GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 378, 28 August 1875, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[By Telegraph.] {From a correspondent of the Press.) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday, August 26. the abolition debate. Mr Walter Johnston, in discussing the financial bearing of the question upon the :olony, said i 1 had been said that the con solidated revenue of the colony could not bear the weight it was proposed to put upon it, In the firßt place, he would point out

that the annual contribution from the consolidated revenue to the Municipalities and Road Boards was £120,000. That was no new burden on the consolidated revenue. Last year the amouut payable to the provinces as the ba'ance of the capitation allowance and special allowances, was £92,000, and £25,000 was granted from the revenue to Road Boards. Then there was the cost of provincial services, £345,000 per annum, whilst the receipts from the provincial ordinary revenue were only £75,000. That showed that nearly the whole'cost of the provincial ordinary services was provided for from the land revenue and goldfields revenue, which was now released to the provincial districts, and it was sufficient to say that the cost of the provincial services in Canterbury and Otago alone was nearly £200,000, to show that those provinces were not unfavorably affected by the Government proposals; this deficiency of £270,000 was made up by taking from the land revenue the interest on the provincial loans, formerly paid from the consolidated revenue, under name of capitation allowance, and also taking from the land revenue the interest on the cost of railways constructed. Last year the consolidated revenue paid interest, and the land revenue the cost of provincial services. This year the land revenue paid the interest, and the consolidated revenue the cost of the provincial services, and he did not see that the change materially affected either the budget or the provinces. During the speeches of the for Wairarapa and other members it had beeu urged that there should be a change in the incidence of taxation. To what extent that change—whether the taxation should be direct instead of indirect, or a mixture of both—had not been stated, but possibly the House would hear all about it when the debate on the financial statement came on. With regard to the assertion that the credit of the colony was ruined, and that if the Government wished to borrow at a future time it must be ready with specific security, he could not admit the truthfulness of it, for the negotiations for the last four millions loan had been another proof of the high state of the credit of the colony in the English market. The United States, Russia, and other large countries could not borrow on better if so good terms, and many other powerful States had to pay very much higher for their money. There was no reason-to fear the diminution of the credit of the colony if the revenue did not decrease. On the question of the localisation of .the land revenue, he was prepared to support the Government. Previously he had been of opinion that as the Government constructed all the railways, a portion ©f the Crown lands should be resumed possession of by the colony, but further consideration had shown him that the land revenue was an artificial product, and if provinces such as Canterbury and Otago, by twenty years prudence and wisdom, succeeded in creating a good land revenue, they should be entitled to it. But he thought it would be of public advantage that the police, gaols, &c, should be taken over by the colony, and he did not see why there should be Superintendents and Provincial Executives, and their clerks, to receive and pay away the requisite money, when there was a land revenue and a goldfields revenue. Neither the country districts nor the mining districts liked the administration of the Provincial Governments. These institutions had done their work in the early days, but there would be no regret at their disappearance; while that disappearance in itself would be a proof of the progress the colony was making. Mr Williams considered the provinces had weakened their influence by : their grasping propensities. He was glad the Government had at last made up tneir minds to take the bull by the horns, and stand or fall on the question. They would no doubt receive, as they deserved, the thanks of a grateful country. He intended to support the Government, and should be backed up by the settlers of his district.

