GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 411, 6 October 1875, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

l ßy Electric Telegraph.]

{From a correspondent of tJve Press.') Monday, October 4. The House resumed at 7.30. IN COMMITTEE.

In Committee on the Debtors' and Creditors' Bill. On the clause relating to the after acquired property of a bankrupt being rendered liable for his previous debts, the Minister OF Justice said he held a strong opinion in -favor of the clause, but since he was aware that there was a strong feeling against the clause, he would be quite satisfied to take the opinion of the committee upon it. Mr Pearce, in opposing the clause, said the charging of a bankrupt's property up to ten shillings was an absolute premium for dishonesty. Mr Fitzherbert gave expression to the opinion that the time would come when all legislation on this subject would be repealed, the State confining itself to imposing penalties which should be reasonably severe in cases of fraudulent conduct. Several amendments were carried, and the Bill reported. The Fraudulent Debtors' Bill and the Stamp Duties Bill were considered in committee. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON REPRESENTATION BILL. Messrs Cuthbertson and McGillivray eupported the measure.

Mr SWANSOK considered members should have be. n taken from those districts over ■ cpri-Nchtid at present, and given to those admitted by the Government to be under represented. Mr O'Neill contended flint it woull only be an act of justice to give three members to the Thames.

Mr W. KELLY would oppose the Bill, unless the additional member proposed to be given to Napier was given to the southern portion of the East Coast district. Mr ANDREW would support the second reading, bat he thought the additional representation had been chosen too much from the centres of population. It would be an improvement if the Government went a little farther, and gave a third member to the Thames/and another member'to the^Waikato. Mr Reid would also support the second reading, but considerable improvement might be made in committee. The additional member proposed to be given to Napier should be'given to Mataura. Mr O'CONOR spoke against giving an additional member to the Grey Valley, the population of which was decreasing, and going to the neighboring district of Buller. The Bill was a breach of faith, considering the previous promises of the Government to deal with the matter comprehensively. On the motion of Mr Fitzherbert, the debate was adjourned.

(Press Telegraph Agency ) Tuesday, October 5. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30. PRIVILEGE.

The Speaker mentioned to the House that the New Zealand Times had printed the report of the Ohinemuri committee that morning; but he had been unable to find out by whose fault it had occurred. It had been brought up, laid upon the table, and sent down to the printing office to be printed, and he was unaware any copy had left the House. He regretted that the report had been published, as it had been done without the leave or wish of the House. Mr T. Kelly said the evidence had also been published. The matter dropped. questions.

Mr DIGNAN asked if Government intended to connect the Auckland and Waikato railway with the Queen's wharf at Auckland. Hon Major Atkinson did not clearly understand the exact meaning of the question, bat he might state that the railway wharf proper was being constructed, and would be worked entirely by the Harbor Board. There were several proposals now under consideration for taking the line into Auckland.

In reply to Mr W. Kelly, the Treasurer said Government had investigated the system introduced by the captain of the ship Rodney for securing the health and safety of immigrants, with the view to its adoption in other ships conveying immigrants to the colony, and that he was in communication with the Agent-General on the subject. FIEST READINGS. The Invercargill Public Office Site Bill, and Provincial Appropriation Acts Continuance Bill were read a first lime. bills passed. The Debtors and Creditors Bill, and Outram Telegraph Station Reserve Bill were passed. BORROWING. In reply to a question from Mr Rolleston, as to the answer given yesterday by the Treasurer to Mr Thomson, he stated he regretted the hon gentleman should accept stories from the man in the streets as of more weight than the official statement of the Treasurer. He stated they had an official statement from the former Treasurer of the colony that no such promise had been made regarding the colony's future borrowing. If the House did not choose to accept his statement without being supported by some document or extracts from a document, he would consider whether it would be advisable to produce an extract from a private letter. In addition to Sir J. Vogel's statement, that he would give no pledge regarding fresh loans, he said he did not think the colony would require to go into the market for two years, but he most positively declined to give any kind of pledge upon the point. By the financial statement it would be seen it would be necessary and advisable to take any reasonable opportunity to raise the remainder of the guaranteed debentures, but only a small amount would be required for expenditure during the current year. When a favorable opportunity offered, Government would place the remainder of these in the market. Mr Fitzherbert said Sir J. Vogel had no right to tamper with the credit of the colony or deal privately with a matter which intimately affected the whole colony. Why should the Treasurer have to take time to consider whether the information should be laid before the House ? nor should the Minister receive a private communication regarding such important matters as the colony's finance. About that there ought to be no privacy. Mr Stafford said that while the House was entitled to the fullest information on matters affecting the public interest, he was somewhat surprised that the hou member for Butt should make such an assertion as that a private communication should not be respected when he ought to know that very often information was obtained that would not have been obtained, had it not been known that its origin would not be divulged. This was a question recently raised in the British House of Commons regarding a dispatch to Earl Russell from the French ambassador, but the principle could not be impugned that there was a class of communications that should not be divulged. Of course as the Treasurer had already given the substance of an extract from one of Sir J. Vogel's letters which conveyed all the information really required, there could be no very great objection to submit that extract if the House required it. Mr Rolleston expressed himself quite satisfiedjwith the statement of the Treasurer, and would withdraw his motion.

