GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 349, 26 July 1875, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

[By Telegraph.] {From a correspondent of the Press') Friday, July 23. reply to the address.

The debate on the reply to the Address was continued by Sir George Grey, who, on rising, was loudly cheered. He said it was with a sense of great responsibility that he proceeded to address the House, for a more momentous period than the present in the history of (he country never existed. There were matters in the address which demanded most serious consideration, because they affected the welfare of the whole of New Zealand [hear, hear], and demanded earnest consideration before any other measures were brought before the House—before they started on the momentous course upon which they were about to enter, He gathered from the in-

timation of the intention to pass a new constitution and alter the representation, that he had a right in assuming that the Government did not intend to press the constitutional changes to an issue this session. If Government answered he would know how to proceed. Sir Donald McLean— That is not the intention of the Government. Sir George Grey— Then the address is an incomprehensive document, which no statesman can understand. He would point out why the Government, by announcing an alteration in the representation, admits that it did not represent the people [Opposition cheers] —that a large number of persons now have no votes who ought to enjoy them—that the electoral districts did not fairly represent the inhabitants; yet how was it possible for Ministers with a House so constituted to force upon the people a constitution upon which the people never were consulted. A more monstrous proposition was never made. It was true that the inhabitants were not fairly represented in the House; that changes in the qualifications of electors should be made; that electoral districts ought to be more fairly arranged, so that there should be no pocket boroughs with three members for some—[Loud Opposition cheers] —and no members to others. These were logical conclusions to be,drawn from Government themselves. What was the result of that unfair representation on the Government benches? The member for Timaru told them the other day that it was impossible for the House to get a better Government. [Cries of “No.”J Mr Ft afford— That can more thoroughly express my views and opinions, Sir George Grey —The hou member now tells us that the great object of representative institutions in New Zealand is to return a Government to express his views. [Loud Opposition cheers.] Is that what we have come to ? Is that the reward of years of toil and struggles ? For his own part, he said, the gentlemen who occupied the Treasury benches, did not in any way truly represent the inhabitants. Take the Premier; he was placed in the Upper House by the nomination of the Ministry, of which he was now the head. It was done to serve a purpose, and such changes were taking place that it was difficult to foretell what would be the next move. Perhaps they might have the member for Timaru next adorning the Ministry, and he confessed he would be glad to see such a change. But to return to the Premier. Who would pretend that a person so nominated could possibly represent the people. Not being required to be a wealthy man, as in the Upper House at home; not being required to give a pledge that he would endeavor to hand down to posterity the institutions on the sustenance of which depended the welfare of the country, nor being one whom they could impeach, but who could escape by resignation —who could retire and receive a pension—such a Premier no more represented the inhabitants than the Minister now in London, and could have no permanent interest in the country. Then there was the member for Taranaki, whom he admitted to be a most able Minister and gallant man, for whom he had a great regard, he in no way represented the colony, for if a trifling constituency had not three members he would not be in the House. Another matter shocked him. When he looked at the member for Kaiapoi, what did he see ; for weeks he was wavering whether he would be a lord or take a seat in the Commons. He was actually called to execute the duties of a Minister of the Crown when he was not a representative of the people in any sense whatever. It was wrong that a minister should be nominated here who was in London, or heaven knows where. The Upper House in no way represented the people. It was imposed on the people without their being in any way consulted, and the House of Representatives, as now constituted, in no way represented the people. The Governor was nominated by his party in England, for reasons which be would show presently. At the present moment, one wealthy establishment in the colony could have any person it chose nominated Governor, to support their interests. Seeing how the Government was constituted, it was not the time to impose a constitution on the people which might ultimately be abhorrent to them. A parliament just about to expire, with Ministers not truly representing the people, would be false to their trust to the people and their welfare, if at the present moment it forced a constitution upon them. To view the matter in another way, if the Parliament proceeded to impose a constitution, such constitution being imposed on New Zealand by an exterior body—the Parliament of Great Britain—without the people being consulted, the people had no fair, proper, or just chance of their rights being attended to. If they attempted to force a constitution, it would be one of the wickedest attempts ever made to rob the people of their rights and liberties. Every avenue of justice was being barred against them. They were toofarfrornthe Imperial Parliament, and the enemies of this country, for so he must call them, had been beforehand and barred access to that tribunal. It must be admitted that the British Parliament had already virtually imposed a constitution upon us. If our prayer was to be decided by them, however benevolent or beneficent, however good their intentions, that Parliament knew so little of our affairs, and less of our interests, that they were completely in the hands of the Government of the day, who were influenced by the Colonial Office, and there at the present moment had a Minister been sent to represent the colony who would use his influence in a certain direction. Then they had an ex-Goveruor connected with a certain monetary establishment, and the whole of that interest, with two millions of the colonists’ money, was used against the people of New Zealand. All would be right if that power was justly used, and he admitted that in times in the past the bank had done the greatest possible service to the colony, and (he use of such power might be repugnant to the great mass of the people interested in that establishment; but to carry out their views they considered they would have better security if the Middle Island funds became colonial property. He was firmly convinced that the power that establishment used was to the detriment of the colony’s interest. The Governor had committed himself to this line of policy from which hecouldnot recede, and his assent had been given to the measures as soon as submitted. He suggested that the Assembly should pass an Act to delegate to the people the duty of choosing under what constitution they should be governed. Let the new basis of representation be fixed, and let ministers lay before the country their proposals, and whatever the country chose, he and his party would assist to carry out the people’s expressed wishes

