PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 317, 18 June 1875, Page 2

PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

This Day. The Speaker took the chair at noon. fencing akaroa cemetery. Mr Pilliett asked the Government without notice whether any provision had been made for fencing in the cemetery near the old farm of Akaroa, known as the Dissenters’ Cemetery. The Secretary for Public Works said that this was the first time they had heard of this matter. There was a sum of £4OO as a general vote for fencing cemeteries, and if an application were sent in it would be attended to. MESSAGE NO. 11. The following message was received from his Honor the Superintendent : ‘ ‘ The Superintendent has received copies of two resolutions passed yesterday by the Provincial Council, the one stating that the Council, having taken into consideration his Message No 10, cannot concur with the views expressed in that message with respect to the Education Bill, 1875, and requesting him to accept the Bill as passed by the Council; and the other stating that, having considered the amendments to the Education Bill, 1875, as proposed in the Superintendent’s Message No 10, they have not agreed to them. “ The Council having now on reconsideration affirmed the alteration in the original Ordinance in a decisive manner, the Superintendent will not interpose any further obstacle to the passing of this Bill. [Loud cheers. ] “Its provisions will impose heavy responsibility on the Executive Government in the work of the Education Department. “ The Superintendent so far as is in his power will endeavour to make the administration of the Ordinance successful. [Hear, hear.] “Wm. Rolleston, “ Superintendent. “Superintendent’s Office, “Christchurch, 18th June, 1875.” The reading of the message was greeted with cheers. MESSAGE NO 12. A message was received from his Honour the Superintendent requesting the Council to reconsider the vote for the Museum buildings, as he was advised that the action taken had committed the Government. Sir Cracroft Wilson said that he had intended to propose a resolution to the effect that this matter should be left to the Executive to deal with during the recess, and that the Council should pass a resolution indemnifying the Executive for any expenditure they might incur under the circumstances. It seemed, however, that this could not be done without contravening the standing orders. The Government, therefore, were precluded from taking further action in the matter, unless indeed the prorogation was put off, which must be done if the message were considered, inasmuch as the standing orders provided that a day must be fixed for taking into consideration messages from the Superintendent. Some discussion ensued on a point of order as to whether the motion referred to by Sir Cracroft Wilson could not be taken at 7 p.m. Mr Montgomery asked the Government whether they would state what action they intended to take. They wished the House to indemnify them for any action they might take, but beyond this they said nothing. He thought the House was entitled to know what were the intentions of the Government. Would they state this to the House ?

Hon G. Buckley —Certainly not. committee of supply. The order of the day for going into committee of supply was discharged. appropriation bill. The Provincial Secretary moved the suspension of standing orders, in order to allow the Appropriation Ordinance, 1875, to pass through all its stages. The motion was agreed to. RAKAIA BRIDGE. Mr Pilliett moved—“ That the correspondence which has taken place between the Government and Mr William White, referring to an immediate official examination of the Rakaia bridge, be laid on the table. The motion was agreed to. THE SOUTHERN COMPACT. Mr Brown did not move the following motion standing in his name:—“That a resolution of the Council passed on the 26th October, 1869, regulating the principle upon which the revenue of the province should be appropriated, ought to be rescinded.” CONTRACT SURVEYS. Mr R. Turnbull moved —“ That in the opinion of the Council the existing contracts for surveys should be determined as soon as possible.” The motion was agreed to on the voices.

RAILWAY PASSENGER STATION, CHRISTCHURCH. Mr J. N. Tosswill did not move the following motion standing in his name:—“ That copies of all correspondence between the Government and the railway engineer relative to the proposed site for the new passenger station, Christchurch, be laid upon the table. ” RAILWAY RETURNS. Mr I. Wilson did not move the following motion standing in his name—“ That a return showing the tonnage received and forwarded from each station on the North and South lines of railway, and the number of passengers booked at each station, and the cost of working each station, be laid on the table.” PUBLIC BUILDINGS Dr Turnbull did not move the following motion standing in his name— •* That there be laid on the table all correspondence with the General Government and others relative to the public buildings.” WEKA PASS ROAD. Mr Harper did not move the following motion standing in his name—“ That in the opinion of this Council it is desirable that the tolls on the Weka Pass road be abolished.” WASTE LANDS ADMINISTRATION. Mr Jebson moved —“ That in the opinion of this Council the Government should take steps to have a Commission appointed during the recess to enquire into the administration of the waste lands, and the erroneous surveys of the province, and the Crown grants already issued, and that may be issued before the Commission bring up their report.” The Provincial Secretary pointed out that the Government had already stated that they intended to appoint a Commission, therefore it would appear that the resolution was not necessary. In fact it seemed like encumbering the Commission. He could not exactly understand what was meant by the term “ administration of waste lands ” ; there seemed to be a little fogginess about that. He would suggest that the hon member should amend the motion by striking out the words “ Waste Lands,” and inserting the words “ Survey Department,” and that all the words after the word “ Department” be struck out. He would move this as an amendment. After a slight discussion, Mr R. Turnbull moved the previous question The Speaker pointed out that the previous question could not be moved, whilst there was an amendment before the Council. The Provincial Secretary withdrew his amendment, and moved another amendment to the effect of the Commission being appointed to inquire into the administration of the Survey Department and the Waste Lands Board, and to strike out the remainder of the resolution. The amendment was agreed to, and the resolution as amended was agreed to. WASTE LANDS BOARD. Mr J. N. Tosswill did not move the following standing in his name: —“ That in the opinion of this Council it is desirable that all ordinary meetings of the Waste Lands Board be open to the representatives of the public press. ” EYRETON AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. Mr Brown moved—“ That his Honor the Superintendent be respectfully requested toproclaim the Eyreton road district an agricultural district,” The motion was agreed to. PUBLIC LIBRARIES. Mr Bluett did not move the following standing in his name:—“ That in the opinion of this Council no public library shall be entitled to receive any portion of grants voted to public libraries unless the sites upon which the buildings are erected shall be vested in or leased to the Superintendent. ” LYTTELTON AND CHRISTCHURCH RAILWAY. The following motion standing in the name of Dr Turnbull lapsed : —‘ ‘ That witn a view of affording every facility for the erection of stores, manufactories, &c, adjacent to the stations upon the Lyttelton and Christchurch railway, sidings leading from the station yards be granted to the owners of adjoining property upon payment of an annual sum.” MESSAGES FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT. Messages were received from his Honor the Superintendent. Message No 13, transmitted amendments in the Educational Reserves Leasing Ordinance, No. 2. Message No. 14, transmitted the Appropriation Ordinance.