Mr Thomson said it was pretty apparent that Sir J. Vogel had been asked by Messrs Rothschild for a pledge that the colony would not go into the market to borrow for two years. Sir G, Grey thought the House should be informed that when Sir J. Vogel was asked to give a pledge, and upon declining to do so, and saying he would ask the opinion of his colleagues upon the point, the House should be acquainted with the nature of the reply of the Ministry here. Hon Major ATKINSON said they had been already informed. The present Ministry declined to give any pledge. DISQUALIFICATION. Touching disqualification, Mr Stafford informed the House that he had been com-

pelled to sell Government a piece of land for railway purposes, but he had no option in the matter, as they had power by law to compel him to sell. He made the explanation to put himself right with the House regarding disqualification. NATIVE LANDS. Mr Sheehan called the attention of the House to the complaints of the natives of Hawke's B.iy as to the manner in which they have been treated by certain Europeans in reference to their lands. The matter was of such groat, importance that it would be criminal in him to remain silent. The hon gentleman referred to the Bill introduced by the member for Timaru for appointing n commission to enquire into certain land transactions in Hawkes Bay. Owing to various causes the question had been shelved since 1873, but he thought it would be a great pity if this Parliament dissolved without considering the matter. Some sixteen years ago Hawkes Bay had been created under the new Provinces Act, and for the next eleven years the whole control of the affairs of that province had been in the hands of a gentleman, now Native Minister and the present member for Clive. At that time the bulk of the land around Napier belonged to the natives there, who, from their previous isolation from civilizing influences, were about the most ignorant of all the natives in the colony, and they consequently never had that correct appreciation of the operation of, the Native Lands Act until it was too late. The result was that the native title there was almost completely extinguished, an' 3 the land had passed away from them to Europeans, under circumstances which the House must deplore. He was perfectly satisfied the Native Lands Courts were, to a great extent, answerable for this, through not having done their duty. It was these courts that were answerable for inflicting great evils upon the natives, and giving Hawkes Bay such an unenviable notoriety. It was of these courts he wished to complain to the House. The hon gentleman went into details to show how the natives parted with their lands, how they had first got into debt to the publican and storekeeper, and how the mortgage and conveyance rapidly followed, and the natives became dispossessed of their lands without ever once having had a glimmering idea of the incidence of mortgages. This state of things continued from 1867 to 1872, certain periods of the time being one continuous drunk amongst the natives, who could obtain stores and poisonous liquor with fatal facility. The worst feature of these transactions was that a great many natives who were no parties to giving these mortgages were deprived of their lands for ever, through the machinations of a few designing Europeans, who were known as " The ring." There was one glaring instance where a Mr Williams, who, outwardly, was supposed to be acting in the interest cf the natives in one of these transactions, was yet secretly and personally interested in the transaction. Instead of being an independent person who was instructing the natives and looking after their interests, he was really making the bargain for himself. Messrs Samuel Williams, James Williams, Ormond (member for Clive), Tanner, Russell, and, he believed, an agent named Gordon, were all interested in the land speculation. In order to induce one of the grantees to sign, and to get the other grantees to sign, he was secretly paid £SOO as a bribe to get his co-grantees to si<?n, which he did. In about twelve months after, an attempt was mad 3 to secure the freehold, though it had been agreed that no one of the grantees could sell without the consent of the others. The hon gentleman then related at length Ihe history of the cases of Tareha and of Mr Parker, of the transactions batween Mr Stewart in his endeavors to purchase the freehold of the Heretaunga block, through Messrs Hamlin and Grindell and Worgan. He also read a letter from Mr Hamlin to the Native Minister, condemning the doings of Mr Worgan, and making grave charges against him, which had never yet been investigated. The hon gentleman referred to the attempts to effect a purchase of the Heretaunga block, and mentioned that £3500 had been paid to Henry Tomoana and Karaitiana his brother, as a bribe unknown to the rest of the grantees, to cause the sale of the block to be effected for a sum of £13,500 for about a 16,000-acre block. To show what idea the purchasers of the block had of their own transaction, he mentioned that as only about £ISOO remained out of the £13,000, after the debts for grog and stores were paid, two natives who were dissatisfied at not having received any of the money had to be silenced by being paid £7OO hush money. His remarks were interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment.

