GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 406, 30 September 1875, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

[By Electric Telegraph.] (From a correspondent of the Press ) Tuesday, September 28. QUALIFICATION OF ELECTORS BILL. The debate was resumed on the Qualification of Electors Bill. The speakers in favor of the Bill were Messrs Williams, Pearce (who reminded the House that two years ago large petitions were presented in favor of extending the franchise to lodgers), Montgomery, May, and Tribe. On division, the Bill was thrown out by 20 to 28. The following is the division list: — Ayes, 20 Messrs Atkinson, Basstian, Bowen, Bryce, Buckland, Gibbs, Harrison, May, McGillivray, McGlashan, McLean, G., Montgomery, Parker, C., Fyke, Reynolds, Richardson, Shephard, Swanson. Noes, 28—Messrs Andrew, Ballance, Bradshaw, J. E Brown, Carrington, Dignan, Fitzherbert, Sir G. Grey, Messrs Hunter, Ingles, Katene, Kelly, Kenny, Macandrew, O’Conor, Ormond, O’Rorke, Parata, Reeves, Reid, Rolleston, Sheehan, Takamona, Yon der Heyde, Wakefield, Ward, White, Williams. Pairs—For : Mr Bunny; against : Mr O’Neil. ABOLITION BILL. On the House assembling at 7.80, The Treasurer moved that the Abolition Bill should be recommitted, to allow of an alteration, proposed by the member for Taieri, in clause 16, to introduce the words “ Boards of Conservators,” and to add a new clause to stand as section 27, which was circulated as a supplementary order paper. Sir G. Grey complained of an attempt being made to hurry on the clause. He objected to its being considered before tomorrow, so that he might have an opportunity of consulting with his friends upon it, to see whether or not it was an infraction of the agreement that had been come to between the two parties. If it was gone on with that evening he would move that the Bill be recommitted generally. The Treasurer was prepared to meet the hon gentleman opposite, but they were not prepared to run the risk of having to fight the battle over again, and therefore declined to recommit the Bill altogether. The amendment was a mere matter of administration, which ten minutes’ discussion would make clear to the member for Auckland City West. Mr Macandrew could see no necessity for the new clause. If it was intended to enable reserves to be made, the power already existed for Superintendents to temporarily make reserves without the consent of the Provincial Councils,

Sir G. Grey said the agreement entered into between the two parties was specific, and in it there was no mention of this clause, neither were the Government to add any clause they liked. He contended that according to every principle of honor this clause could not be introduced into the Bill without his first having an opportunity of consulting his friends to see whether or not it fell within the arrangement come to. He had a right to use every means in his power to try and get the Bill recommitted and things brought back to their original state. The Minister of Justice said the Government were willing that the new clause should be considered in committee, but they decidedly objected to the proposal of the member for Auckland west. After some remarks by Messrs Fitzherbert and Cuthbcrtson, The Treasurer said unless the Bill was read a third time that night, it could not be read until Friday, and it was exceedingly desirable that it should not be sent up to the Council too late in the session. Therefore, it appeared to the Government a matter of considerable importance that the clauses should be considered and fully discussed in the House, and the Bill read a third time that night, or they would consent to the postponement of the clause till to-morrow on the understanding that the Bill would then be made a first order of the day. Government had no desire to hurry the clausa through, but they desired to get the Bill out of the House as quickly as possible. Sir G. Grey objected to the consideration of the clause that night. He had partially acquiesced in what was done, but he had done so with sorrow, with regret, and with a sense of shame, and having made a sacrifice of that kind, he thought he had a fair right to ask for time to consult with his friends concerning this clause, which was, he believed, a breach of the agreement between the parties. The action that had been taken was very wrong. He was unanimously elected Superintendent of Auckland by 14,000 people, and when he took office he was not bound in any way to the Governor or to the present Ministry. He was in no way a servant or associate of theirs, and in no way undertook to look to them for guidance or control. He refused to act under them or to be