EDUCATIONAL RESERVES.—LEASING ORDINANCE NO 2. On the motion of the Provincial Secretary the House went into committee for the consideration of amendments suggested by his Honour the Superintendent in this Bill. The amendment was agreed to, and his Honour was requested to assent to the Bill as amended. The resolution was reported, and the report adopted. At 1.45 p.m., the House adjourned until 3 p.m, Thursday, June 17. The Speaker took the chair at 3 p.m. PETITION. Mr Andrews presented a petition from a public meeting held on the previous evening with reference to the Education Bill. He might say that the meeting was the most orderly meeting he had ever seen, and most unanimous in opinion. The petition was read and received. HIS HONOR'S MESSAGE. The House resumed in committee on his Honor’s Message, No 10. Mr Dixon said that a considerable amount of public spirit had been evinced in this matter, but he thought that they in that House could now divest themselves of any warm-bloodedness in the discussion of this matter. There were several members who believed in the Board of Education, but there were others,whose opinions were equally as much entitled to consideration, who objected to nominated Board. However, he hoped to see some system devised, by means of which the Board could be elected upon a firm and solid basis. It was necessary he thought as long as there was a Provincial Council that it should have the general control of expenditure on education, that was that the estimated expenditure for it should be submitted to it, so that the representatives of the people should have a check over the expenditure. He considered himself in duty bound to oppose the Bill by all means in his power, and that it was the duty of the Superintendent to veto the Bill if the Council refused to pass his amendments. He should be glad to see him veto, but he would be sorry to see him have occasion to do so.. There could be no other conclusion but that it was the duty of the Superintendent to veto the Bill. He

thought the Council should reconsider their position ; they had done a great deal of work, and got a great deal of informatiou, which would go far towards forming their opinions to consider the Bill when the Council was called together, and they would then be able to frame a Bill which would be a lasting one. He considered that the Bill which had been returned to them did not contain the elements of continuity, because it proposed to appoint a political Minister, when they might not have any political status themselves. It was impossible for one man to evolve and carry out a system of education, such as would be a pride to them. Let them divest themselves of Jail hot-bloodedness in this question, and take a larger and broader view of the matter, so that a chance might be afforded to reconsider the matter. His idea was, that they should not go further with the Education question, but he was perfectly friendly to the Government, as he considered anything which would remove those gentlemen from those benches would be a misfortune to the province. After the excitement had subsided a little, they would be enabled to consider this matter far better, besides which, the Government would, having mastered the financial question, be far better able to lead the House than now. He should like to see the Government move a resolution indicating the way in which the House should go, or if not, one of their friends might do so. He would rather see the Bill returned to the Superintendent without amendment, and he to veto it, than the Government should be displaced from those benches. Mr Knight said that he desired to correct a statement, made by Mr Montgomery, appearing in the PRESS, which was as follows“ 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.” What he (Mr Knight) intended to say was correctly reported both in the Press and Lyttelton Times.

Mr Montgomery said that what he had said was, that the hon member for Lincoln ought to have known better as a member of the Board of Education. Mr J. N. Tosswill said that the views of his Honor the Superintendent were held by all English-speaking people throughout the world, and he contended that they were attempting a retrograde movement in returning such a reply to his Honor’s address as they were asked to do. He dissented from it in the strongest possible terms, and he said that the men of later generations would rise and point with contempt at the men of this time, who, in their places, counselled the adoption of such a miserable line of conduct as they were now asked to adopt, Mr JOLLIE said that he was at a loss to understand what the Government ideas were. The message of his Honor the Superintendent was notstreated properly, because at a few moments to seven o’clock, just after it had been read by the clerk, it was moved that it be taken into consideration at once. What would have been the result of the debate might be judged from the speeches of the hon members for Lincoln and Seadown. Those gentlemen seemed to think that his Honor had no right to interfere at all and ;send his views down to the Council. Even ;after the delay of one day the Government were not disposed to take any steps in the matter at all, leaving it to a private member to get up and move the reply. The Provincial Secretary it was true had spoken on it, but all he had said was— ‘‘The Superintendent says so and so, and the Government differ from him ” —bnt no reasons were given. fEear, hear.] He felt that the Government had not taken up a proper position in this matter. [Hear, hear.] He was of opinion that they should reconsider the Bill, more especially those sections relating to the inerease of taxation on the people; therefore he said that he agreed with the message of his Honor. The hon member ■ for Lincoln said that it was ridiculous to suppose that the taxes would press hardly on the working man; but he (Mr Jollie) denied that, as the result would prove different. [Mr Knight—“No,”] He (Mr Jollie) said “yes,” and he felt sure that he was right. Of course he and those who thought with him were in a minority, but they were a respectable minority. Of course it was impossible to oppose the Government when they had a majority of members pledged to support them in whatever they brought down. [Cries of “ Hear, hear,” and “ No, no,” and “ Prove it.”] He said that the fact was that the Government had the Southern members thoroughly with them, and he would tell them more than this ; that if those hon gentlemen who supported the Bill went to their constituents they would be rejected at once. Then they had a Provincial Secretary who had avowed himself an opponent of the Bill, and now they had the trying to thrust down the throat of a respectable minority this Bill. That respectable minority was supported by public opinion. [“ Oh ! oh !”] They had a petition sent down to them by a public meeting most unanimous in the expression of its opinion, and he contended that they should respect that expression of opinion as -that oi the public on this question. f Hear, ..Jiear, and “No, no,”] He was fully of -opinion that his Honor should veto the Bill, ■and h,e (Mr Jollie) would like to see it done. He said further, that the Council by adopting the repdy proposed was not treating his Honor courteously or in a proper manner, if" Oh” and ‘'Yes.”] He should oppose the reply, though of course it was a foregone conclusion, as the Government could carry anything they liked, .having a majority who would vote with them on anything, [Hear, hear, and “ Oh 1 oh 1”] Sir Cracboft Wilson said he desired to rise for the purpose of making a personal explanation. He had been charged outside that House with having told his constituents that he was opposed to any alteration of the Education Bill. Now he did nothing of the kind. He had told his constituents that he would give the Education Bill a fair trial, ■and he had done so, and found it to be wanting. As he had said on the preceding •evening, he found that the Board of Education was not doing the work it was supposed to do, hence he was now in favor of it being replaced. There was no disloyalty to his constituents in that at all; he had done what be said he would do, that was to give the old Bill a fair trial, and he had found it wanting. [Hear, hear.] Mr Montgomery —Will my hon friend opposite (Sir Cracroft Wilson) do this)? Will he resign his seat —we both represent the flame district —and let us go to the electors ■on the question of the Education Bill ? <“Oh, oh.”) , . Mr Parker said, as one of the majon J •*poken of by the hon member for Selwyn, he

