GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 371, 20 August 1875, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

♦ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. [By Electric Telegraph.] (.From a correspondent of the Press.) Thursday, August 19. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m. THE ABOLITION DEBATE. Sir D, McLEAN gave notice that after today the abolition debate should take precedence of all other business, next Wednesday excepted, when separate business would be taken. The abolition debate was resumed by Mr Reeves, who felt impressed fully with the magnitude of the interests at stake. They were asked by the Government to pledge themselves to a measure which he considered to be one of hasty and inconsiderate legislation. In considering this question, one of the first considerations that should be taken into account was whether the measure was introduced after full and fair consideration, and whether in asking the House to follow their lead to pass their measure this session, the Government itself had given it that full consideration to which it was entitled, If they looked back and examined the mode in which the question was introduced, they would be unable to find out that it was the result of the deliberate and well considered purpose of the Government, but it was from a haphazard consideration thrust upon them by those who were undoubtedly influencing their actions. [Cheers.] lie called the attention of the House to the mode in which the subject was introduced during last session. He challenged the Native Minister, the Minister of Public Works, or the \Commissioner of Customs .to

disprove the assertion he was about to make, that before the strife Forests Bill was introduced it was never brought before the Cabinet or that it never entered into the mind of the Cabinet— [cheers]— that such a measure should be brought forward last session. If they replied in the negative, then he asked why did they not indicate such a revolutionary change in the Governor’s speech. If they replied in the affirmative he thought he had proved his cause, that so far as the introduction of this measure was concerned in the first instance, it was a hasty and ill-considered step. _ [Cheers ] The last session there was a distinct understanding and promise from the Premier that there was no intention on their part that their policy should interfere with the form of government in the Middle Island, so long as Canterbury and Otago were able to carry on their Governments, so as to meet with the approval of the greater proportion of the people of those provinces. [Hear, hear.J He contended that the Governments of those provinces were carried on in a manner so as to meet with the approval of the great majority of the inhabitants of those provinces. [Noise and cheers.] Therefore the Government was bound by an implied promise. That was the state of affairs when members went to their homes last year. They next beard from extra-parliamentary and ex-official statements, that the Government, having a just sense of the importance of the question, recognised the necessity of meeting it in a manner satisfactory to the House and the people. The late Colonial Treasurer before leaving the colony announced to the people of Auck land that the Government intended to employ the services of a barrister of colonial reputatisn, who would do the proper work of the gentlemen on those benches—embodying their policy in such a measure as he believed would be acceptable to the colony. It was true that ithe minority made an ineffectual appeal, and he considered it was founded on reason and justice, that owing to the great magnitude of the question, they might have departed from the usual custom and have circulated their Bills a short time before Parliament met. That proposal was negatived. When they arrived here this session, did they find any further proof that the Ministerial mind was made up on the matter, or .arrived at a more definite conclusion on the question affecting the most material interests of the colony. Certainly not. The Bill did not propose the abolition of the North Island provinces, as was understood last year, but the abolition of all the provinces in the colony. This was another proof that no definite course of action had been decided upon by them. For himself he believed the first intention was to bring down the Bill in the form which was shadowed forth in the Governor’s speech which said that they would bring in a Bill to abolish the North Island provinces and inviting the House to act upon their suggestions to extend abolition to the provinces of the Middle Island; but he had reason to believe the present action had been imposed on Ministers by the protector of the Government. [Opposition cheers.] He could not call him their friend. It was owing to the influence of their protector that the Government felt themselves bound [Hon C. C. BOWEN —“ That is not true.] —to make the question one of confidence or no confidence, that the Bill should be carried making abolition applicable to the whole colony. In another important matter, the Government departed from the distinct promise of the late Premier. That gentleman most distinctly stated his Government would never be a party to a breach of the compact of 1856 —[Hear, hear]— whereby the land fund of the provinces were administered by the provinces, and the land fund made part of their general revenues. In bringing down this Bill to abolish the provinces of the Middle Island, and in making this question one on which the existence of Ministers depended, was a distinct breach of the pledge given them by the late Premier. To say this Bill was not a breach of that compact was insulting to the understanding of the House. The only hold the provinces