Mr SwANSON characterised the General Government as the mother of the horseleeches daughters, and the Boad Boards as the children oi those daughters. What local bodies had been created by the Provincial Councils, such as Education Boards, &c, the General Government would take away by abolishing the provinces. The best of it was that they charged provincialism with their own crimes. Their mistakes in administration were charged against the provinces, for all the good the General Government took credit to themselves. As to the cost, he denied there would be any reduction; and then they were to be brought face to face with the people; but this was not a fact. The Government did not want to look in the face of the people just now. [Hear, hear.] If they were so very anxious to be brought face to face with the people, they should go in for annual Parliaments. The i they might get through some work coming fresh from the elections, and their next election being dependent upon their giving satisfaction to their constituents. They were to'd they were going to have a strong central Government, which was a very nice phrase. But did they not think that an honest Government would be better?—[laughter]— one that would be easily supervised and inspected, and that could be economically worked. No; Government would not hear of an honest Government and one economically worked. As to the purchasing of land, he maintained that the superintendents of provinces were far more likely to conduct those transactions to the advantage of the people than the General Government. In many cases differences with the Natives had compelled the Government to give a great deal more for laud than it was worth. If the Bill was a good one they should trot it out. Let them not be afraid of it. Let every editor of tbe preas generally, and the people of the different provinces, ponder over the matter, and if, after due reflection, they could see it would be to their advantage, then they would no doubt embrace it; but he stroDgly deprecated any attempt to rush the Bills through without consulting the people or giving them an opportunity to object. He had become perfectly satisfied since coming into that House, that it would be far better for Auckland to remain as she was. He would ask the Government to leave them the money taken from them, demanding what security they pleased, and let them manage their own affairs. The House had destroyed the prosperity of Auckland. He would oppose the Bill through every stage, and should do all he could to take part in the debate if it went into committee, and to resist it to the utmost. Mr Ormond proceeded to question the speech of Mr Swanson, with reference to the land purchase system. He should take advantage of what the hon gentleman said to refer to a case in which the Provincial Government of Auckland had been responsible,

or one in the direction of which they had a very large voice indeed. That was the purchase of Coromandel. Mr Ormond then read the correspondence of Sir George Grey referring to the case, saying that that hon gentleman could scarcely have been aware at the time that the (negotiations had received the assistance, advice, and concurrence of Mr Gillies. He next referred to Sir G. Grey s remarks regarding the poor man, and as Showing that the sentiments of the hon gentleman had somewhat changed in the course of time, alluded to the early days of Wellington, when the Wairarapa was occupied in defiance of his power, and he gave them pre-emptive rights of a square mile each. That was the way in which he rewarded the breakers of the law. He could give other instances in which the hon member had acted despotically. As to what Mr Swanson had said about cutting Auckland off from the rest of the colony, he should like to know what the Auckland people would say to that. The hon gentleman might rely on the support of the inhabitants of Queen street, who would occupy a central position, but he would ask what the Bay of Islands, the Bast coast, and the other out districts would say who had been kept in a contracted condition for years, and who would cry out for justice and for safety from such a tate. The arguments against the measure had been very weak indeed. As to the statement regarding the reduction of the capitation grant, he said in making such statements they were misleading, not the House, because they knew better, but the country, and trying to poison their mind by implying that which was not the case. The capitation was not really interfered with, as the member for Timaru had told them. Regarding the arguments on the question of finance, the subject had been treated in a different way. The member for Auckland West had spoken of the Government offering bribes, and in the same breath offered bigger bribes on behalf of the Opposition, but the fact was the Opposition was perfectly unable to agree on any principle. That was why the member for Auckland West did not redeem that whieh he said he would do. The member for the Hutt called them vicious proposals. He proceeded to show that Mr Fitzherbert had been most inconsistent, quoting from Hansard a speech made by Mr Fitzherbert on the Local Government Bill in 1867. Looking at the present circumstances of the country, property should pay its fair share, and he trusted the Government would enable their supporters to go to the electors and say the Government intended to alter the incidence of taxation, so that property shall contribute its fair share. There were wants for colonisation and settlement, and these could best be met by property bearing a fair share. He then referred to those who had argued that the provinces had been working satisfactorily. No one dared—no one had dared to propose a resolution setting forth that provincialism was good. All they had dared at public meetings was to ask for delay. Since the immigration and public works Eolicy had been inaugurated the provinces ad been aothing but small; centralising bodies, and members looked with surprise when the hon member for Auckland West said provincialism had pierced mountains with railways, because they knew that nothing of the kind had been done by proTincialism. The city of Auckland might be in favor of provincialism, but the outlying districts of Auckland, to a man, were in favor of abolition, which they would not be had the system been so valuable. He referred to Hawkes Bay, which had been plundered once, and though it was now progressing, the people were not satisfied, because there were out districts which complained they were not treated fairly by the settled districts.. What were the rights and liberties which the member for Auckland West talked about ? Why the province over which he presided was a public scandal, and the administration of it was a scandal to the institutions and those in power. They put an end to all public works to find money for officials, and that was the first principle of Provincial Government. [Cheers.] At a late session of the Provincial Council of Auckland it first of all passed a motion in favor of abolition, and yet immediately they were ordered to undo what they had done, and they did so. That was the manner in which the gentleman who came there and pretended to fight for the rights and liberties of the people acted. He treated the Council with the utmost contempt. Mr Ormond then proceeded to quote extracts from Mr Wood's speech in the Council, to prove the assertion that the Superintendent of Auckland treated the Council with the greatest contempt; for although Mr Wood had said the provincial system had broken down from Auckland to Dunedin, yet he had altered his opinions at the command of the Superintendent, and actually one who had been fighting for the rights and liberties of the people, came down to be the mouthpiece of a despol. The Opposition had in no way attempted to show the use of provincial institutions. Sir G. Grey, the author of the institutions, at one time had larger and manlier opinions than he had now, for in 1848 he said that the General Assembly was intended to absorb into itself the powers of the smaller bodies, and that eventually provincial institutions would gradually fall into disrepute. In 1851 he had expressed similar opinions, and it was a pity he had not kept them. How could it be said the time was inopportune ? The members of the Opposition, particularly the members for Parnell and ; Selwyn, said the contrary last session. 'The fact was, it was a most opportune time, because members were about to face their constituents, and the constituencies J would have ten times the voice they would have if the question were postponed, because members would be more careful, knowing that their 3eats depended upon their votes i Where wasthe Opposition scheme? The House had heard of it, but it had not been placed before them. The question was not a question of detail, because the people had declared in favour of it for years, and he " hoped Government would persevere in getting for the people real freedom which they had not at present. He did not consider the administration of the General Government had been good, but that was because successive Governments had to fight for their lives with Provincial Governments. fHear, hear.| If that was done away with, if the Provincial buffers between the Government and the people were swept away, then good Government might be hoped for. [Hear, hear.] In reference to the position of parties, he denied the Fox-Vogel Government had been a Provincial Government. The provincialist party was disunited on almost all subjects. He compared the opinions of the members for Avon, Taieri, and Auckland West on the