would like to ask him and the gentlemen who acted with him whether they had done their duty in deserting their posts without any adequate reason on a Bill on which they had been beaten before. [Hear, hear,] They left the Council to drift into the session without a Government, and he must say that he thought that the present Government deserved a more than ordinary amount of support from the majority of the Council, in order to show their opinion of the conduct of the late Government in deserting them. [Hear, hear.] So far as his opinion went he would ifhewere Superintendent sooner cut his hand off than send for those gentlemen again after the manner in which they had treated the Council. [Hear, hear.] Now the hon member for Selwyn had insinuated that the Southern members log-rolled by getting the Government to place large sums on the estimates for the South, and in return that the Southern members voted for them. The terms “ Southern brigade” and “log-rolling” had been thrown in the teeth of the present Government, but he would desire to point out that under the compact between the North and the South, there was no need whatever for Southern members to log-roll at all. So long as the resolution respecting the division of the funds between the North and South remained unrescinded, they had no reason whatever to ask the Government to put any money on the estimates at all, because they were entitled to it. No one knew better than the hon member for|Selwyn what that compact was, and hence the hon member had no right to say what he had done.

Mr R. Turnbull said that he was glad to find that the hon member for Mount Cook had at last stood up and spoken clearly on the subject of the southern compact. As regarded what the hon member for Selwyn had said, he (Mr Turnbull) would desire to point out that the late Government had been far more liberal in their putting sums on the estimates for the South. But, as his hon friend, the member for Mount Cook,had pointed out, there was no reason for the southern members to take the line he accused them of, but what he (Mr Turnbull) said, was that they were bound to support a Government which they had asked and requested strongly to take office. He did not think that the late President of the Executive had dealt fairly with the Government, because on one occasion he had said the Government should not divulge what had taken place in Executive; but after this, the next dav, he asked them to propose a reply in which it would be necessary for them to state what had taken place. Regarding his Honor’s message, he said—“ It appears to me that the principal objects to be aimed at in promoting a successful system of education are: —First, a continuity of administration unaffected by political changes, but closely connected with the Government of the country. Second, 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.” Now he (Mr Turnbull) thought that there was no continuity or fixity at all, because what should be done was not to have the taxation on one class, but alike on all, not sheltering one class. His Honor proceeded with the usual platitudes, and said—“ It is the Board, however, as administering the central department, which has in all cases been looked to as affording a stability and certainty to the system. It has been objected that a nonelective Board fails of that direct responsibility to the people which it is desirable to maintain; but the Board, I would observe, has no power other than that entrusted to it by the representatives of the people through the law, and the law properly framed should be the most fixed and deliberate expression of the popular will. In so far as the law fails to express the popular will, the Legislature, and not the Board, is to blame for any want of success in the system.” Here was a most extraordinary statement. Were they to hand over the large powers or patronage to this Board? Were they to carry out the system at an extravagant or economical rate ? He thought that large sums of money had been spent on ornamentation, and further than this, there were buildings erected which were of a perishable nature. His Honor went on to say that the popular will should become law, but he would like to know whether the popular will was fit to be trusted; they had enervated the people to such an extent by making them pensioners, that he did not think they were fit to exercise a will. [“ Oh.”] His Honor went on to advocate free education, but he (Mr Turnbull) thought the only fair way of paying for this would be by a uniform rate throughout the province. His Honor said that the first way of raising it would be from the consolidated revenue, and also on rates on property, but whether should the tenant or the freeholders pay ? The result, however, would be simply that the people would have the rate imposed upon them indirectly, and he did not see how it could be done unless the matter was settled on one firm basis. His Honor also wished to borrow, but upon what ? how was it to be done ? There was no information. As regarded the Board he was opposed to the continuance of it, because in less than three months from that date he (Mr Turnbull) hoped to see the provinces swept away—[Hear, hear] —and one united Government established throughout the length and breadth of the colony. [Hear, hear.] Until this was done no real progress could be made, as they had wasted money right and left in the present system, and until they had one Government the provinces and the colony would not, nor could not, become a great nation. He deprecated any violent changes, but if the Government now took the matter in hand and more economically carried it out, the change would not be so violent. Let them reduce the expenditure, and then when the burdens came to be borne by the people they would be ready and willing to bear them. If they did not, then the schools would, as a matter of course, close in a large degree. He hoped that the Bill would pass as it was, and that it should not be made a party question. In less than three or four months he trusted the provinces would be swept away, and then they would at the election for the General Assembly have an opportunity of making their preparations to have a policy of education which should extend over the whole colony. Mr W. B, Tosswill objected to a public meeting which was held at Christchurch being taken as representing the voice of the province. They in the country districts had no chance of having a public meeting to back them up, and therefore it was not fair that they should have these public meetings in Christehurch represented as the voice of the

people. [Hear, hear.] Now he must say that he was not a thick and thin supporter of the Government,*,but he supported the present Bill, though objecting to the half contribution to be paid by old districts, which he did not think was righi. He had opposed the message of his Honor being considered at once, but now they had had plenty of time, and he was quite in favor of the reply proposed by the hou member for Ashburton. The hon member for Lincoln (Mr J. N. Tosswill) had spoken of what obtained in England in the matter of education, but he must recollect the circumstances were' different.

