GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 417, 13 October 1875, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[By Electric Telegraph.] [Per Press Agency.] LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Tuesday, October 12. The Speaker took the chair at 2.80, native lands. Hon Mr Mantell moved—" That in the opinion of this Council the purchase of native lands by the Government should in due regard for the best interests of the colony be conducted with the most scrupulous integrity and honor, and that therefore it is incumbent upon the Government to exercise the greatest care in the selection of agents for that important duty." This was carried. disqualification act. Hon Mr Menzies moved —" That in the opinion of this Council it is expedient that the Government should bring in a Bill this session to amend the Disqualification Act, 1870, in order to bring the letter into conformity with the spirit of the Act." This was carried. LEAYE OF ABSENCE. Hon Mr Acland was granted leave of absence for the remainder of the session. the piako land. The following motion by Hon Colonel Kenny was lost—" That with a view to the settlement of the matters, re the subject of the Piako Land Exchange Bill (No 2), it is expedient, in, the opinioD of this] Council, that that Bill should be withdrawn by the Government, and that the Government should afford Mr Whitaker every facility and assistance in arranging with the natives for the survey of the land, for which he has been awarded a Crown grant by the Land Claims Commissioners, or in otherwise effecting an equitable arrangement with the natives. parliamentary privileges. A Bill to amend the Parliamentary Privileges Act was received from the Lower House, and the standing orders suspended on the motion of the Premier, in order to proceed to its consideration at once. The Bill was read a second time with trifling comment, passed through committee, and all its stages, without amendment.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, October 11. The House resumed at 7.30. IMMIGRATION AND PUBLIC WORKS ACTS. The committee on the Immigration and Public Works Acts Amendment Bill was resumed, when the Chairman reported progress, and had leave to sit again. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON SAN FRANCISCO CONTRACT. The Treasurer suggested that as there were so many amendments it would facilitate business if the House went into committee on the question. This was agreed to, and the House went into committee.

The Treasurer said after a general expression of opinion by the supporters of the Government that it was desirable to make certain concessions, Government thought it right to move an amendment in the resolution submitted by the Commissioner of Customs, by which the expression of approval would be omitted, and the resolution would stand as follows—" That this House ratifies the joint contract entered into on the 23rd July, 1875, by Sir D. Cooper, Bart., and Mr Thomas Russell, on behalf of the Government of New Zealand and New South Wales respectively with the Pacific Mail Steamship Company, for whom Messrs Elder and Co, of Glasgow, and Mr Macgregor, M.P. for Leith, are sureties, for a four weekly mail steam service between San Francisco and Sydney, and between New Zealand and San Francisco." He said the Government had been blamed for their course of conduct, more especially with regard to the action of Sir J. Vogel in giving instructions to Mr Russell while the House was in session, and not communicating the purport of it to the House. He must at once say that Government took the entire responsibility for Sir J. Vogel's conduct. The action of Sir J. Vogel was the action of the Government. He acknowledged that it was a mistake not telling the House of the instructions, but palpably this was an oversight caused by the press of business on the day of prorogation, which was the only opportunity he had of doing so. He said this was evident from the words both in the letter to Mv Russell and the contract itself—" Subject to ratification by Parliament;" therefore, if not ratified, the contractors would have no claim against the colony. Taking, however, into consideration that the recognised agent of the colony had made this contract, that a member of the Government, on behalf of the colony, had signed it, that the colony waß mixed up in the affair with another colony, that the contractors had made arrangements for carrying out the service, and looking to the small sum by which the contract exceeded the vote of the House, that if it were worth £40,000 it was surely worth £45,000, the hon gentleman submitted therefore that it would be most consistent with the honor of the House to ratify the contract and leave it to the Government to endeavor during the recess so to modify the terms so as to bring it within the terms of the resolution of the House, He would shortly move a resolution to the latter effect.

Sir D. Bell reverted to what took place last session, and pointed out the difference between what the House had authorised and the instructions given by Sir J. Vogel to Mr Russell. For instance, £45,000 in place of £40,000; ten years vice six (he did not blame the Government for this but exclusively Sir J. Vogel), the reduction of the speed from twelve to ten knots. On the last day of the last session Sir J. Vogel had informed the House of Mr Russell's visit to Sydney to arrange with the Government of New South Wales, but in that statement there was not one word of the extended powers given to Mr Russell. Sir I). Bell regretted that Sir J. Vogel was not here to hear him, but he must do his duty, and say Sir J. Vogel had committed (?) on the Parliament of the country in giving instructions to an ambassador totally at variance with the expressed wishes of the House. The Hoube did not deserve to be treated with so little respect. It had entrusted the Government with money and power to an extent never before given to any Ministers. At the same time he must say there could be no doubt Sir J. Vogel only acted as he (Sir J, Vogel) thought was best for the colony.