of the Middle Island had upon the land fund according to that compact was in their existence as provinces. [Cheers and “ Noes.” J That was the very essence of the compact by which the lands became the property of the provinces. Necessarily the Bill by abolishing the provinces took away the administration of the land funds from the hands of the provinces. He said, without the slightest fear of contradiction, that it was a distinct breach of that compact, and of the late Premier’s promise to the House last session. [“ No.”] He thought he had shown conclusively that this measure was the result of hasty and ill-considered action on the part of the Government, and not what the House and country had a right to expect as the result of calm and deliberate consideration on their part. The measure itself was entirely imperfect and unworthy of the occasion. Not only so, but it was brought in with haste and without thought. Ministers contradicted themselves in the course taken. At one step they affirmed the measure would only apply to the North Island provinces, at another, that that was an entire mistake; atone step promising they would not bring in a measure applicable to the whole colony, and then turning round and saying it was a necessary measure, and should apply to the whole colony. He maintained they had, in spite of all reasonable warnings, failed to take the precaution which reasonable men would have done to see that they had a legal status before bringing on the measure. It had been clearly shown that there was a great difference of opinion between gentlemen of considerable legal eminence in the colony as to the legal power of the Government or Parliament to deal with the question. [“Noes,” and cheers.] He said “Yes.” The Attorney-General admitted that doubts had arisen, and advised the Government to have them set at rest by the only authority which could do so under these circumstances, it was the bounden duty of the Government to have applied to the Home authorities to set the doubts at rest. He might be mistaken, but he gathered from the speech of the Minister of Justice that Ministers now considered it right and proper to take that step, or that another and higher branch of Government had already done so. [Hon C. 0. Bowen: “No.”] Perhaps the hon member would correct him, and say whether the Governor had applied for advice to the legal officers of the Crown in England. [Hon C. 0, Bowen : “I did not say anything of the sort.’] Then he asked what meaning was to be attached to what the hon gentleman said. If the hon gentleman did not, had not 1 is Government itself ? He accepted the In n gentleman’s silence as consent, [Ministers;

“ No.”] At all events the Government would have taken a wise precaution if they had. It was only a pity that they did not. Hon 0, C, Bowen understood Mr Reeves to say he made some statement, he would like to know— Mr Reeves —From what fell from the hon gentleman the other night, he and many members were led to the conclusion that the Governor or Government had taken measures to consult the Imperial authorities about getting the English Crown law officers’ advice as to the power of this Government and Parliament to deal with the question. Was that conclusion correct? Had the Governor sought to obtain that advice ? Hon C. C. Bowen had to state that he had said nothing of the kind. Mr Reeves —Then he failed to understand the meaning of what the hon gentleman said, Perhapshemeantsoraethingornothing. j Hear, hear,] He nowstatedhemeant nothing. [Hear, hea.] Herepeated that the Bill was unworthy of the occasion. What did it profess to do ? it swept away provincial institutions, deprived the people of the right of electing Superintendents or Provincial Councils. Were the Government prepared to say that itsubstitutedlocal governraentinstead. [Hear, hear, and “ Noes”] Did they mean to say that the municipal institutions and Road Boards provided in the Bill were sufficient to fill the gap caused by the destruction of the provincial formjof government? Certainly not. The Government proposed to fill up this gap, and to substitute for elected Superintendents and Provincial Councils their own nominated agents, [“No.”] He said the provisions of the Bill clearly pointed to that step. [“No.”] From the meagre interpretation which had fallen from the Government benches, they were led to that supposition. Again, he understood the Minister of Justice appealed to the Superintendents, and pressed them instead of meeting the measure from an antagonistic point of view, to give in their adhesion, and offer their services to the General Government for the administration of the affairs of their provinces. The Minister went further, and this was an important step, and asked them to take service under the General Government, —to give up their positions of elected Superintendents and subside into the position of Crown officers, [“No.”] He went even further, and said he would be the last man who wished to see those hon gentlemen removed from the House, and trusted the House would have the advantage of their services for many years to come. It was clear as daylight that the hon gentleman wished to secure the services of the Superintendents of the provinces. The Bill also showed it, [“No,”] It spoke of the term Superintendents. He might be met by the objection that such a proposal was contrary to the usual acts of the Assembly ; but he had seen Acts of the Assembly repealed and altered by Governments occupying those Benches, and they could do so again. He should not be surprised to see them bring down an Act repealing the Limitation of Patronage Act so far as regarded the General Government and different Superintendents, so that they might have seats in the House. What then ? The Government might