put under their control in any way whatever. He was under no control at the time the Bill was passed, and to introduce such a clause and to bring it into immediate operation would be to take away from him his rights in making him enter into communication with persons on a subject he did not wish to communicate with them upon, and regarding which the law did not require him to communicate with them. To him the principle was of the greatest magnitude. He had given way already—or he would not say given way—he had submitted from meekness, and had allowed himself to Violate a principle, for which violation he would never entirely forgive himself. After what he had done, for Government at the last moment to suddenly put this new clause into his hands, and backed by their majority, to tell him that he must assent to it-being done immediately was wrong ; and he said more, in honor, considering the agreement made, Government dared not do it. The Treasurer remarked that Government had shown every willingness to meet the hou gentleman opposite, but after the speech of the hon member for Auckland West, they would not be prepared to postpone the consideration of the leport till to-morrow, but would that night ask the House to read the Bill a third time. [Hear.] On the motion being made that the House should go into committee to consider Mr Beid’s amendment of clause 3, sub-section 16, Mr Sheehan moved—“ That the new clause, of which notice had been given,, should also be considered in committee,” whereupon a division was called for, and the doors having been locked, considerable discussion took place as to the position of thequestion. Ultimately the Treasurer explained that it was in consequence of thespeech of the member for Auckland west that Government felt bound to assert themselves and the large party supporting them ;. but the intention of the Government from the first had been that the clause should he fully considered in committee, and they were prepared that it should be so considered, on the understanding that that would be done, and the Bill be read a third time next day, when it would be made a first order of the day. Mr Rolleston having elicited from the Government that the object of the new clause was to enable Superintendents with the Governor in Council to exercise power in certain cases which had hitherto been exercised by Superintendents mutually with their Provincial Councils, Mr Fitzherbert intimated that the Opposition would offer no opposition on a technical ground to the third reading. The words “ Board of Conservators ” having been added to subsection 16, progress was reported, and leave obtained to sit again. BILL DISCHARGED. In consequence of the decision of the House upon the Qualification of Electors 'Bill, the Supplementary Electoral Roll Bill was, on the Hon Mr Reynolds’ motion, discharged. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL. The Municipal Corporations Bill was read a third time and passed. RAILWAYS BILL. The Railways Bill was further considered in committee, and reported with amendments. DEBTORS AND CREDITORS BILL. In committee on the Debtors and Creditors Bill, The Minister op Justice proposed some amendments. Mr J. E. Brown and Mr Shepherd spoke at considerable length in opposition to the Bill, and the first-mentioned moved it be read that day six months. On Mr Hunter’s motion, the debate was adjourned. committee of supply. In committee of supply the following services were granted : Stamps, £4030; printing, £10,130; store, £662 : geological and meteorological, £3210; electoral, £3885 ; secretary for Crown lands, £1765; inspection of machinery, £IBSO ; department of justice, £1175 ; Crown law office, £2160 ; Supreme Court, £7285 ; district Courts, £5000; Resident Magistrate Courts, £21,455 ; Petty Sessions Courts, £100; criminal prosecution, <£6000; coroners, £1800; lunatics, £500; contingencies, £I6OO ; Land and Transfer department, £9300 ; Deeds registry, £9255 ; telegraphs, £75,511; Customs, £41,997 ;marine, £15,295, On the item Grown lauds office, Mr Montgomery asked whether it was intended to appoint an Attorney-General as well as a Solicitor-General,