question of Jthe utility of the Legislative Council in proof. He next spoke on the land question, and showed the members for Parnell, Port Chalmers, and Auckland West in disagreement on the subject. In fact, there was no question except abolition upon which half a dozen of them could agree. With respect to the financial position of Auckland, he quoted figures showing that their liabilities were as follows : on loans, £40,y92 ; interest on railways, £24,465 ; yearly expenditure, £65,833. Under existing arrangements, the Council got capitation allowance, £61,755 ; land fund, £21,000 ; goldfields revenue, £12,000 ; receipts from railways, £5938, or a balance for ordinary expenditure of the province of £14,749, of which there was £12,000 that ought to be expended upon the goldfields, Now if the attempt of the Opposition to continue provincialism was successful, what would be the result 1 The province would not be able to carry on a decent Government. In reference to the insinuations brought against the Government that the promoters of the measures were rejected Superintendents, the hon member who led the Opposition should give proof that he was not actuated by some personal motives. The House knew of grievances the hon member had had against the Home Government, and who knew whether there was any object in hand in trying to get into power. He did not say it was so, but when he came to occupy the position he did, and hurl imputations against the Government, and spoke so strongly, the people should have some knowledge of the reason why he did so. With reference to the Bill, he said he should support it for one reason, that it abolished the provinces, and the people wanted it. For the first time they would have direct contact with the House, and because it would lead up to a great future when local differences would give way to great questions and local struggles be forgotten in a desire for the general good. [Loud and continued cheers. ] Mr Harrison would have supported the Government proposals with pleasure if they had been content with affirming the principle this session. He would have greater confidence in the details being properly carried out if the Bill had been introduced by Mr Stafford. He would support the second reading and give every assistance in committee to make it a good Bill, but would not promise to supportthe third reading.

