WELLINGTON.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 387, 8 September 1875, Page 3

WELLINGTON.

{From a correspondent of the Press.) September 7. The abolition debate has got through yet another stage. On Friday the talk was resumed by Mr Thomson, whose only fresh point was the power abolition was likely to place in the hands of the General Government, by adding to their already large army of clerks a by no means inconsiderable contingent of school masters, police, surveyors, et hoc genus omne, that the taking over of these departments implied. Mr Montgomery had been at pains to draw up a table from the estimates of the departments of the colonial service, and the number of men in each, which Mr Thomson read out to the House. This gave the very large total of 5256 civil servants; and Mr Thomson argued that with the control of that vast number, with a possible thousand or so added thereto on and after November Ist, when abolition, if carried, is to take place, the central Government would be so able to work the elections (the Iron gentleman prides himself on being above making an inuendo, and though he did not say “work the elections” in so many words, he did so by implication), as practically to set opposition at defiance. Mr Thomson cannot credit himself with being a good manipulator of figures, and his treatment of them on this occasion fully justified Mr McGlashan, who followed him, in saying that he had quoted himself into a fog. Equally erroneous were many of the member for Clutha’s deductions. Nor could there be anything more ridiculous than his proposition that the Government could control the votes of those “ free and independents” whose names certainly figure on the nominal roll of civil servants, but whose salaries range from £5 to £SO. The speech of Mr Reader Wood, which was the speech of this stage, of the debate, was sent to you pretty full, and I have little doubt it has met with criticism at your hands. As are all that gentleman’s set speeches, it was capitally delivered; but was as theatrical in style as his great effort of 1872. How well he would have figured on the boards was demonstrated in that part of his {speech wherein he compared the member for Nelson city to Sir P. Macsycophant, whose “ booin and booin ” to Ministers, and swallowing wholesale everything they said or did, led to his advancement. So far, Mr Wood had been most temperate; but when he came to dress down the member for Franklin, he appeared to be burning under a recollection of the sordid motives attributed to him by that hon member, and perhaps was not wholly forgetful of the hon mot which is ascribed to the latter. It is said that, on the occasion of the Government caucus, after the Abolition Bill was brought down, and after Mr Wood had expressed his sentiments thereon and retired from the room, Mr Buckland said, “ Well, well, last year Wood was the apostle of, and this year he is the apostate of abolition.” The unsympathetic cries of the majority, and the interference of the Speaker, prevented Mr Wood from finishing the sentence, in which he was picturing the member for Franklin with “upturned eyes, Chadband-like expression of countenance, and a Wesleyan whine.” This was terribly severe on the member for Franklin, than whom no member (he of Newton excepted) is less troubled by religious feelings. It was amusing to hear Mr Wood charge Mr Stafford with being disingenuous, when in almost the very next breath he laid himself' open to the same charge. While endeavoring to show the House how the balance of £3OOO to Auckland’s credit on August 12th, about which we have heard so much lately, was arrived at, he contended that it formed part of a sum of £6OOO that was legally due to the province. It is worth while examining this little matter, The Assembly last year decided to advance £40,000 to Auckland immediately after the Appropriation Act was passed, and that £6OOO should be paid over every three months’ afterwards. Four of these quarterly payments have already been made within the financial year, but Mr Wood, with an amount of ingenuity that would have done credit to a lawyer, contends now that, insomuch as a fifth quarter has commenced before the close |ofj the financial year, the province is entitled to that fifth payment of £6OOO. And this point appears to have been raised in his speech on Friday for the first time, for previously the appeal had ■ been made to the Government ad misericordiam. Mr Wood’s speech concluded with a declaration which should have had the effect of detaching from his following all those southern members who are pledged to secure to their provinces the continuance of the land fund. The amendment of the member for Parnell is neither more nor less than a declaration that he will at the proper time lead the Auckland phalanx on to an attack on theland fund. Mr Brown, of Tuapeka, next moved an