If they would not accept his suggestion, and would persist, they would find there were men who would not submit to it, and he firmly believed such would be the. case For himself, he would never submit to being obliged to bow to the will of a majority attached to a Government by ties which could not be understood—nor to such majority imposing something repugnant to many of their best feelings, and not allowing people the choice of their future destiny. In the first place, it was opposed to the constitutional laws, and in the second to the statute law. Any man reading the speeches of the most eminent British statesmen finds constitutional maxims from which there is no departure ; that when one legislature is created which has powers given it to provide for the peace, order, and good government of the country, those powers cannot be taken away from the people until the Legislature from which the powers were derived first gives its consent. In Canada the other day that maxim was most rigidly enforced, A most liberal interpretation had always been given to it, and no attempt made to restrict it within narrow limits. With regard to the statute aw, the Government had no power. Opinions of lawyers had been unhesitatingly given to that effect. He appealed to the member for Timaru in the statement he was about to make, that the Act under which the Government proposed to proceed could not be wrested to the purposes to which it was to be applied. If so applied Parliament had been deceived into passing it. Parliament gave its full consent to the Act under which it was now proposed to abolish the provinces; but it was obtained by Ministers on the distinct statement that they had only a certain object in view, It was sent home, not through the Governor, who was on a tour in the colony, but through a Minister to the Secretary of State, in order to hurry it through Parliament at once. The statement then made was that the object was to clear up a doubt arising from an antecedent Act. Ministers “proposed to take powers to establish such forms of government in the existing provinces and to make such dispositions of the revenue as they may consider necessary from time to time, regard being had to the provincial divisions or forms of government hitherto subsisting.” On that representation the Act was hurried through Parliament, no proper coni {derations being given to it. He declared solemnly, from his own acquaintance of the way in which these matters were attended to, that had the actual truth been told Parliament, that it was intended to use the Act to take from the people of New Zealand the representative institutions which they now enjoy, it would have taken weeks of anxious consideration on the part of the members of the Imperial Parliament before the consent of the British Legislature was obtained to such an Act. It was entitled An Act to Abolish any Province in New Zealand, but the words “ abolition of the provinces” had no relation to representative institutions. The 'Jhief Justice laid that down in most complete and ample terms. He pointed out that the Act which give representative institutions to New Zealand created five provinces, the boundaries of which should be fixed by the Governor by proclamation. The “ abolition of the provinces ” was an alteration of those boundaries. He instanced as an example Westland, which was taken from Canterbury, an old province. Canterbury was abolished, and a new one created. That abolition was very different from what wf c now proposed. Not only was that the case, but no rule of law was more strictly adhered to than this, where great and magnificent privileges had been given to any people in express specific terms, no general words can deprive the people of those rights. (Opposition cheers,) Only something equally as specific as those conferring the lights can take them away. Sir George Grey concluded as follows-—“ I tell this House we cannot in point of law and justice do what Government proposes. The member for Timaru used the word revolutionary, for which I thank him. Revolution contemplates a lawless act. I say this act is more than lawless, more than revolution. It is a coup d'etat by the party in power, who seek to establish themselves for ever the representatives of the people. I can only say for my part, as Superintendent of Auckland, I will never surrender the rights which belong to me by law. Let the House try to deprive me of my rights, so long as courts of justice exist in the land, so long as there is a Judicial Committee in Great Britain, I will appeal to them. You will gain nothing by hurrying. In the end you will be defeated. Press it on and you will bring about a revolution you little think of. All posterity will raise their shouts behind me. I shall have a following in which I shall glory in times to come. I appeal to those around me nob to commit themselves to an insane career — to the member for Timaru, whom I have never known sacrifice right or justice to expediency, to try and obtain for the people of New Zealand a fair, full, and just consideration of the constitution you propose to impose on them, before so imposing it. I appeal to the Native Minister, who it has been one of the hopes of ray life to see in that position, to give his countrymen time to fairly consider the math r; to the Treasurer, who has done service to his country, to whom dangers and difficulties have been as nothing; to the Minister for Public Works, to keep to the duties of his profession, in which he excels, and not to meddle with constitutions, about which he knows nothing; and to every Minister whom I desire to see successful, and to aid in the path of success. Why force me into a contest, when I am so clearly in the right, and they so clearly in the wrong. Again I appeal to those tribunes of the people—those real kings of men who by their own labor have raised themselves from the humblest conditions —not to kick away the ladder by which they have risen, and so prevent their children and children’s children from rising even higher. I tell them that they must and shall not do it. The people will insist on their not doing it. Although . my voice is only one, I tell you the people will so insist. I have put before you two pictures. It is for you to choose which to adopt. It is only a question of a few months’ delay. Delay is pregnant with consequences, because if that delay is not given, Ministers will be entering on a course out of which they see no end. You have no mercenaries, such as the Emperor of France had to carry his cowv dc etat; you have not the means nor the power to carry one out, Speaking on my own behalf, I tell you I will resist you to the death if you try.” Sir Donald McLean dissented altogether from Sir George Grey’s assertion that the House neither represented the people, nor could frame a constitution, nor establish a new form of government; The Government