meet another Parliament with their own seven or eight votes, with the votes of the nine nominated agents, and a few more honorable members of the Native race, who were to be introduced into the House, and whom the Native Minister for a long time would undoubtedly secure. What would be the position of the House ? Ministers would meet Parliament with so many votes in their hands that it would be a pretty hand of trumps to commence business with. What would be the result of the country being deprived, as proposed, of its local Governments, deprived of the services of its elected Superintendents, who undoubtedly acted, and very properly, as a material check upon the proceedings of the General Government—it would be at the mercy of the Government. He had not the slightest doubt, he was perfectly sure of it, were these measures carried out, one of the first results would be that to the House would be brought complaints of maladministration from one end of the colony to the other. He had no hesitation in saying he disapproved of the Bill. The measure was altogether inadequate to the gravity of the occasion. By the confession of Ministers, one after another, it was in effect a merely skeleton measure. They deprived the colony of the privileges ©f local Government, under which a great part of this colony had flourished exceedingly, and the Government for that were going to substitute an interregnum of Colonial Government carried out by Orders in Council. This was the substitution for a local institution which had worked well and been carried out with the greatest satisfaction to the people generally, and which had resulted in a large amount of prosperity in the province from which he came. He was unwilling to exchange what he had got fur what the Government proposed. Let them look at what was held out by the Government proposals. He saw nothing in the measure that affected the intelligence of the people. It affected simply the pocket, and claimed support simply by what it proposed to give them. That was an unworthy mode of dealing with the question. It was not only unworthy, but delusive. The Middle Island provinces especially were asked to give the substance for the shadow. For parting with the administration of the land revenue within these districts, grants were to be doled out. Those grants were entirely dependant on the continuation of the revenue for the time being. The Opposition were told in reply to these objections, that those grants were secured by Acts of the Assembly, but what the Assembly proposed to do it could undo next, and he said without fear of contradiction, what security was there for the municipalities and Road Boards when their grants depended entirely upsn the state of the colonial revenue. If the Government had money now, no doubt they would give it. Probably they would borrow, but if they could do neither it would certainly not be given. That was the condition of things, by no means improbable when the expenditure of borrowed money ceased, and the Customs revenue failed to reach its present high returns.' He went on to say that, from the moment he heard this abolition policy announced; he saw clearly the object' was nothing more nor less than first to get rid • of the obstruction offered to a centralising Government by the Superintendents and Provincial- Councils throughout the colony, and to - add the land fund to ■ 4;he credit side of - the. colonial revenue. Had Ministers been perfectly candid and come down to the House and said the necessities of the colonies demanded this [Hon Major Atkinson —“ They don’t.”] as he (Mr Reeves) believed to be the case, and if not at present it very shortly would be, there would have been something to work upon,

and possibly he might have been found giving them his support ; but they denied that financial necessities existed, therefore he would not be found amongst their supporters. [lronical cheers.] Another objection he had to the Bill was that it would make the choice of people for their repre sentatives more limited than now. They would have parish business brought before the Assembly, and they would have to decide minor points of legislation which now and for years past were determined by the Provincial Councils, and which were beyond the scope of the Assembly. The session of the Assembly, instead of lasting three would last six months. Instead of having those who would give their independent services in the cause of the public, they would have professional politicians. But the greatest objection he had to the action of the Government was that from the first they absolutely refused to refer the matter to the consideration of the public. He had maintained from the first, and would still maintain, that this Parliament was not elected to consider this question of a revolutionary change in the constitution of the colony, and as a representative he declined to undertake that responsibility. I Cheers.] A Minister told the House that the main reason for pressing on the Bill was that the public opinion demanded it from one end of the colony to the other. [Hear, hear.] He entirely denied that statement. [Opposition cheers.] Public opinion, as far as it was at present shown, was entirely divided. If anything, the balance was for delay. The Government had most unadvisedly announced their intention to press on the Bill. The Minister for Justice had likened the Superintendents to Caesar—(Hon C. C, Bowen —“ No.”) — and declared that, in his opinion, they were the embodiment of Caesarism, and that they turned their backs upon the rights of the people. He would like to ask the hon gentleman how long he entertained those ideas, and especially how long he had looked upon Superintendents as the embodiments of Cresarism and obstructionists to true government