Mr J. N. Tosswill —l referred to Englishspeaking people throughout the entire world, Mr W. B, Tosswill would point out that the hon member was wrong, as the case was different in Scotland. Now the hon member said that his Honor’s message should not be adopted because it proposed to place the burden entirely on land ; that, of course, was not fair, because they should see that the taxation was equally distributed. His idea was that they would have to make direct taxation for education, and then he would like to see it divided between property and people. Before sitting down, he must again protest against the supposition of the hon member for Lincoln (Mr J. N, Tosswill) that the circumstances here and in England were identical. Dr Turnbull said the hon members South of the Rangitata were partial judges of anything connected with the North, What had been the fact ? Why the retrenchment had all been made in those things where the south had to contribute one-half. The public buildings which were urgently called for, the Museum, the College, all these had been voted against by the members for the South. Everything in which the members for the North had been concerned had been attempted to be burked by the for the South, who had stood up on every occasion, and voted with the Government in burking education. And yet now it was said that the Northern members ought to support the present Government, because they had been deserted by the late Government. But he asserted most confidently that the greater part of the members knew there would be a crisis on the Municipal question. They knew that the matter had been refused once, and the Government certainly could not have remained after the way in which a large question involving the health of the largest constituency in the province had been treated. [Hear, hear.] No Government could have slopped on those benches if this was the case. But he contended that the policy of the present Government was economy and repudiation, [Hear, hear.] He congratulated the member for Mount Cook on the healthy speech which he had made on behalf of the Government, but he was sorry to say that that speech was founded on illusions and not on fact. [Cheers.]

The Provincial Secretary said that the speech of the hon member for Christchurch was full of inaccuracies. He said that the House knew that the late Government were going to resign, but he said that no one beyond those forming that Government knew anything of it. Then the hon gentleman said that the Government had bought the southern members, but he would tell the hon members for Christchurch and Heathcote that the Government when they came into office struck off thousands from southern votes placed on the estimates by the late Government, They could not understand what the hon members meant, one-half said that they could not lead the House, while the other half said that they had a subservient majority. What were the Government to do in this case? What could they do 7 [An hon member: “ Resign.”"] Well, why did not some hon member move a vote of want of confidence in the Government. Time after time, the late Provincial Solicitor had challenged the gentlemen opposite to move a vote of want of confidence, but they had not done so. Now, as regarded what had fallen from the hon member for Selwyn : that hon gentleman had said that, because he (Mr Maskell) held private opinions of a particular character, that he was an opponent of the Bill, and therefore it should be rejected. Now the Bill had no reference to denominationalism, which was his ground of contention two years ago. The hon member for Selwyn had said that they should respect public opinion, but were they to take the expression of the public meeting held on the previous evening as an expression of the public opinion of Canterbury. He said no; it was simply the expression of opinion of one particular class in Christchurch, and if any one taking an opposite view had gone to that meeting he would not have been heard. —[Oh, oh] —as there was no fair play at such meetings as those. He said this because they found that that the promoters of this meeting did not state facts. He found that the hon member for Papanui was reported to have said : “ He again repeated what he had said elsewhere, that he could see no reason why the buildings for education should not have been as easily provided for as roads, bridges, wharves, &c. [Hear, hear.] He contended that none of these were in any way to compare in importance with education, and if they went on with very fine roads, bridges, &c, and yet neglected education, they would be looked upon as having lived in the dark ages. On the Appropriation Act, which would be passed next day, there was over £10),000 for public works, while there was not anything for the building of schools. [Cheers.] For that reason, when he found it, he had resigned his office as Provincial Solicitor in order to attempt to stop it.” Now he must have known this was not the fact. [Mr Williams— “ I did not say so.”] Well he thought that they could not accept this as an indication of public feeling or opinion. [Hear, hear.] The hon member for Selwyn had spoken of the respectable minority, and that their opinion should be respected, hut he would desire to point out that some two years ago there was a respectable minority opposed to the present Bill whose feelings were not considered. He hoped that they would in discussing this matter do so with calmness and temper, and without making any personal allusions about being led by the Government, or voting from some personal me tive. Time after time the cry had been raised against him (Mr Maskell) that he was a foe to this Education Ordinance, and this cry, he was sorry to say, had been started by a gentleman whose position, to say the least of it, should have prevented him doing such a thing. He emphatically denied such a thing. The present Ordinance contained no reference whatever to denominational education, which was the ground -taken up by him (Mr Maskell) on a former occasion. He did trust that the House would not allow feeling to get the