The Treasurer replied that no perm an on* appointment of Attorney-Gencnl would tv made until the question of wheih i o- m< that office should be a political out had hem considered by the House. Mr Rolleston then enquired whether an opportunity would be given this session ol discussing that matter, to which question tin TREASURER replied in the negative, adding that the Solicitor-General was legally empowered to do all Acts required to be performed by the Attorney-General. Progress was reported after the vote for the Customs Department was passed. PIAKO swamp sale. The number of the Piako Swamp sale committee was increased to eleven, the names of Messrs Sheehan and Kolleston being added to it. Wednesday, September 29. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30. FIRST READINGS. The following Bills were read a first time —Bill to amend the Gold Mining Districts Act, 1873 ; Bill to abolish the Import Duties now levied on Tea, Coffee, Sugar,and Flo^r; Imprisonment for Debt Abolition Bill; Representation Amendment ; the two last being introduced by the Hon C. C. Powen. ABOLITION OF IMPORT DUTIES, On Sir G. Grey giving notice of the second reading of the Bill to abolish the import duties on flour, &c, for Wednesday, Sir D. McLean intimated that the Government, at the subsequent stages of the Bill, would oppose it on principle. Any Bill dealing with taxation should emanate from the Government, ABOLITION BILL, On the House going into committee to consider the new clause 27 of the Abolition Bill, Mr Sheehan asked if the clause was intended to have retrospective action. The Treasurer replied in the negative. Mr Sheehan condemned the clause as a departure from the agreement already made, and asserted that the Government, because they were unable to carry out their intention of immediately passing the Bill, had in a malicious manner held up Provincial Councils to public scorn. Mr Kolleston asked for a distinct answer to the question he put yesterday, was his understanding of the clause a correct one that the Governor could only act under it, by the act of the Superintendent himself? [“ Hear, hear,” from the Treasurer.] He understood the clause was introduced to prevent any difficulty arising from the passing of that clause under which Provincial Councils can no longer meet. He disagreed himself with this latter clause,buthe believed there were circumstances under which great inconvenience to a large section of the public might arise in exceptional cases, but as he read the clause there was no intention to override the authority of the Provincial Governments. The Treasurer said the member for Avon had correctly interpreted the clause. He was very much surprised at the member for Rodney taking the extraordinary view he had of the meaning of the clause. He disagreed entirely with that hon member that it was outside the agreement, which was to try and make the Bill a workable one after fair discussion, but this was clearly a matter of administration. Government had no wish to put Superintendents under the authority of the Governor, or to degrade them in any possible way. Sir G. Grey said there had been a distinct promise made that the Bill should not come into operation until after the close of next session. No more solemn compact was ever entered into, but it had been entirely departed from when Government proposed to repeal the 17th section of the Constitution Act. If it had been intended really to adhere to the compact, Government need not travel one single step beyond the repeal of that section. They had ample power under 'the Constitution Act to do that, and no one would have questioned that power. Having done that they should have removed from the Superintendents all necessity of a finan cial nature for calling Councils together. But not satisfied with that they brought down a •clause providing that it should not be lawful for Superintendents to call Provincial Councils together. But the moment that was passed, the compact was broken, because the Act was made instantly to come into'operation. No sophistry, no power of language man could use, could show anything else than that the introduction of this clause committed a further act of injustice ,than was already committed. The real meaning of the clause was, that the Bill should instantly come into operation and destroy provincial machinery. He appealed to the honor of members; he appealed unhesitatingly to every man who respected contracts entered into by man with his fellow-men, and above all, as respects contracts entered into by a Legislature; and if this course was to be pursued in by a majority, he appealed to those to whom he had referred in honor to reject the Bill upon its third reading, which he believed would be done.

Mr MACANDREWhad cheered the sentiments of the member for Auckland West because he believed by passing the clause powers would be given to the Governor in Council, along with Superintendents, which hitherto had never been exercised without the consent of the representatives of the people. He repeated, the clause was wholly unnecessary. Mr Kelly supported the clause, as did Mr Carrington, who said without it a dead-lock would result.

