GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 359, 6 August 1875, Page 4

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. (j From a correspondent of the Press.) Thursday, August 5. QUESTIONS. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30. (1) Mr Buckland asked whether it was the intention of the Government to extend during the present financial year the telegraph line from Hikuhaia to Mackaytown. (2) Mr Rolleston asked whether the report of the Registrar of Friendly Societies, provided for by the 52nd section of the Friendly Societies Act, 1867, would be laid on the table. ~ , (8) Mr W. Kelly asked if the block of confiscated land at Gisborne, out of the proceeds of the sale of which the Government proposed to construct bridges and other public works, had been sold, or offered for ■ale; if not, when such sale was likely to take place. (4), Mr Rolleston asked what action the Government had taken or proposed to take in reference to the resolutions of the Senate of the New Zealand University of the 3rd of March, 1875,J0n the subject of the lands reserved or promised to be reserved in the provinces of Auckland and Taranaki, under The University Endowment Act, 1868, or other Act as endowments for a Colonial University, the proceeds of which endowments should now, in terms of the 30th section of The New Zealand University Act, 1874, be invested, and “ be dealt with for promoting higher education in the respective provinces in which ■uch reserves are situate, in such manner as the General Assembly may from time to time determine.” In answer to the questions, the Government said—

1. In the course of a week, after consulting with Mr Sheath, the superintendent of constructed telegraphs in the North Island, they woffid be able to state their intentions in reference to extending the telegraph from Hikuhaia to Mackaytown. 2. The report of the Registrar of Friendly Societies was being prepared, and would be presented shortly. 3. As soon as the surveys of the block of the confiscated land at Gisborne were completed they would be offered for sale. 4. With regard to the reserve at Taranaki, the native difficulties had prevented a defi nition of ihe boundaries. On the reserve ai Waikato, the richest reserve of all, valuablt coal deposits had been found, and it waconsidered unadvisable k to take advantage o. it for direct revenue until the Auckland and Mercer railway was completed. On the reserve at Kaglan coal and iron indications had been found. The best steps would be taken to secure the revenues from the reserves, and those revenues would be dsvoted to the purposes of higher education,

PIEST READING, The Bill to incorporate the Campbelltown Athenseum was read a first time. MANGERE BRIDGE. In moving that it be an instruction to the public accounts committee ‘to inquire into the circumstances under which the cost of the Mangere bridge was debited against the vote for roads and works north of Auckland, Mr Sheehan said, in reference to the hon E. Richardson’s statement on the previous occasion, that the cost of the bridge was so charged and done with the concurrence of the Auckland Provincial Executive, that though a member of it, he himself knew nothing about it, and read telegrams from Messrs Gillies, Lusk, and Hurst, denying that there had ever been such a proposal. Hon E. Richardson while expressing his desire for .the fullest enquiry, repeated his assertion. NATIVE COMMITTEE. Hon C. C. Bowen and George McLean were added to the native affairs committee. OCEAN BEACH RAILWAY. Papers relating to the Ocean Beach and Dunedin Railway were ordered to be printed. MARRIAGE BILL. The Marriage Act Amendment Bill was read a first time. OPINION BE ABOLITION. Sir George Grey moved for a return giving the date on which the Governor was supplied with a copy of the Chief Justice’s opinion as to the power of the Assembly to abolish the provinces and representative., institutions therein; also that an address be presented to his Excellency requesting that he will cause to be laid on the table copies of all despatches which the Governor may have addressed to the Secretary of State in reference to that opinion. Hon C. 0. Bowen replied that the Chief Justice gave no opinion whatever. No doubt the hon member meant the late AttorneyGeneral. [Sir G. Grey— Hear, hear.j The Government would at once say no opinion of the late Attorney-General had been laid before the Governor, and if it had been the