better of their judgment in this case, but would discuss the whole question temperately and without imputation on hon members. The imputation he had alluded to was in effect to say that because he (Mr Maskell) held certain private opinions and religious convictions, he therefore should not be allowed to vote or speak on the Education question. This, he took it, was an absurd proposition, and not worthy consideration. He did hope that after the many emphatic denials he 11 ad given to it, that it would not be repeated. [Hear, hear.] Mr Wynn Williams desired to say that he had not read the report of his speech re ferred to by the hon member, but he might say thal he could not have said no money was on the estimates, as he had quoted certain figures as the cost of school buildings, &c. Mr Brown said he was very much grieved at the exhibition of temper which had taken place. He would now move—“ That the chairman leave the chair.” If they now proceeded to a decision on the message, and came to consider the amendments, there would not be a member who would be prepared to consider them. It was impossible for them to consider the amendments or the message, as they dealt with such a large number of abstract questions, which it was impossible to consider. If thechairman now left the chair they could go into committee on the amendments, and have them taken on division one after the other, when they might draw up a reply to his Honor's message. The reply drawn up by the Government now placed himself and other hon members in a false position, inasmuch as it made them vote against or for the amendments as a whole, while there were many with which they agreed or disagreed. The motion for reporting progress was declared to be negatived on the voices. Mr Brown called for a division, whick took place as follows : Ayes 13 Noes 21 Majority against reporting progress 8 The following is the division list Ayes, 13—Messrs Williams, Brown, Jollie, J. N. Tosswill, Joynt, W. B. Tosswill, J. S. Turnbull, I. Wilson, Fisher, Montgomery, Higgins, W. White, and Dixon. Noes 21—Messrs Tancred, Andrews, Buchanan, Jebson, Harper, Turnbull, R, Peacock, Potts, Bluett, J. C. Wilson, Parker, Walker, Rayner, Teschemaker, Knight, Buckley, Gray, Maskell, Pilliett, Westenra, and Hay. Mr Brown said as the House had declined to consider this matter, he would much rather walk out of the House than be placed in a false position by voting for or against the reply framed by the hon member for Ashburton. The Speaker thought the best way to do would be to go into committee, on the amend • ments, deferring the consideration of his Honor’s message until after the amendments to which objection had been taken were considered. Mr Montgomery said that the Provincial Secretary had stated that large grants had been indicated to be placed on the estimates for the South. He desired to say that no amounts for public works South of the Rangitata had been considered by the late Government. As the hon gentleman had given his views on public meetings he might say that he, thought a public meeting, announced by advertisement, and where resolutions temperately worded were carried unanimously, should have weight. The hon gentleman, at a meeting some twelve months back, attached great Jweight to a public meeting because he happened to be a speaker there, and the objects were in accordance with his views. Therefore, the hon gentleman had no right to say one day that he did attach weight, and the next day that he did not, to such meetings. The hon gentleman said he hoped the House would discuss the matter calmly and temperately, but he would desire to point out that, when the hon member for Rangiora proposed to go into committee on these matters, the Government resisted it. Was this discussing the matter calmly and temperately? He thought not. What he considered was the proper course, was to adopt the suggestion of the hon member for Rangiora, and to take the amendments seriatim in committee. He hoped this course would be adopted, as it was the only way to get over the difficulty of adopting a resolution which said that they had considered the amendments, when they had not done anything of the kind.

Mr Jebson dissented from the remarks of the hon member for Heathcote as to the influence to be exercised by public meetings. If his ideas were to be considered, then the sooner they adopted the position wished to be set up the better, they had better legislate under their shadow. He protested against this most strongly. They were told by his Honor that “ in so far as the law fails to express the popular will, the Legislature and not the Board is to blame for any want of success in the system.” But he (Mr Jebson) could not at all accept the idea that a meeting of some 300 people congregated together in one spot represented the public opinion of some 70,000 people. He thought that they should defer the consideration of the message until they had considered the amendments, and then they could frame a joint reply or separate replies to both message and amendments. He would move therefore that the House proceed to the consideration of the amendments. Mr Brown pointed out that this was exactly what he had proposed. Mr Knight wished to know whether they could go back to No 1 if No 2 were disposed of« Mr Webb said that he apprehended they could do so. The Secretary for Public Works said the Government would not object to report progress and go on with the amendments, after which the consideration of the message might be proceeded with. The Speaker thought that by considering the amendments first they would be taking the most convenient course, because if they made the very smallest amendment in +he Bill they could not send the reply as proposed. It would be competent to proceed with the amendments without reporting progress. Mr Jebson moved—“ That the further consideration of the message now before the committee be deferred until the amendments sent dow n by his Honor the Superintendent be considered” The motion was agreed to, and the committee proceeded to consider the amendments proposed by his Honor in the Bill. The first amendment was put as follows: — “ Section 2—Page 2, line 3, strike out all words after Ordinance to end of section.” On the question being put—“ That the words proposed to be omitted, stand as part of the clause.”