Mr Reynolds said after the conclusion of the session the Government found some of the provinces in the Middle Island were in an impecunious condition, and also required aid from the General Government. The Government thereupon came to the conclusion that it would be best to abolish all the provinces, particularly seeing it was the wish of the whole colony, north and south. ["No," and hear, hear.] The hon member said no, but he (Mr Reynolds) might be allowed to be able to judge as well as any hon member in the house—["No," and hear, hear] —and he said distinctly there had been a general expression of opinion throughout the colony in favour of abolition. No doubt Canterbury and Otago might carry on their functions without any assistance from the colony, but it would be placing those provinces in a very unfair position, if they were allowed to remain. The Government had been quite united in their proposal, and so far from having only come to a decision since the commencement of the session as to whether the Bill should include the provinces of both islands, he might tell the House that the Government settled the matter on the 7th of June last. Of course it was competent for the House to strike out one or more of the provinces. [Loud Opposition cheers and laughter.] He wished to be understood properly. He did not say the Government would agree to such an alteration, but merely stated the fact that it was competent for the House to do what he had indicated. Sir J. Vogel before leaving for England had stated it was not the intention of the Government to interfere with the Middle Island. When that statement was made it was made in good faith, for up to that time the Cabinet had not referred to the advisableness of including in the Bill the Middle Island provinces. He (Mr Reynolds) in addressing his constituents early in December had spoken to the same effect, but subsequently he had casually told his constituents he had altered his mind, although he had spoken with perfect good faith in the first instance, and it was not until after this, that the Government had decided upon introducing the measure in the form in which it now came before the House. The Government, in proceeding with the Bill this session, did so under the belief that it wouh I beimpolitic to stay now, because the provincial authorities might, if so disposed, enter into contracts involving the country in difficulties for years to come. The country was now quite ripe for the measure, and the time was specially opportune, because, at the elections, there would be returned men to undertake the important business which must come before the House next session. Another reason why there should not be any delay was because if the talk about war and other unconstitutional acts were to continue during the next six months, great harm would be done. He was sure all the members whose judgments were not warped by provincial proclivities could not but admit that real local self-government would be conferred upon the people. The Government had all the necessary power. Mr Katene said that last year he had expressed his opinion that the whole of the provinces ought to be abolished, and still thought so. The provincialists knew last session that there was an intention of abolishing the provinces, and why had they not considered it during the recess; If a majority of the House was in favor of abolition, it was a sign that a majority of the people were in favor of it, and those who said to the contrary represented only their own tongues. The people had no right to have two masters. Mr W. Kelly intended to support the Bill. He represented the feelings of his constituents, for at two meetings during the recess he had received two votes of confidence from the electors, notwithstanding his expressed intention of voting for immediate abolition. On the motion of T. Kelly the debate was adjourned, and the House rose at 1.16 a.m. Feiday, August 27th. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m. FIRST READINGS. The following Bills were read a first time; Bill to validate an Ordinance of the Province of ptago, entitled the Kakanni Harbor Board Ordinance Bill; to enable the Corporation of the Municipality of Oamaru to

supply the town with gas; Westport Municipal Reserves Bill. CONFISCATED LANDS.

On Sir D. McLean moving for leave to introduce a Bill to place the confiscated lands under the ordinary administration of the waste lands in the provinces in which they are situated, Mr Fitzherbert said the present was an inopportune time for introducing it. It should be delayed pending the final settlement of the abolition question. No one knew what became of the Wellington confiscated lands.

Mr Dignan inquired what right any Superintendent had to come to the foregone conclusion that the provinces were to be abolished.

The Honß. W. Stafford pointed out that until the Abolition Bill became law no other term than province could be legally used. Thelprovincial districts were at present unknown to law. In the financial statement were tables showing how the proceeds of the confiscated lands were disposed of. Under the Abolition Bill the land would be subject to the laws of the different districts. If this Bill was passed the confiscated lands would be administered according to the land laws of the provincial districts in which they were situated. It was a little surprising to find a gentleman opposite objecting to the introduction of a measure, because he understood one of the greatest objections on their part to the present system was that it left too much discretion with the executive officers in dealing with the lands. The Government were quite willing they should administer them according to the ordinary land laws. He believed the reason the Canterbury land laws, altogether apart from any other question, had worked better than those of any other province was that less discretion was left with the land board in dealing with the lands than was the cast! in the other provinces.