adjournment of the debate, on the ground that it was but fair that the Government Bills in reference to the land fund and the endowment of;Education Boards should be in the hands of members before they were further asked to consider the question. This view was strongly supported by Mr Stout, and by Mr Reid, who made a violent attack on the Upper House in general and on Dr Pollen in particular, for having by their “ obstinate” opposition threatened the Otago Land Bill ; and by Mr Fitzherbort, who made a most violent attack upon Ministers. Considering that Mr Brown, who, by the way, acted on the responsibility of a few of the Opposition, had been put «p to break through the arrangements previously come to by the two whips, the Government declined to put up any of their side to reply to the Opposition speakers, or to answer any question put to them. Mr White wm particularly savage at the stolidity of Ministers ; but Mr Fitzherbert was fairly beside himself with rage. He turned upon Ministers the full force of invective, which no one in that House can better use than he j charged them with sitting in their places like dumb dogs; their supporters with being like slaves with shackles round them, so that they were obliged to vote as they were directed. The Ministerialists were told that they had mistaken for the Almighty a golden calf, which, like an ancient race, they bowed down to and worshipped ; and Ministers heard, without answering a word, the insinuation thrown out that the public works policy had paid the inventors. Then with raised voice Mr Fitzherbert, with pointed finger to the Ministerial bench, declared “that those snen would descend to anything to retain their seats” ; and that in acting as they had that night, they had not the slightest regard for the respectable position they held. Mr Sheehan also delivered himself of a good speech, in which he made the House roar at the expense of Taranaki’s Superintendent, who the night before had kept the House in high glee during the half hour he was engaged in reading a wonderful State paper; in which he had set forth the advantages of Taranaki, and explaining to the House how he had got his harbor. Shortly after midnight the irrepressible member for Bruce, who with a degree of patriotism that should ensure him long remembrance by his constituents, came fresh from a scene of revelry, appeared in his place, and “spoke all round” for over an hour, just to keep the game alive. He was occasionally interrupted by motions for adjournment or questions of order; but though he was good for an hour longer, his leaders thought it desirable at 1.45 to throw up the sponge. Of course Mr Murray had the field to himself, and so so situated allowed hia fancy full play, speaking mainly to his own party, for there was just enough of them with Ministers to keep a House together. Two or three times the Speaker’s attention was called to the state of the House, but the ringing of the bells brought in a rush of Ministerialists, who, as soon as the Speaker declared that “ the hon member” in possession of the chair “ may proceed,” or the question was put, trotted back to Bellamy’s, there to pass the time away till their services were required, At 1.45, the House divided on the main question with the result you know. The resolution was read a second time, and the wearied members adjourned till 'I uesday, when Major Atkinson will, on going into committee, reply to the criticisms of Mr Wood and Mr Rolleston on the financial part of the Bill.

Apropos of the abolition debate, some calculating mind in the Post has been at pains to make the following analysis of the speeches:—“The debate extended II nights, and 54 members out of 76 addressed the House. The speeches occupy 665 columns of Hansard, and were they placed lengthwise, would measure 414 ft 4in. Thu longest speech in the debate was delivered by Mr Fitzherbert, measuring 374 in of Hansard, or over 31ft. The shortest was Mr Dignan’s, which measured sin. Mr Fitzherbert's speech equalled, within 2in, the combined speeches of 14 of the shortest speakers during the debate. Mr Sheehan comes next to Mr Fitzherbert in order of length, with 203 in, being an inch short of 17ft. Mr Reid contributed 15ft 4£iu ; Mr Stout, 12ft 6in ; Mr J. C. Brown, lift. The longest speech on the Government side was Mr Cuthbertson’s, who contributed 10ft 6in. The greatest number of speeches delivered at any one sitting was on the tenth day, when nine members spoke. The ninth sitting, however, when seven members spoke, contributed the largest quantity of matter to Hansard —namely, 55ft 6in.”