Government would certainly have declined to lay on the table either the date or occasion of the communications between the Governor and his Excellency’s advisers. Sir George Grey, from his own experience, would see the impropriety there would be in Ministers laying on the table a statement of the times and occasions of each communication, with the Governor. With regard to the second part of the motion, the Government had already laid on the table despatches which were considered by his Excellency to be of interest and of importance. If the member for Auckland West would name any particular despatch he wished, Ministers would take his Excellency’s commands on the matter. Mr Rolleston suggested the alteration of the second part of the motion, so as to read for all despatches from the Governor relating to the abolition of the provinces. Sir George Grey said his request was not unusual. With regard to the constitutional question, which he wished arrived at, his mind was entirely satisfied. He had elicited the information which he desired to get, that the Governor’s attention had not been directed to the late Attorney General’s opinion, when asked to put his name to the message covering the Abolition of the Provinces Bill. Hon 0, 0. Bowen asked for leave to read the correspondence between himself and the Chief Justice in reference to a remark in the previous debate by Sir G. Grey, who said that Mr Prendergast’s opinion on the Act of 1868, and the powers of the Assembly under it to abolish the provinces, was different from the one previously given by him. Sir G. Grey —l never said the Chief Justice had given a different opinion. Another member said so. Mr Prendergast’s opinions were in perfect conformity one with the other. Hon C. 0. Bowen continued—ln consequence of the member for Auckland West’s remarks a search had been made in the Government offices for a different opinion by Mr Prendergast to that brought down by the Government, but none was found recorded. He then wrote on August 2nd to Chief-Justice Prendergast, asking him to be good enough to inform them whether he ever had given a different opinion to that dated December Ist, 1874, and if so whether or not it was given before or after the passing of the 31 and 82 Victoria. To that letter the Chief-Justice replied that he was not conscious of having either expressed while Attorney-General any opinion on the 31 and 32 Victoria, other than that it gave the Assembly of New Zealand power to abolish any or all the provinces, and added that he felt sure that Sir George Grey must have been misinformed on the subject. Sir G. Grey, on rising to make a personal statement, repeated his previous asserlion ; but he still affirmed, and felt sure the Chief Justice would unhesitatingly admit, that prior to the passing of the Imperial Act of 1868 Mr Prendergast in his then capacity of Attorney-General explained that the abolition of the provinces meant that a province ceased to exist when its boundaries were altered. Mr Stafford said while Hansard corroborated what Sir George Grey said, it was unfortunate that he had allowed an impression to go throughout the colony that be had distinctly said that the previous opinion of the Attorney General was quite different to the one Ministers laid on the table. He referred to Mr Prendergast’s action in reference to the draft Bill of 1868, which the Imperial Government sent to the colony, as corroborating his statement, that he had never in any manner given an opinion other than that the Legislature had full power to abolish all the provinces in the colony. Mr Stafford was about to answer Sir G. Grey’s observations in a previous debate, re the hurried manner in which the Bill of 1867 was passed through the Imperial Parliament, when the Speaker interrupted, saying that the matter was not debateable now. Mr Stafford promised to refer to it again. The motion was then carried. DECEASED WIFE’S SISTER BILL. Mr steward made a short speech, recapitulating the old arguments, in moving the second reading of the Marriage with a Deceased Wife’s Sister Bill, Mr Pykb made a violent speech against it, and said it was attempting to legalise incest in the second degree. [“Oh”] It was an attempt to legislate for a minority. The law was repugnant to the feelings of the majority. Why not allow a woman to marry her brother-in-law, or a man to marry his grandmother, Mr McGillivray moved that the Bill be read that day six months.