Mr Pabata complained of the administration of the confiscated lands being placed in the Superintendents' hands, which would occasion trouble, and of this matter being gone into without first having been fully gone into by himself and colleague along with the rest of the Ministry. After some remarks by Mr Sheehan, Sir Donald McLean remarked that it was clearly stated in the financial statement that it was the intention of the Government that the confiscated lands should be brought under the same administration as the ordinary lands. To use the word province was quite correct, because the provincial land laws would be continued until the next meeting of the Assembly, He could not conceive how so much misapprehension arose. With respect to the Bill itself, his opinion always had been that under proper administration and with the settlement of the Native difficulties in the various parts of the country, the colony would have in the confiscated lands a valuable and profitable estate. That some of the lands had been alienated was true; but he took exception altogether to the remarks that it had been done without the authority of law. Tbe Government had had the support of the law in all its acts, and had done everything under the authority of the several Acts passed from time to time, and affecting the confiscated lands. He took this opportunity of saying there was such authority in respect of the Waikato swamp. The only thing required was an Order in Council to give effect to what was already in the power of the Government to cai ry out. With regard to the member for the Hutt's remarks about the sales of confiscated lands, the Government were quite ready and were prepared to show the various transactions which had taken place, which had resulted in placing £BO,OOO to the credit of the colony since 1870. The lands had yielded good prices, and had been well administered, and notice sent to different parts of the country when the sales took place. The last sales of confiscated lands on the East Coast of this island realised the net price of £6 17s 6d per acre. He could not suppose that that could be construed into bad management. He would be willing to compare the administration and management of the confiscated lands with the other waste lands of the colony. As much publicity as possible had been given to the salea in order to get the best prices, and the result of that publicity in the different parts of both islands had been that hardy, industrious, and enterprising classes had come from the South and taken up the land, establishing most thriving communities on the Bast Coast, and between here and Taranaki. With regard to Auckland, in the Waikato districts little confiscated land had been sold, for the very good reason that the lands in the hands of private individuals would not realise 2s 6d per acre. The confiscated lands in the Auckland province had been open for a number of years at the upset price of 5s per acre, but none would buy it at that.

The Bill was read a first time, Sir D. McLean promising to lay on the table a return, giving in detail the confiscated lands transaction. DISQUALIFICATION ACT.

Mr Rolleston brought under the notice Mr Buckland's transactions with the Government. When he first referred to them he sts ted he was not in a position to form an opinion on the subject, but considered there was a prima facie case from returns laid on the table, that the Disqualification Act applied, which required an explanation at the hands of the Government. He had at the time appealed to the Government to say whether they considered the transactions in reference to the Disqualification Act, but the Government had given no reply to his question. Having raised the question, which admittedly on its face was of considerable importance as affecting the character of the House in the eyes of the country, on account of the opinion that might be formed by the outside world of its independence, he felt an explanation was required, and allowed two days to elapse for the Government to consider the matter. He appealed to the Government to know if they had considered the question, and if they were satisfied whether there had been a breach, intentional or unintentional, of the Disqualification Act, or if there had been no such breach. If the Government was unable to make such a statement he thought he would be justified in asking to have laid on the table this evening all papers referring to the case, to enable members to judge for themselves of its position. Sir D. McLean replied that the Government had taken steps to consider the point raised. It had been laid before the Solicitor-General, whose opinion, so far as the papers laid before him, was that the transactions do not come within the DisqualiO cation Act, Certain other papers bad to be placed before