had resolved to extend those powers—["loud cheersj—to an extent the people never before possessed. [Renewed cheers.J The Government's object was to give them more and more freedom. That was the full determination of the Government—[Loud cheersj —well knowing that they were supported by law, by the evidence of facts coming under their notice, supported by the feelings of those outside as well as inside the house. [Cheers.J It was all very well to say make an appeal to the country. Had they not appealed to the people. [Cries of “ No,” and cheers ] The subject had been ventilated since 1858, and the feeling of the country from end to end was in favor of the abolition of the provinces. [“ No,” and cheers. 1 He assured Sir George Grey that it was the fixed determination of the Government that they would not swerve from it in the slightest degree, and he was certain they would succeed. He knew something of the feeling of the country. Anyone who travelled through the outlying districts and saw the centralising power of provincialism could not help seeing that the time had come when the centralism of provincialism should be abolished, and the people given greater freedom and greater powers of local self-government than they hitherto enjoyed. At present, the interior of the country, which was the backbone and sinew of the colony, was starving, and required to be settled by a system of local self-government. He would allude to the province of which Sir George Grey was Superintendent, and ask him what had been done there for the outlying districts. The greater part of the provincial revenue had been expended within the large centres of population. With regard to another remark of his honorable friend, he denied the possibility of the proposed change being contrary to the desire of the people; everywhere the people were paying increased attention to local affairs. They were there as the representatives of the people, and he held that they had a right to decide any measure which, after careful consideration, was deemed to be conducive to the welfare of the country at large, and they were determined to do so despite all opposition. Mr Stafford, .in replying to the first of Sir Grey’s statements that the Government represented his views, denied he was arrogant enough to suppose that the people of the colony would be content with such a condition. Sir George Grey knew as well as himself that no such assumption ever passed through his mind. He had defended himself legitimately with precedents for so doing—for the attitude he thought right to take during the present session towards the Government. As the House was now composed, he did not believe, under all circumstances, they could get together a set of gentlemen who would so faithfully give effect to his opinions and measures whieh he desired to see carried. At all events, this was a sufficient justification for the attitude he chose to take. Between him and Ministers on some questions there were as fundamental differences of opinion as between him and Sir George Grey which would justify him in opposing certain measures. Sir George Grey, in insisting positively that it was unlawful for the House to proceed in the direction in which Ministers proposed, made vague references to the opinions of individual statesmen. Amongst others, reference to what had lately taken place in Canada was made; but he had forgotten the recent significant instance of Jamaica, where the Imperial Government without consultation with the people took away representative government. Alluding to Sir George Grey’s assertion that the Upper House was imposed without consulting the people, he asked Sir George Grey if, when forcing his own conception upon the country in 1852, he consulted the people—when recommending the manner in which the Legislative Council should be created, whether he invited an expression of public opinion. In his own closet in a cottage here, once dignified by the name of Government House, he sat down, without assistance or advice, and in spite of the remonstrances of the Wellington Constitutional Association, framed a constitution, which he forced upon the people so autocratically. [Cheers.J And, as her Majesty’s representative, how did he give effect to it ? He imposed it on the people without consulting them, and, unwittingly, no doubt, himself gave the most deadly blow to provincialism. As he interpreted the Constitution Act, all local and isolated centres of population were to have the means of self-government, without dictation or interference from persons without. What did Sir George Grey do ? In his closet, with a set of parallel rulers and pencil, he parallelled the colony into six small fishing villages, in some instances with 700 inhabitants, men, women, and children, Hawkes’ Bay and Taranaki being totally ignored, for the latter formed no part of the recommendation sent home. Would the people of that province, despite all the dangers and sufferings they had undertaken, prefer being tied, as Sir George Grey proposed, to Auckland. In the face of all this he got up and declai ed that the House was not competent to give an opinion as to the form of the constitution so well or so wisely as he himself in his own closet thirty years ago. When the hon member had the administration of the Constitution Act no provision whatever had been made for districts which were entitled to government. Otago at that time was peopled by some 2800 inhabitants .yet to these 2800 did he surrender the great part of the South Island. Sir George was at that time deficient in knowledge of the geography of the country, being so absolutely without material information that districts were given false positions and false names. Very ingeniously Sir George Grey asserted that there was no freedom among the English speaking races without provincialism, but the onus proiandi remained with him and his followers to prove that this was the case. Were the inhabitants of Great Britain, and the great colonies in these seas having representative Government, slaves without birthright and freedom because they had not Provincial Governments and systems. [Cheers.] The hon gentleman was most illogical. Sir George Grey disclaimed saying any such thing. He was forced to divide the colony into provinces. The present Chief Justice gave an opinion to that effect.