The committee divided with the following result : Ayes 21 Noes 11 The first amendment was therefore negatived. After the adjournment the amendments were put as far as new section to follow section 31, reading as follows: —“ 35. There shall be for such district a school fund to which shall be carried all moneys paid to the district school committee under any Ordinance of the Superintendent and Provincial Council and all moneys in any manner whatever received by the district school committee and any deficiency shall be raised by rate as hereinafter provided. 36. Any sum required to meet any deficiency in the school fund whether for satisfying past or future liabilities shall be raised by an annual rate to be levied, by the Superintendent upon the amount of the annual value of the property within the district as stated in the ratepayers’ roll or rolls of the municipality or road district or districts for the time being in force which are or shall be included either wholly or in part within the boundaries of such educational district to be paid by the persona liable to pay rates in respect to such property for municipal or Road Board purposes provided that such rates shall not in the aggregate exceed in any one year one shilling in the pound of the amount of such annual value. 37. The said rates shall be paid to the Superintendent or to such person or persons as he shall appoint and if the amount of such rate or any part thereof shall not be paid as aforesaid within the time prescribed the same shall be recovered as a debt at the suit of the Superintendent Provided always that it shall be lawful for the Superintendent to excuse from the payment of such rate any person whom he may deem unable through poverty to pay the same The amount of such rate when collected or recovered as aforesaid shall be paid to the chairman of the district school commitee.” On the new sections 35, 36, and 37, Mr Montgomery said that he felt that it would be far fairer to put the rate upon property, as that would bring the rating to a fair and equitable basis. He would like to hear the hon members opposed to these clauses give their reasons for so doing, not only merely voting against them, Mr DIXON said this was a very unpleasant matter, and his Honor had met a great difficulty very nicely. Had these suggestions been before the House when the Bill was going through the House they would have received a very large amount of attention. He (Mr Dixon) hoped that they would put the Bill off to the next session. (“ No, no.”) Well, if hon members would not accept them then that was their fault, not his. He should strongly support the clauses as sent down by his Honor. The question that the amendments as proposed by his Honor, viz, the insertion of clauses 35, 36, and 37, was then put, and declared to be negatived. Mr Dixon called for a division, but did not repeat his call or the doors being locked. The remaining amendments were negatived on the voices up to section 40, line 3, “ for one-half” read i( five-sixths,” On this being put the ChairmAn declared it to be negatived. Mr Joynt demanded a division, which took place as follows : Ayes 11 Noes 21 The amendment was consequently negatived. The following is the division list: — Ayes, 11-—Messrs Higgins, J. N. Tosswill, Montgomery, Fisher, I. Wilson, Dixon, Brown, Williams, Andrews, Jollie, Joynt. Noes, 21 —Messrs Potts, W. B. Tosswill, Peacock, Buckley, Pilliett, Bluett, W. White, Harper, Teschemaker, Gray, R. Turnbull, Rayner, Jebson, Tancred, Maskell, Walker, Hay, Buchanan, Westenra, Knight, and J. C. Wilson. Pairs, For—J. S. Turnbull ; Against, G. B. Parker, The remaining amendments were then put and negatived on the voices. The consideration of the reply to his Honor’s message was then renewed. Mr Joynt said that, although they had discussed the message during two afternoons, they had not had time nor opportunity to give the message that full consideration which it deserved, nor did he think if they discussed it for two or three nights that they would be able to do so. A good deal had been said of the position taken up by his Honor the Superintendent in the matter, and it had also been pointed out that, though a majority of that House were in favor of the Government Bill, that they had strong expressions of disapprobation from other quarters. The hon member for the Heathcotc had pointed out that so far as they were able to ascertain the opinion of the people on the Bill—and in saying this he might say that he f did not take this as a full expression of public opinion—yet, so far as they could ascertain it to a certain limited extent, the opinion of the public was decidedly adverse to the Government Bill. They had had petitions numerously signed, and also the resolutions of a large public meeting, strongly condemning the Bill. Now hon members were apt to view public meetings very much as it happened to suit their views. If it were in favor of them they valued them; if otherwise, they pooh-poohed them. Now they had a very large and influential meeting, carrying resolutions very strongly opposed to the Bill, and also the opinions of his Honor the Superintendent very fully giving the reasons why he had arrived at the conclusions he had. Therefore, he said that the minority of that Council not only had the support of the Superintendent, but that their opinions had also found an echo in the public voice. Therefore, he asked the Government to take some notice of the [public voice, and advise his Honor the Superintendent not to make the Bill lnv- till next session. This would not involve any relinquishment of their position, and would be a yielding to the public voice. There were three distinct points in the Government Bill; first, the doing away with the Board of Education, and the substitution of a Minister of Education ; secondly, the increase of the contribution of the districts to school buildings ; and thirdly, the increase of the rate per child Now, he thought that the postponement of this Bill would not interfere with the first of these, as the money for Education had been voted by that house, and it was therefore not able to travel beyond this, and therefore the accusation or expectation of possible extravagance could not lie. As regarded the contribution of the districts for school buildings he need not tell the Government that this was not to come

into operation until next year, so that no serious result to the Government policy would ensue by postponing the Bill, As regarded the last item it would be advantageous to postpone this as it was a most important matter On the other hand it would be an act of deference to the opinion of the Superintendent, and would also show to the country that the Government would also defer to the popular voice, and not attempt to thrust on them an unpopular measure. He would therefore move the following reply as an amendment —“ The committee of the whole Council having taken into consideration your Honor’s Message No 10, inasmuch as they recognise the importance of the principles set forth in it, they recommend to the Government the advisability of withdrawing the Education Bill passed during this session until the next session of the Provincial Council, so as to give members the fullest opportunity of deliberating upon such principles.” This, he thought, would enable them to show deference to his Honor, and also that the Government would show the country that they were inclined to treat their request with at least some consideration. [Hear, hear.] Mr Dixon again urged the acceptance of his Honor’s amendments, and gave his support to the amendment of the hon member for Kaiapni (Mr Joynt). The Speaker desired to say that he should vote against the amendment, though opposed to the Bill, because the Council having decided by large majorities as to what it wanted, it would not be fair to ask the Council to retract all it had said on the question. He therefore suggested the withdrawal of the amendment of the hon member for Kaiapoi. Mr Walker said the hon member for Kaiapoi, in proposing the reply to his Honor, forgot the dual character of his Honor by mixing up a recommendation to the Government in it. Apart from this question, he did not think the amendment met the exigencies of the question. He recognised the anxiety of his Honor on this subject, but he also recognised that for two months the Council had been laboring with as much anxiety as his Honor. The position he took was, that having done this, they could not be asked to eat their own words. They had been told that this was the leaven which was to leaven the whole Council; but he thought that it was more like Berwick’s patent yeast, in being brought into notoriety or publicity. The hon member for Lincoln (Mr Tosswill) knew perhaps something about this. There was no doubt in England that the party who thought the satq.e as the hon member for Lincoln were working heartily in the direction of spreading education in England. He was pleased to find that the hon gentleman had excepted Scotland, where they had had a national system of education since the days of John Knox, and did not require to send about advertising mediums such as that read by the hon member for Lincoln. But at home they were not at all ready to swallow the principles of the National Education League. Therefore he might say that the people of New Zealand would not take those principles either. They might take the propositions in his Honor’s message as a sort of educational gauntlet thrown down by an enthusiast, simply shadowing out the state he would like to see the colony in, but believing in his own mind that it could not be carried out. He hoped the House would pass the reply proposed by him, and reject the one proposed by the hon member for Kaiapoi; Mr J. N. Tosswill said that the pamphlet referred to by the hon member for Ashburton as a sort of advertising medium for some quack medicine, was in fact the report of the Chief Superintendent of Education of the Province of Ontario, in the Dominion of Canada, which he thought was entitled to more respect than it received by the hon member. The object of the National Educational League at home was to obtain unsectarian and free education, which was simply the ideas shadowed forth by his Honor the Superintendent. That message contained certain fixed principles which were gradually spreading their way over the whole world, They were asked by the hon member for the Ashburton to reply—“ 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 ” —which was to say that they opposed the principles which oblained|in all Englishspeaking communities. As ha had, said before, the coming generation would say that the Government on these benches had so far from aiding and helping education, while with a majority at their back, rather repressed and kept back the cause of education. Unsectarian education was now gaining ground and it was in the interests of free and unsectarian education that he raised his voice in that House, Mr R. Turnbull said that to talk of free education was a mistake, because unless they took the money from the land fund they would have to rate the people themselves. Therefore it was absurd to talk of free education. Mr Jebson said the term “ repression of education” had been freely used in the debate that evening; but it seemed to him that there was no argument at all used to back up mere assertion. Now were they introducing any new principle or carrying on the system ? He said they were doing the latter. The real question was, should the machinery of education be administered by a Board or by a Minister. The funds voted during the present session of that Council amounted to £IOO,OOO, and he would desire to point out that a rate of Is in the £ would only return some £22,000. Let them take the free education, where was the balance to come from ? Some £30,000 had been voted for salaries, and some £70,000 for buildings; and he would ask if they had free education how would they have the balance. It had been said that the Ordinance impaired the cause of education, but he contended that there was not one word or one clause in the Ordinance just passed which would in any way impede the progress of the cause of education. The local committees had complained often that they could not get their business done with the Board, and therefore he asked what was the good of retaining a system when they had one better adapted to the wants of the province, ready to replace it. He did not share in the idea of popular influence so vividly depicted by the hon member for Kaiapoi. He (Mr Jebson) said that his Honor’s message and the amendments had been fairly considered, and the respectable minority had had every opportunity of ventilating their opinions quite as much as the greatest lover of popularity could desire.