in the colony. It was a matter of public notoriety that that hon gentleman not long ago was on the point of being a candidate for the Superintendency of Canterbury. What were his reasons for not coming forward, he (Mr Reeves) did not know. He asked that hon gentleman whether he entertained those views at that time, and whether he told his supporters those were his particular opinions. [Cheers.] This would-be-Caesar now stood before the House in the attitude of Brutus. [Loud Opposition cheers] —ready to plunge his dagger into the breast of the first provincial Caesar he met with. [Cheers,] Why pursue that subject further, for does not all the world know “Brutus is an honorable man.” [Cheers.] “ Why the Government are all honorable men,” Last night there was a speech delivered by an hon gentleman whom he was very sorry not to see in his place, because that hon member had repeatedly taken credit that he was always in his place ; but his absence would not preclude him from criticising his speech, because it was worthy of criticism. There was one instrument upon which the member for Heathcote performed most admirably—that was the trumpet. [Cheers.] It was his own property, and constant practice had made him perfect. He (Mr Reeves) had heard him perform on various occasions in that Assembly, and other more popular assemblies, but never did he perform such a fanfaronade as last night upon his instrument. The hon gentleman last night stated on no occasion had he ever taken public money for his public services, and ended by exalting his patriotism. Were the hon gentleman to be believed, he was without doubt the most patriotic man in the colony. He then went on to say that Sir 0, Wilson had offered to accept the Superintendency without salary, but the people would not have him, and rightly so, because he would have been dear at his price. He concluded by scarifying Sir C. Wilson for his abuse of Messrs Moorhouse and Macandrew, and expressed his intention of trying to amend the Bill in committee, and doing his best to prevent its passage into law. [Mr Curtis made a powerful speech in support, which time does not allow of transcribing.] On the House resuming at 7.30 p.m., Mr Ward, of Wairau, addressed the House in strong opposition to the Government measures. At 8.30 p.m., Mr Stafford rose amid loud applause. He said many members had told him that this was a great occasion, but the House had risen to the occasion. They had never had members make more intelligent and able speeches for the faith that was in them ; never did the star of an expiring Parliament shine more brightly. There had been many new members come amongst them, but he did not think they had lost anything by the change. He much regretted the loss of the late member for llangitiki ; but the mantle of Elijah seemed to have fallen on his successor. Various positions during this session, and in connection with the Bill before the House had been attributed to him, but he repudiated all the honor sought to be conferred on him. He was only one of the rank and file. The Bill was not his, nor that of any private member. It was that of the Executive of the country, and they alone were responsible for it; they alone deserved any credit. Members, he was sorry to say, in their desire to wound those gentlemen, did not refrain from wounding their sensitiveness. He deprecated the constant harping, with great disingenousness, in both writing and speaking, on what was called the bribes in the Bill, and in the same disingenuous spirit reference was made to the changes made in the capitation, but it was carefully concealed that when those changes in the capitation grant were made very many of provincial charges were taken over ; in fact that a great boon was conferred on the provinces. [“ No, no,” and “Yes, yes.”] He regretted that the veteran legislator, the member for Auckland City West, did not think it beneath him to try to stamp on the young men of the House, instead of holding out the hand of fellowship. Notably he singled out as the objects of his contempt the Colqnial Treasurer and the Minister of Justice, these were the men they were told were not fit to occupy their places. The Treasurer had again and again distinguished himself in the field as well as in the senate, and the Minister of Justice had for years occupied a high and important office, and had raised himself as high as a man could by his integrity and high ability. When in the early part of the session he used the word “revolution” in connection with this measure, he did not use it in the sense it was used by a journal inspired by the hon member for Auckland City West (the

Auckland Evening Star). He had no idea of imbruing his hands in the blood of his fellow man ; no idea of powder and brands held aloft. No, his idea of revolution was the power of reason, as represented by the united sense of the people, such aa was seen in the corn laws, the Catholic emancipation, and other great and peaceful revolutions infinitely greater than this. The hon gentleman, in most eloquent terms, then referred to the fall of ancient Greece in consequence of their petty local prejudices and dissensions. What might have been a nation that should have illuminated a world had sunk lower than the children of Ishmael, whose hand was against every man, and every one against him. Coming down to modern times, had they not seen through similar disunion in France, a nation of serfs and an order of nobles, and what terrible calamities had flowed from it. Later still, had they not seen the Herculean efforts of the United States, who shed their best blood to prevent their great nation being destroyed. The hon gentleman, in referring to the occasion when he was elected as first Superintendent of Nelson, said he had realised