After some remarks by Mr Reid, Sir G. •GREY asserted that the understanding come to was that the provinces should remain untouched until the day named in the Bill. He earnestly implored the House, as true men, as representatives of the people, to hold to the original agreement, that the Bill or no part of it should come into operation on the day agreed upon. To the utmost he would strive to get that fair interpretation of the agreement carried out. He appealed to the strong side to show not only mercy but justice to the weak side, to show an example to the people, that the Legislature itself would faithfully, scrupulously, honorably, and justly fulfil an agreement entered into, and not allow it to be departed from, Mr Stafford said the necessity for some clause in this direction had been generally il not universally admitted. It had been repeatedly stated the representatives of the people were proposing to confer powers hitherto unknown in the colony upon sorm autocratic body who were Ministers of th< colony, but the representatives of the people were responsible to the people for the aclvici given to the Governor, and their administration from time to time. With reference tc the forcible appeal by the member for Auck

land West, that the Legislature should maintain failhfully some compact which he iss.'-rii-i would be broken by the insertion of his i-imise, lie (Mr Stafford), as one of the nai y who supported the Government in passing (Ids Bill, an-l placing it upon the statute book, deodar d m-i.s: emphatically that one of the inducements to him, and he believed with many m hers on that occasion, for assenting to the Bill not coming into operation until a day after the close of the next session, was being informed by the Govornnn at that one of their stipulations that they intended making a necessary part of the Bill, was that Provincial Councils should be prevented from meeting. [Cheers.] Hon C. C. Bowen was sorry that the matter of fact as to what was the agreement had again been brought before the House. Me should like to get the opinion of other members present when the arrangement was made as to what the understanding was, because he thought it was an absolutely undoubted fact that not only did Ministers state that they insisted upon this clause, but some of the gentlemen then present said they could not be expected to vote for it, but that they would be allowed to discuss it, and the necessity would lay upon the Government of carrying the clause. More than that, this very clause was, however, handed in writing to the gentleman in the room at the time. Mr O’Rorke ventured to say the Native Minister had, in theface of Parliamentand the country, declared what the agreement was. He was not going into what had passed previously as the Minister for Justice had done, because that had been a matter of controversy, but he thought ho was entirely justified in saying the House was bound by the statement of the Minister for himself. He could oniy declare what was true. Government did put upon paper certain terms to which the Minister of Justice had alluded. Hia owu understanding was they were entirely swept away by the agreement finally come to. [Oh.] He presumed he had a right to state his own impression. Sir D, McLean remarked, had he purposely avoided going in details on the occasion referred to, the terms of the agreement had been fairly stated by the members for Avon and Hutt, and he (Sir D. McLean) did not at the moment lay particular stress upon the closing of Provincial Councils, but it was clearly understood that Government made that one of its conditions. Nothing inconsistent with the agreement had been added to the Bill, nor was there a breach of faith, nor a departure from an honorable or distinct understanding. The clause was carried on the voices. Messrs Fitzherbert and Kolleston then stated their views of the understanding arrived at, agreeing with what Ministers stated. On the proposal to at once consider the report of the committee in accordance with the agreement come to last night, MrO’itORKE objected, Messrs Fitzherbert, Eolleston, SHEEHAN, and others argued that this would be a breach of the understanding arrived at yesterday, and urged the withdrawal of opposition thereto, to which Mr O’Rorke consented, saying that he had not been aware of the arrangement. On the proposal to read the Bill a third time, Messrs Reid, Bradshaw, and Sheehan spoke at length against the Bill, going over a great deal of the old ground. The debate will be continued to-night, but is not expecied to last the night out. Sir G, Grey will call for a division. In the Legislative Council, Hon Mr Waterhouse has given notice of his intention to move—“ That in the opinion of the Council the acknowledgment by the Government in the purchase of native lands of the rights or leases acquired by Europeans from the natives, is in violation of the laws of the colony, and is opposed to all sound principles of public policy.” To-day it was notified that the House of Representatives will meet on Mondays in future till the close of the session. On Monday the Postmaster General will move a resolution to ratify the contract entered into by the New South Wales Government, and Mr Russell with the Pacific Mail Company. At the commencement of to-day’s business Mr Reeves, referring to the debate on Friday night, showed that Mr Stafford had, as he (Mr Reeves) had asserted, voted with the noes on his amendment relative to the apportioning of the 25 per cent of the land fund to each district. Mr Stafford remarked that too much stress had been placed by the member for Selwyn on his (Mr Stafford’s) denial. What he stated at the time was that he had believed he had not voted with the noes. He conscientiously believed he had not voted, and was sorry for the mistake he had made. Mr Steward has introduced a Bill which provides that clerks of municipal coiporations and Road Boards shall prepare lists of ratepayers and forward them to the Registration officers of each electoral district, and that the registration officers shall treat all such lists as those of claimants to vote, thus forming the electoral rolls without the voters having to give themselves any trouble in the matter.