Mr HIGGINS thought the speech of the hon member for Kaiapoi was a most temperate and convincing one, and that the Government might very easily have accepted the amendments proposed by the hon member, as it did not at all involve the giving up of any of the positions taken up by them. He would again urge upon the Government to state to the House the reasons why they could not accept the amendment. He thought the House was entitled to know. Mr FISHER would support the amendment of the hon member for Kaiapoi, and he was very glad to see that the action he had taken on this Bill was supported by the petition which had that evening been received from a large public meeting. If the amendment of the hon member for Kaiapoi were carried the difficulty would be solved, and the Council would still occupy the same position which it did. Mr Gray would support the original reply as proposed by the hon member for Ashburton. He agreed with the hon member for Seadown, that to give free education without making it compulsory would be a mistake. He should have liked to have seen his Honor couple the word compulsory with the idea of free education. Mr Montgomery said that he did not think the Council was treating this Urge and important measure with that consideration which it de-erved. He thought it would be a wise and a graceful act if the Government acceded to the amendment of his hon friend the member for Kaiapoi. By so doing they would avert consequences which might follow. He again asked them to pause and give time for further consideration. [Hear, hear.J Mr Joynt’s amendment was negatived on the voices.

The reply moved by the hon member for Ashburton (Mr Walker) was then put and agreed to on the voices. The reply was then reported to the House and adopted. Sir Obacbopt Wilson moved—" That the resolutions rejecting the amendments and the reply of the Council, be forwarded to his Honor the Superintendent forthwith, together with the Education Bill passed by the Council." The motion was agreed to. FENCING OBDINANCE. Mr Knight moved—" That the standing orders be suspended for the purpose of recommitting the Fencing Ordinance, 1875, and reading it a third time.” The motion was agreed to. The Bill was re-committed, reported to the House with amendments, read a third time, and passed. SHEEP OBDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE No 2, 1875. Mr GRAY moved That the standing orders be suspended for the purpose of recommitting and reading a third time the Canterbury Sheep Ordinance, Amendment Ordinance, No 2, 1875." The motion was agreed to. The House went into committee, when an addition was made to the 2nd and 13th clauses, the Bill reported to the House, read a third time, and passed. EXCHANGE OP BESEHVE3. The Secbetaby fob Public Work 8 moved —“ That the Council approves of the proposal to exchange certain parts of reserves Nos 631 and 632, in the Waimate road district, made for railway purposes, for a conveyance of the lands required out of rural section 3790, for the construction of the Southern railway from Waitaki to Timaru, and respectfully request his Honor the Superintendent to send a Bill down to the Council at its next session in order to give effect to this exchange.” The motion was agreed to. constitutional changes. Mr Jbbson moved—“ That in the opinion of this Council it is inexpedient and unconstitutional to entertain and carry into effect any proposal to abolish the provincial form of government in the province of Canterbury, until a majority of the people of the province have clearly and unmistakeably expressed a desire for such change.” He was afraid that the time was inopportune, as the patience of the House was well nigh exhausted. [Hear, hear.] But still he thought that this was a question of such importance, that they should not separate without expressing an opinion upon it. His resolution would, he desired to point out, only apply to Canterbury, and though nothing much had yet been said, there were signs of the times that when the time came the province of Canterbury would be included with the rest. Provincial institutions, he might say, were the birthright of the province, and he for one would not sell it for a mess of pottage. The people were, the only ones who had a right to give up their birthright, and it was offensive to any free people to take away that which was their right without first consulting them on it. He went further than this, and the closer they brought the governed and the governor together the better was the result of such a form of government. On the ground of expediency he said the provincial system brought government quite to their doors, and gave them the opportunity of having their wrongs redressed, and their wants attended to. It was no argument to say that another form of Government obtained in another colony or country, and he would ask if tbey in that colony were a degenerate portion of that race that they were asked to give up the privilege which they now possessed. Therefore he said that to abruptly sever the people from the forms of Government to which they were accustomed was an exercise of power which should not be exercised. On the second part of his resolution he said that the people themselves had not yet asked for this change, and it was quite opposed to all modern ideas of reform to have such a measure as this introduced by the Government. Let them 'ook at the number of years which it took to wrest from the Government the reforms made in the British Constitution. Then why should this province be placed in an exceptional position. It was all the more dangerous then, when here they attempted to do this, and that some forty or fifty gentlemen, without being aware of the circumstances of the case, should say that this or that was the proper thing foi some 40.000 or 50,000 people. It seemed to him that it was an attempt to abrogate the political rights of the people, and to place a bar in the way of progress. The arguments in favor of this might be summed up under three heads—first, that the provinces had done their work; secondly, that the provinces had been extravagant in spending their resources; and thirdly, that they were too poor to maintain themselves. Now, he asked, had the Province of Canterbury completed her work of colonisation? He •aid no, and that the Council was itill carrying on (be work; Again,