the difficulties of the position. He visited an isolated portion of the province, and in compliance with the earnest wish of the inhabitants he got a road opened up, paying for it out of his own pocket, and would it be believed that the Council never reimbursed him that money, and it was a debt to this day. Soon after he recommended the Council to bring out immigrants under the inducement of small grants of land. Yet, though there were millions of acres of waste lands, the Council absolutely refused. They said there was no more than they wanted for other purposes. That was his experience of Provincial Councils, and he had seen nothing to admire in them. As to his ideas of nationality, he could tell the House that the day that he first occupied the Government benches of the colony, that he that day made up his mind that he was not of Otago, nor Wellington, nor Auckland, but of New Zealand, and he hoped that during his political career he had done something towards establishing a national feeling. | The hon gentleman then referred to the various political changes which had taken place in England, and in fact by which constitutions had been overturned and built up in a different fashion.] He could but admire the audacity of the member for Auckland City West when he said that the Constitution Act forbade the Legislature to alter the constitution of the Provincial Councils. He could tell the House that that hon gentleman was one of the first to break through the Constitution, and put this country and the Imperial Parliament to considerable trouble. [The hon gentleman then proceeded to detail the different instances to which at request of this colony the Constitution Act had been changed.] When new provinces were created, under a power as good and valid as the Constitution Act, they had appeal after appeal against them, but in any that were created he ventured to say there had been no diminution of power, or liberty, or happiness. The hon member for Auckland City West told them the Imperial Parliament had been deceived in regard to the Provinceof Westland, though he ought to have known it was not so. He could conscientiously say that there was no single clause in the original Constitution Act that the Assembly had not power to annul. Referring to the various legal opinions given regarding abolition, he would say that while having the very highest respect for Mr Gillies as a political power, and considering him an ornament of the Bench, he did not give the opinion referred to by the member for Auckland City West as a legal adviser, but as a political partisan. [Applause.) An appeal was made about invasion of liberties of the people, but what and where were these liberties ? Were they in that complicated mass of conflicting laws on the Provincial Statute Books, such as those relating to Hog Ordinances, Scab, Trespass, and Impounding Ordinances ? In contrast with these powers what were those vested in that House ? The powers of founding courts of justice, and of determining what the working man should contribute towards the requirements of . the State. These were the powers which guarded the liberties of the people. Why, the Provincial Councils could not impose a fine on scabby sheep without coming to that House. Reference had been made to the officers to be nominated to supervise the affairs of the provinces, and they had been called Satraps, but why this should be a term of reproach, he could not see, as the name in its real meaning was not objectionable. These officers were only to be appointed till next session. Then he came to the Superintendents, whom they had, like the Russian cannon at Balaclava, to the right, to |the left of them, and in front of them. How were they representatives of the people? Look at the hon member for the Avon. Why, he dared not dismiss his Executive, or appoint or dismiss a single officer without their consent; he counted aa only one, and was perfectly helpless. Then there was the member for Port Chalmers, the Superintendent of Otago. He too was bound to act in accordance with the advice of bis responsible advisers. Another Superintendent last session had told the House that he had often signed documents he did not approve of, because he was advised to do so by his Executive. He could say that when Superintendents were not in constant conflict with their Executives, they were the abject slaves of them. Was it to be said that their Anglo-Saxon blood required provincialism for the protection of their liberties ? He would tell the people of New Zealand, if they wanted to build up a palladium of liberty, they should not be distracted by little petty sham Parliaments, which were occupied in passing dog-taxes. Let them turn their undivided attention to this, their one supreme Legislature, and make that the guardian of their liberties. If this legislature had not the legal power it had the constitutional power to make such changes as the time and occasion required. He would vote for the passing of the Bill. The hon gentleman sat down amidst loud applause, after speaking an hour. There were cries of “ Divide ” and “ Question.” After a long pause, and the Speaker having asked if any other member wished to ad- * dress the House, he called upon the Hon Colonial Treasurer to reply. Major Atkinson rose, whereupon Mr White, of Hokitika, rose hurriedly, and was left speaking at 9.40 p m. Nearly every member was in his place, and the galleries were crowded during Mr Stafford’s speech, Wellington, August 20. After Mr Stafford’s speech last night, Mr White occupied the remainder of the evening in speaking against the Bill, which lie would oppose in every stage and form. Mr Mehvyn moved the adjournment of the debate, which will be resumed this afternoon. The House adjourned at midnight.