Mr Stafford could only say with considerable experience of the affairs of the country, that he had never heard of such an opinion, nor what evoked it. He strongly reprobated Sir George Grey’s allusions to the Governor. Sir George Grey denied that he alluded to the Governor.

Mr Stafford affirmed that he said he believed there was a financial power in the country which could appoint the Governor. That was not a prop'. ■ "cmmi,. lb was in effect stating that the L'.-Msu Government, whom the hon gentleman would admit were constitutionally such, were accessible to influences of a foreign and mercenary character in the choice of a gentleman recommended to the Queen. Sir George Grey claimed that he had been misunderstood, he alluded to an exGovernor, now director of a bank. He was was a member of the present English ministry, when he formerly held office, and he must undoubtedly exercise a great influence with his former colleagues. Without insinuating corrupt intentions, such a person, largely interested in a monetary concern, must insensibly have his mind influenced by considerations of the prosperity of his establishment. He believed his power would largely influence the choice of officers chosen by the present Government, Mr Stafford characterised Sir George Grey’s argument re the House not having power to consider large questions proposed, as ridiculous and inconsistent. Alluding to the Ministerial memo re Westland, he said he was sure it was submitted to Sir George Grey, and when doing so he was sure he (Mr Stafford) strongly stated the object was to extend the power for the very reason Sir George Grey now urged for going to the Ini' perial Parliament: that (he circumstances of the large provinces were such that it was necessary that the Legislature should be able to substitute something else instead of provincial institutions, which then obtained. He asked Sir George Grey to wait a few days when the people will have an opportunity of expressing their views on the Government proposals. The public were looking out ardently for them. The provisions of the measures would be known by telegraph everywhere, and the public voice would soon manifest itself. Sir George Grey would better have understood public opinion if the telegraph had been to Kawau, In a few weeks he would be surprised at the declaration of the opinions of the people of the colony. The Government were taking a thoroughly constitutional course. He altogether denied that the Assembly was acting unconstitutionally. He refused at any time to be placed in the position of a delegate. He would act solely as his conscience and his judgment decided, and would rather perish for ever his chance of a seat than be placed in such a position. [Loud cheers ]

