterly valueless while they omitted the very important question of the amendment. Sir Oracroft Wilson said he rose to explain. He had told his constituents that he, would give the old Education Ordinance a trial, and had done so, but had found that the Board of Education had been quite inadequate to the work it had to do. He had given it a fair trial, but had been forced to the conviction that the Board had failed. Mr Montgomery said Mr Knight had stated that the amount of £IBO,OOO had been spent on seventeen schools only. Now the hon member for Lincoln (Mr Knight) knew better, because he was a member of the Board of Education. The fact was, that in 1871 there were thirty-seven districts, which had increased to eighty-six, and in 1873-4 twenty-four new diotricts had been created Thus it was not correct to say that this large sum had been voted for seventeen schools alone. [Hear, hear.] As regarded his Honor’s message, he considered it certain that the time would come when free education would be carried on out of consolidated revenue, and that some statesman would arise in another place who would see that free education .should be placed within the reach of all. His Honor said— 11 These con 1 tributions towards the government of the country would give a fair claim to a large number of the population to participate free of cost in the benefits of an education which the State admits it to be its duty to place within the reach of all.” With this he fully agreed. As regarded the reply, he thought that the Government should strike out the last clause, for their own sake. They should stop after the words “ Education Bill 1875.” The latter part of the reply would be met by the rejection of the amendments when they had been discussed. He thought they were now assuming a foregone conclusion by saying that they had considered the amendments when they had not done so. He submitted that the Government and the House should not pass a resolution which shewed that a foregone conclusion had been arrived at.

The Provincial Secretary said that that the hon member for Papanui had taken a line which he should not have done. He had said that the Government knew that they had a majority at their beck and call, and could carry what they liked. It was veiy strange that the hon member during his six weeks’ connection with the Government had never objected to the majority which the Government had. No doubt this would make a very good cry, and it would be repeated elsewhere. As regarded the remarks of the hon member for Heathcote as respected the election at Heathcote it was not on the point that the hon member stated. The gentlemen referred to were not rejected because they were not in favor of the alteration of the Ordinance, but because they wished to introduce the system of denominationalism. Now this was not what the Government proposed at all, nor was the question of denominationalism at all referred to in the Bill of the Government. Of course those gentlemen who were in possession as members of the Board of Education did not like to turn out, and therefore their statements must be taken cum grano sails. The hon member for Heathcote desired the Government to divide the motion and reject the latter portion, but he would desire to point out that that was the most important portion of the reply, because it referred to his Honor’s views as regarded the Education Bill. Mr Gray made a short speech, when

The Provincial Secretary called attention to the fact that it was six o’clock, and that it had been agreed to adjourn at that hour. He would move that the chairman report progress and ask leave to sit again. After Mr Dixon had endeavoured to protest against the chairman reporting progress,

The motion was put and agreed to on the voices, the committee to have leave to sit again next day at the commencement of business.

The House then adjourned till 3 p.m. this day.