On a division, the votes were— Ayes 29 Noes 25 Noes, 25—Messrs Bluett, Bowen, Bunny, Curtis, Dignan, Ingles, Johnston (teller), Katene, Macandrew, McGillivray, Mervin, Munro, O’Neill, O’Rorke, Parker, G. B. Pearce, Pyke, Beeves (teller), Reynolds, Stafford, Tairoa, Thomson, Ward, White, Williams. Ayes, 29—Messrs Andrew, Atkinson, Ballance, Brandon, Bryce, Carrington, Creighton, Cuthbertson, Gibbs, T. Kelly (teller), Luckie, May, M’Glashan, McLean, G. McLean, Montgomery, Murray, Parker, 0. Reid, Richardson, Shepherd, Steward (teller). Swanson, Takaraoana, Yon der Heyde, Wales. Webb, Nelson, Wood. The second reading was therefore carried. ABOLITION BILL. The Treasurer intimated that the Government would take the second reading of the Abolition Bill at 7.30 to morrow night, and the other business on the order paper afterwards. LEAVE OF ABSENCE, Leave of absence was granted to Mr Bradshaw for ten days. STAMP DUTIES BILL, After going into committee of ways and means, to allow the Minister of Justice to introduce a Stamp Duties Bill, the House adjourned till to-morrow. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF’S REPORT. {From a correspondent of the Press.') [By Tblegkaph.] Mr Carruthers enters into a controversy about the relative advantage of the broad and narrow gauges, and makes the following remarks;—“ We have in Dunedin the Port Chalmers (narrow gauge), and in Canterbury, the Christchurch and Lyttelton (broad gauge) railways; examples so similar in many conditions, that the relative advantages of the two systems may be most instructively compared. Both lines connect the capitals of the province in which they are situated, with its sea port. They are both very short, the broad gauge being seven miles, and the narrow ten miles long. The receipts for 1873 on the broad gauge, were £44,426; for 1874-5, £32,592 on the narrow gauge. The difference in the receipts is due to the higher rates charged on the broad gauge, the traffic on the,two lines being nearly same. Both lines are well and substantially built with heavy rails and managed by able and experienced men for the respective Provincial Governments. Here the points of resemblance cease. The points of difference are that the broad gauge is nearly straight with a ruling gradient of 1 in 140. The narrow gauge is a succession of reversing curves of from 8 to 10 chains radius with a ruling gradient of 1 in 57. The narrow gauge sea terminal station is miserable and insufficient; that of the city terminus was, until quite lately, nearly as bad. On the broad gauge, both stations are roomy and convenient. On the whole, the facilities for working are immensely in favor of the broad gauge. The revenue returns, however, by no means show this advantage. One line is worked with low speed and light rolling stock ; the other, as a first-class (line, with high speed, heavy rolling stock, and luxurious carriages, the result being shown in the relative cost of working. In 1873 the working expenses of the broad gauge were 65.84 percent of the gross revenue, I am unable to use the later year for comparison, as the Christchurch and Lyttelton accounts are not now separated in the printed returns from those of other Canterbury lines. It is fair to assume, however, that no great chan b e in the cost of working has taken place in the interval, as the percentage for all the Canterbury lines was in 1873 74 per cent, in 1874-5 76 per cent, or rather, would have been, had not a reduction of rates been made which raised the actual ratio to 84 percent. The change in the whole being so slight probably there has been no great change in the Lyttelton section. We may, therefore, fairly compare the narrow gauge working for last year with the broad gauge for 1873. In the first place, the rates on broad gauge are much higher than on narrow gauge. * * * * By taking the traffic returns for the year, less the revenue which would have followed had the fates on the Christchurch line been reduced to the Dunedin standard, it can easily ho ooloulated. It amounts to £15,486, which would be sufficient to raise the working expenses to a little over the total receipts, as there would have been an actual loss on the working of £312, besides the whole interest on the cost of the line. The narrow gauge line, on the other hand, is being worked for 62 per cent of its receipts, and has paid a profit of 20 per cent on the average cost of the construction of railways in New Zealand. The broad gauge advocates are pleased with the rapid rate of travelling, and the smoothness with which the heavy carriages run on heavy rails, and wish, without counting the cost, to have all the New Zealand railways constructed and worked in the same manner as the Christchurch and Lyttelton line ; but if that line can only pay its working expenses by levying rates double those which are sufficient to allow a narrow gauge to pay very handsome profits, in what position would the other New Zealand railways be where the traffic is so much smaller, and where the rates could not be raised to the broad gauge standard. There could be only one result of such a policy, and that is the absolute ruin of the colony. If, however, it is the wish to adopt it, the narrow gauge can be worked at a speed of thirty to thirty-five miles an hour, quite as cheaply, or cheaper, than the broad. For higher speed the cost would probably be greater. Of course heavy engines and heavy stock would be required. To get the smooth running of a first-class line heavy rails and ballast are necessary, this means wider banks and cuttings. Easj curves and gradients are of course required for high speeds andwould have to be provided. In short the cost of construction would be not very much less than for a first-class broad guage line, or in difficult country, probably three times the cost of the present lines. If the system now adopted for working the narrow guage is adhered to, the railways of New Zealand will in a few years earn an income equal to the interest on their cost, even with she present scale of charges, which is considerably lower than that charged on the lines worked by the Provincial Governments of Canterbury and Otago, but if the thoughtless agitation for high speeds is g ven way to the Colony will have to pay out of taxation the whole interest on the public works loan, and a still larger sum in addition to meet the loss in working.”