{From a correspondent of the Press.)

According to the Tribune, the prorogation is fixed for the 20th.

Quite a string of amendments are proposed in the Representation Bill. Inter alia, Mr Stafford moves upon clause 7—" The electoral district of Timaru, as now constituted under the said Act, shall be divided into two electoral districts, by the River Opihi. The district, north of the Opihi, shall be called by the name of 'The Geraldine district,' and the district south of the said river shall be called by the name of ' Timaru district,' and each district shall return one member." On the San Francisco resolution, Mr Stafford moves that the following words be added to the resolution moved by Mr Reynolds— " Subject, however, to such modifications of terms of said contract as may be agreed on between the Governments of New Zealand and New South Wales and the contractors, whereby the annual charge imposed on the revenue of New Zealand for the said service shall not exceed forty thousand pounds." Mr T. Kelly will move that the following be added to Mr Reynolds' resolution—" Provided that such approval shall not be deemed to prevent the following modification of the contract being given effect to," viz, " that route G be substituted without the coastal service, provided that the cost of such service does not exceed £36,000 per annum. In the event of such modification being agreed to, that tenders be invited for performing the interprovincial delivery of mails." Government will oppose both amendments. ■ SAN FRANCISCO SERVICE. In speaking to the San Francisco contract resolution, Hon Mr Reynolds said the deviation of the contract from the resolution was very trifling. Instead of the terminal voyage alternating between Sydney and Port i Chalmers, the boats from San Francisco are

to run through to Sydney, and the boats from Port Chalmers are to run through to San Francisco ; transhipments of cargo, passengers, and msiils in each case are to be made at Kandavau. This, I think, is a far more satisfactory arrangement than the fork hervice proposed by the resolution. The next deviation is that the annual payment under the contract is £SOOO above that authorised by the resolution, and the service is extended from six to eight years. Experience has shown thac to insure an efficient service no lesser sum would suffice. Assuming the colony takes advantage of this service for the conveyance of its mails, the receipts may be thus calculated— For postage collected in the co ony, £15,000; i ondoti payments for postage;. £12,000 ; passages from noncontributing colonies, £2500 ; total, £29,500 : which will show the actual cost or loss to the colony to be £15,500, while upon a similar calculation the cost or loss to the colony under the Suez service would be £IO,OOO. or £5500 less than by the San Francisuo service. It must here be remembered that in this calculation I have Dot taken into consideration in either case the cost of the distribution of mails throughout the colony, nor the general expenses of the post office department. In comparing the respective services via San Francisco and Suez the advantages as regards time arelargelyin favorof the former. By the contract service via San Francisco the letters will be delivered between London and Auckland in 44 days, between London and Wellington in 48 days, between London and Christchurch in 49 days, and between London and Dunedin in 50 days; while under the Suez service, they would be delivered according to the time table, via Southampton, in Auck laud in 63 days, in Wellington in 62 days, in Christchurch in 61 days, in Dunedin in 59 days; via Brindisi, in Auckland 56 days, in Wellington in 55 days, in Christchurch in 54 days, in Dunedin in 52 days, thus showing in favor of the San Francisco over the Suez an earlier delivery than by the Southampton or Brindisi respectively to Auckland of 19 and 12 days, to Wellington of 14 and 7 days, to Christchurch of 12 and 5 days, to Dunedin of 9 and 2 days. The rates of postage between the colony and London, by the San Francisco and Southampton routes are identical, but by way of Brindisi there is extra charge of 3d per half ounce on letters, and from 2d to 4d each on newspapers. Most of the commercial correspondence by the Suez service is sent via Brindisi, so that the writing public have to pay by this route 50 per cent additional, and that too for a slower service. This difference of 50 per cent will, 1 reckon, more than make up the extra cost of £5500 of the San Francisco as against the Suez service.