instead of being, as some of the provinces were, in a slate of poverty, the Province of Canterbury had supplemented the works of the General Government by about a million of money. Therefore what was there for the province to get? He asked while the province had resources of its own, and had work to do, was the province prepared to sit supinely by and be swallowed up without making a sign. Legislation had always been of a conservative character, to build up rather than than to destroy. It was supposed that by a single Government, and therefore reduced expenditure, that the province of Canterbury would have a large sum of money placed at its disposal, but he (Mr Jebson) contended that the reverse was the case. The land of Canterbury had been sold at £2 per acre, whilst the lands of other provinces had been sold at 3s per acre or even less. Now he desired to ask where would the Government of the country turn for revenue when the loan had been expended, and the result would be that the inhabitants of the province of Canterbury would be called upon, not only to contribute to the support of the Colonial Government, but also to the making of public works in those provinces which were bankrupt and unable at the present time to carry on out of their own resources. He ventured to predict that those parties who brought in these organic changes would be the very first to suffer when the re-action took place. He regarded the provinces of New Zealand as a series of corporations, non as federated states, and he contended that the present proposition would tend to destroy that binding together of the provinces in one common bond. Now, he might be told that tha verdict of the people would be rendered, but he said this, that he believed the verdict of the people would be that Cook’s Straits should be the great dividing line. He thought that the same state of things would go on as now, that the South would be drawn upon by the North to the last drop of their blood, and their liberties and independence of thought politically sacrificed. Mr Turnbull, though seconding the motion, thought that the hon member for Rakaia had attained his object by calling attention to the present state of things, and he would ask the hon member to withdraw it. The Provincial Secretary said that, while his own personal opinions were strongly in the direction of those expressed by the hon member, he thought that this was not the proper time to consider such a large question as this—one of the largest that could be brought before them. [Hear, hear.J If the hou member would withdraw the motion he would say no more, but unless he did so he (Mr Masked) would move the previous question—not that he was opposed to it, but he thought that this was not the time® Would the hon member for Rakaia say whether he would withdraw the motion or not ? Mr Jebson—l think the resolution is the property of the House ; if the House expresses a wish that I should withdraw the motion I will do so.

Mr Maskbll—Then I shall move the previous question. Mr Dixon said that he should vote for the resolution, as the people had not been consulted on this question. Mr W. B. Tosswill thought that ample time had been given to consider the question of the motion of the hon member for the Rakaia. He thought, however, that the motion should be amended if the previous question were not carried, that the matter should stand over till next general election. The time for the general election was so near now that he thought the people of New Zealand should be consulted. He was not going into the question of the abolition of the provinces; but he said this, that the people of New Zealand should be consulted upon so important a matter, and express their opinion. Mr Montgomery suggested that the motion should be withdrawn, as he felt that it was necessary that an appeal should be made to the people of the colony before such a sweeping alteration was made in the constitution of the colony. Mr Parker said he thought that for the Council to debate this subject was to bring down the Council to the level of a debating society. Road Boards, he might say, were quite as much entitled to discuss this motion as the Council. Sir Cracboft Wilson said that the motion seemed to imply that a proposition to sweep away provincial institutions in the Province of Canterbury had been made, but this was not the case. The proposition of the General Government was to do away with the provinces in the North Island, which from irapecuniosity were unable to carry on without recourse to the general fund. He asked the hon member to withdraw the motion. Mr Higgins hoped that the hon member for Rakaia would not withdraw the motion. As the Speaker had ruled that the motion as it appeared on the 'paper must be put, it followed that if they were driven to vote on this question, and it were lost, they would be saying that the people should not express their opinion upon it. He could not agree with the hon member for Mount Cook, that it was not proper to discuss this question, as he had always looked upon it that this would be discussed before the Council separated. If the matter were shelved it would have a very injurious impression upon the high assembly before which the question would have to come; as it would seem to say—" Do as you like, we don’t care a farthing,” The President of the Executive had said that it did not apply to Canterbury, but he would desire to point out that the general expression of opinion in the North Island was, that the provinces in the South should be included. Therefore, they should be prepared. Mr Turnbull would ask the*hon member for Rakaia to withdraw the motion, and bring it down in another shape, as it was absurd to say that it was unconstitutional to make the change proposed. Mr Brown thought it was peculiarly inopportune to bring this motion forward now, and particularly that evening. It was quite true that no attempt had been made to abolish provincial institutions in the South Island. >ut he would des’re to point cut that the argument in the North was that there could not be two forms of government in the colony. The House was asked to say that the people should be consulted—that was that members should go to their constituents, but he did not believe that one-tenth of the people of Canterbury cared whether provincial institutions were abolished or not, Mr Gray coincided with the hon member for Rangiora (Mr Brown) that there was but little chance of Canterbury being swept away. He hoped, however, that the Provincial Secretary would withdraw his motion and allow the amendment to be proposed by the member for Biocarton to be carried.

Mr Jisbson wished to pointoul tli.it a great and organic change had been brought on by the members of the Assembly without the slightest intimation of them, being given to the province. While it was perfectly right to say that it had not been proposed to sweep away Canterbury, would the honorable members in that House say that in another place they would oppose as a body the sweeping away of the province of Canterbury. [Mr Parker —“No.”J pie (Mr Jebson) was quite prepared to have the resolution altered or amended in any way, so long as it was so shaped as to give the people an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon it. He would however ask leave to withdraw the motion. The Provincial Secretary said under these circumstances he would withdraw the previous question.

The original motion and previous question were then withdrawn.