him, when he would give a final opinion, and on the receipt of it the Government would lay it before the House. PRIVILEGE. Sir G. Grey threw himself upon the indulgence of the House upon a question partly of privilege and partly of order. Out of respect to the feelings of a very large community, probably 70,000 of her Majesty's subjects, he trusted the House would indulge him in allowing a few words on so important a question. A high officer of the Government (the agent of the General Government in Hawkes Bay), also a member for that province, in his place in the House, as he was informed, used an expression seriously damaging to the character of the Auckland province—the term rotten. He regretted suoh a word should have been applied to that province. He had only seen one report, and that stated the hon member had said the state of Auckland province was a public scandal. Now he must say the Government had resolved to force upon an unwilling people a constitution which they certainly abhor, determined as it were absolutely to take away the representative institutions which they prize, and when representative institutions were to be taken from them against law, and which, according to his firm conviction, if taken away would be a breach of the British constitution — [" Oh"] —an absolute breach of that constitution. It would be found that modern constitutional writers agree that there is no instance of any, alteration having been made in the constitution of Great Britain without a dissolution of Parliament had taken place, and so allowing every elector to record as he pleased his vote, either in favour or disapproval of the proposed constitution, and giving the right to return representatives to the new Parliament, there to express the convictions of the people. [Opposition cheers."! He did say, with regard to a province, which had suffered many wrongs at the hands of that House —[Cries of " Question"] —and at the last moment was compelled to bow down to a majority of the House, on a subject of this kind it was wrong for an officer of the General Government, and lately a member of the Ministry, to taunt and aggravate the people so oppressed, in his belief, as to apply language of that kind to them. They might tread upon the head of the worm, but at last it would turn upon its oppressor. If they had in their breasts feelings of men, people so maligned would make their voices heard. He called upon the generous sympathies of the House—upon those who respected the feelings of their fellow men—upon all who cherished within their breasts feelings of self-respect and pride in their country —he called upon all those actuated by such feelings, to support him in his demand that some apology should be made, not only by the hon member for Clive, but the Government be serves. [Loud cheers.] He said they should, because the Colonial Treasurer in his financial statement made use of language which might well have caused a blush to rise to his cheek regarding the Auckland province. An apology was due to his own feelings, to those of the inhabitants of Auckland and throughout the province those feelings were sympathised in. Would the Government look at what they were doing. He denied that it was in the power of the Ministry, because they were determined themselves to break the law and Constitution, to force others to follow their illegal career ; to force himself and others to do what was unlawful, or force the inhabitants of Auckland to counsel a policy which was contrary to the law of the British Empire. He was was surprised at the sentiments expressed upon the snbject by the member for Timaru.

The Speaker interrupted him. Sir G. Grey put himself in order by mov- ''< ing the adjournment. He maintained he had a right to be heard on the subject. 80,000 people were not to be insulted iu the manner they were. He threw himself upon their sympathy whether such a proceeding was one against which as a representative of that great community he had a right to protect. He had a right to expect an apology for such language, and reparation for the most improper and unnecessary aspersions upon the province of Auckland. Mr Ormond could not recollect in what aspect he had used the word "rotten," though he believed he did use it when speaking last night on the Auckland province. Before proceeding further ho would like to answer the member for Auckland's threat in reference to his being an officer of the Government. His positiou was simply this. For a number of years he acted as the General Government agent in Hawke's Bay, and in respect of those matters, of course he had a right to act in accordance with instructions from the General Government, but he utterly denied that in his place in that House Ministers had any control over him. He denied he had in the slightest way intended to apply the term objected to to the people of Auckland. He intended to refer to the Auckland Provincial Council in having degraded itself by being so subservient to the will of the Superintendent. Very strong language was used all round, Mr Ormond declining to retract until he had satisfied himself from the Hansard report that he had used the word in the sense attributed by Sir G. Grey.. Messrs Macandrew, Reader Wood, and others also spoke. ABOLITION DEBATE. The abolition debate this afternoon was resumed by Mr T. Kelly, who, speaking in favour of the Bill, made a speech which, by its dreariness, all but emptied the House. On the House resuming at 7,30, Mr Stout rose, amid loud cheers from the Opposition, and addressed the House, touching firstly upon the legal aspect of the question. He contended that this was not the proper time for the discussion. The different political sympathies and feelings made the House almost incompetent to deal with that question. He contended the Act of 1868 was merely declaratory, and neither in spirit nor intention did it sanction the Abolition Bill as at present before the House. [Opposition cheers. | The Act of 1868 was intended simply to grant municipal institutions where there were no provinces, but the Imperial Parliament never intended to give power to entirely sweep away the Constitution granted to the colony. But the legal question was of little moment, because he should be sorry to say the people of New Zealand were not competent to frame a Constitution for themselves. If the Bill passed he told the House it was only the commencement of constitutional changes. The people would have to demand further constitutional changes. There were constitutional changes as great and vast as this Bill proposed, which for years they had been asking the House in vain to take, up. He argued that the onus of proof of the inutility