Mr Fitz Herbert reviewed the address of Sir D,McLean and Mr Stafford. Sir D.McLean had said, “ We have determined to pass the Bill,” and that bare declaration constituted his argument. He knew no better. Hewas very good in his own department, but very much wanting when he entered into general politics. With regard to Mr Stafford’s speech, the principal point was his reference to Jamaica. It was absurd to refer to Jamaica regarding constitutional rights. Had he ever been in Jamaica 7 Such an argument, into which their dark skinned brethren were dragged, was of a very different color to that brought by the member for Auckland West, He saw nothing in what Sir George had said to call forth the strictures from Mr Stafford. It was right that they should speak of a danger if they con. scientiously believed it to be ahead, and he was glad to see a disposition to give a free and honest expression of opinion—a change in the nature of their proceedings, which was owing to the advent of Sir George Grey, who had put pluck into them. They would not have dared to say a word had he not been there. The occupants of the Government benches had about as much to do with the government of New Zealand as he (Mr Fitzherbert). They had their master—the member for Timaru —making them do his work, and his position was very discreditable. The member for Timaru was the Government of New Zealand, He asserted that the Bill re Westland was of the smallest technical nature re that province. Hon C. C. Bowen remarked that Mr Fitzherbert’s speech demonstrated that Sir George Grey was the leader of the Opposition, but he was astonished to hear such language as that members were afraid to speak till Sir George Grey was in the House. He was also astonished to hear the Superintendent of Auckland say he defied the House, and no matter what it chose, that he would snap his fingers at it. There Sir George Grey took up an unconstitutional position. The Government had taken a constitutional course, and was prepared to bring down measures and lay them on the table when the House was prepared to listen to their explanations, and they were prepared to stand or fall by the measures. [Cheers.] While admitting that it was not altogether waste time to discuss the question now, because now there was evidence that there would be an able Opposition, which the Government was glad to see, much further discussion would only be provocative of delay. The explanation of the member for Timaru was as unexpected by the Government as by the gentlemen opposite; but the hon gentleman, as an old tactician, knew well that there were other ways of defeating a Government than by firing on the main street, and if there was an attempt to traverse the main issue he would go into the lobby with the Government on other measures. This was as frank a statement as was ever made to the House. The member for Auckland West had been good enough to remark on his (Mr Bowen’s) non-representa-tive character. He represented no small constituency. The constituency which elected him did so with a knowledge that he was a member of the Government, and he defied any member to say he was not a representative. Such an accusation showed weakness and an admission of a false position. Mr Rolleston could not discover anything in the address to raise objection to, or that it pledged members to any particular course in adopting it. He thought on one subject it might with more propriety be said that instead of Mr Thomas Russell representing the colonial Government, the Government was represented by Mr Russell. He declined to think the debate unnecessary. If new light was thrown upon matters by the papers laid upon the table since the adjournment, they were only the precursor of farther light, and it would not be unprofitable to adjourn still further. He was glad to see the anomalous position of the late Premier, who carried on business without consultation with his colleagues, changed, but he would have been glad to have heard something from Ministers in explanation of that anomalous position, The country could not but feel that the conflict between Sir Julius Vogel and the Crown agents was most detrimental to the interests of the country at large, and there must be a further feeling, very wide spread, that the

country has not been governed by those who were really responsible to them. He would have been glad to have heard that the technical change of the Ministry involved a change of policy. He was pained by what Mr Stafford said, and it was impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Ministry was guided by a member who would not take a seat in the cabinet. There were interests of greater importance than the one which had been made the chief subject of debate. Coming from the isolated district which Sir Donald McLean did, he was no judge of the present question. He (thespeaker) came from the second province in (he colony, and from his experience, that province feared that under that worst form of centralism which it was proposed to put in the place of provincial institutions, the groat centres of population would be neglected for the outlying districts. He deprecated the system which he saw creeping up of gentlemen forming a Ministry, with the views of the chief of which they had previously been at variance. He expressly declined to associate himself with that part of the address which expresserl satisfaction with the financial condition of the colony, Mr Wakefield urged the re-adjustment of the incidence of taxation, which was of more importance than the abolition of provincialism, -which he was prepared to support. The reply to the address was then carried on the voices. Sir Donald McLean informed the House that on Tuesday he would be able to name the day upon which the financial statement and the Government measures would be brought down.