of provincialism lay with the proposers and supporters of the change, and therefore it it was not expected, nor was it the duty of the Opposition, to bring forward a countu; constitution. He defended the province-. from the charges of mismanagement an<l selling land in blocks. He argued that the Bill would fail to create a national feeling, as it retained the provincial districts, and would, instead of effecting a saving, lead to increased honorariums three times more than at present, or else throw the representation into the hands of a class who adopted politics as a last resort. He admitted he was not in favour of delay, because he failed to see how pro vincialism could be substituted by a better form of local Government, Provincialism, as a theoretical of Government, could stand its test with any idea of a Central Government, Central Administration, or legislation. In conclusion, he said he had spoken to the question, though he knew there might be a majority in the House at this time in favour of abolition. Although a young member, he might be permitted to warn those members who were so anxious for a change. He did not desire to Hansardise, but he would point out to some of them how wonderful was the change that came over their views. He recognised, for example, that the Commissioner of Customs, in changing from ultra provincialist to ultra centralist, might have had very weighty arguments addressed to him to induce him to change his views. The people could not be made to believe that by altering the Constitution they could cure the evils or the cause of the mischiefs that had fallen upon thsm. The only salvation for the country lay in looking after and governing their own affairs. This was the second time the people of New Zealand had been asked to believe they could get rid of those evils of misgovernment by a change of the Constition. The only good Government to be obtained was by educating the electorates to look after their own interests. It would be an evil day for the colony when the people were taught that they could get rid of misgovernment by a simple change from provincialism to shire councils. It was said by the change that people and Government could be brought face to face. How could they possibly be brought more to face than by the Provincial Councils. It was nonsense to talk of bringing the people face to face with the Government. : The Government were trying to make the country believe they could get some great benefit by a succession of surprises. Such had been the course of legisla:ion for some years past. Scheme after scheme had been propounded to every parliament that sat within that hall. The people been told if they voted for each of those schemes money would be spent in their place. These kinds of bribes were held out, and now they had bribes which virtually placed the members for the the position of having to vote for the Bill rather than incur the ire of a city like Dunedin losing £IO,OOO annuallyThis jroposed change was not desired by by the real settlers, but by two classes—the people in towns and the land monopolists. He said he only came forward this session because he considered a great principle was at stake—something greater than the mere form of Government purposed under this Bill. A very vicious principle was established, that of attempting to get the people to believe that a great boon could be obtained by merely changing the paltry form of the paper constitution under which they lived. He trusted members would look at the question fairly. He did not apply for delay in the hope that the electorates might changetheirbpinions,becausehebelievedif the question went to the country Ministers might havea majority, but heasserted that the majority "would not be the hard working settlers of the colony, but the monopolists and capitalists of the colony—[Cheers]—backed up by a section of the press, who are under the thumb of the capitalists. [Cheers. J He knew for a fact of a portion of the press in a certain part of the country where the directojs at a meeting carried by a majority of one capitalist that the paper must go in against provincialism- That was how public opinion was fostered. He warned those who thought the Bill was going to give a great boon and additional liberties to the people to look at this, and he was speaking particularly for Otago, because in the absence any public opinion, they could not tell the feeling of the colony. Those at present in support of the Bill were not miners nor settlers, but two classes, viz, those trained to rely upon the Government for everything, and money being spent in their place, and the class who had got millions of acres of the best land in their possession, and declined to give up one acre for the purposes of settlement. It was that class—he did not wish to name members of the House —who were strongly supporting this Bill. How was New Zealand to take her place on the roll of nations ? Not by handing over the country to feudal Lords, but by imbuing the people with truly democratic feeling—that was a feeling of Government for and by the people. That was the only way she could become a great nation. [Loud cheers 1 . Mr Wales, who followed, characterised Mr Stout's speech as special pleading, and charged him with viewing everything with provincial spectacles. [Mr J. C. Brown was speaking at 10 p.m.]