Hon E. Richardson said it would be no breach of confidence to say that it had been decided in the Cabinet that Sir J. Vogel should on the day of prorogation inform the House of the nature of the instructions given to Mr Russell, and it must have been in the hurry and pressure of business that the matter was overlooked and the explanation not given, Mr Cuthbertson would vote against the ratification of the contract. He spoke long and warmly of the manner in which the authority of the House had been set aside. He could not accept the explanation offered by Ministers, as the papers before the House were at variance with it, and, in his opinion, showed Sir J. Vogel's reticence to have been intentional, and not accidental. He thought the coastal service useless, and would be willing to dispense with it. If this were done so far as the San Francisco boats were concerned, the colony ought to reap the full advantage of such concession. Mr Sheehan thought there was no course open but to accept the proposals of the Treasurer. He, personally, highly approved of the San Francisco service, and thought it the best possible mode of advertising the colony, but was not satisfied with the explanation of the Treasurer. It was evident that, notwithstanding the limits put by the House last year, it had been the intention of Ministers to make the contract, knowing the House must ratify it or expose the colony to odium and distrust on the part of the other contracting parties. It was the merest farce inserting a clause making the contracts subject to ratification by the House, which was so bound by the action of Ministers, that all it could do would be to ratify this, as it had so many other contracts.

The Native Minister said Government intended during the recess to make modifications, and would next year submit them to the House. If members would read the correspondence they would be satisfied every endeavour had been made to render this San Francisco service advantageous to the colony He himself felt sure it would add largely to our prosperity. He utterly repudiated the idea of allowing Sir J. Vogel to shield the Ministers here from shame. The Government had always held themselves responsible for the acts of their absent colleague. Sir D. Bell thought it very undesirable to leave out the words " approve of." The leaving them out simply meant that the Houße disapproved. He would vote for the ratification. Mr May would go further and authorise Government to make the best arrangements possible without the necessity of submitting

them for ratification. Though he could not agree with Sir J. Vogel's course of action last year ia his instructions to Mr Russell, still, on the whole, the contract was a good one, and he should vote for its ratification.

Mr Stafford pointed out that the effect of the resolution would be merely to ratify the contract, leaving it to the subsequent action of the Government to make modifications. Government, in omitting the words, had merely deferred to the wishes of a section of the House, and asked a ratification of the contract without any expression of feeling on the subject. He did not consider there was any slur cast upon Sir J. Vogel by his colleagues. They merely deferred to the opinion of the House.

Mr T. Kelly would support the ratification of the contract. Hon E. Richardson said it would be impossible to face the contractors and ask for a modification of the contract, with a resolution expressing the approval of the House with the contract. That was the reason Government suggested the omission of the words "approved of." Mr Fitzherbert disapproved of the contract, the want of skill in its negotiation, and the want of regard for the authority of Parliament, and especially he disapproved of the way the scheme had been concocted. Looking at the correspondence, he observed that the reply of Mr Russell had been written on the same day as the letter of Sir J. Vogel to him, and therefore he concluded that the matter would have been concocted. Mr Reeves moved to strike out all the words after " that" to insert the following : " Whilst this House disapproves the action of the Government in authorising Mr Russell, while the House was in session, and without its knowledge or sanction, to involve the colony in an expenditure of £45,000 for the Californian steam service in the face of the fact that the maximum sum authorised by House was £40,000, thinks that such action is a slight to Parliament and calculated to diminish its control over the public expenditure. It further expresses the opinion that the contract should be concluded in accordance with the terms already authorised by this House." The hon gentleman said it was unnecessary for him to take up the time of the House. The words of his motion were sufficiently explanatory. It was universally admitted that a very grave offence had been committed by the Government, in authorising their agent to act at variance with a general resolution of the House. He could not, for the life of him. see how the Government had brought themselves into such a position. They in fact brought down a vote of want of confidence in themselves. He hoped the House would resent the action of Government in not informing the House of the nature of the instructions given to Mr Russell. If it had been from a slip of memory on Mr Vogel's part, why did not his colleagues jog his memory or give the information themselves. Such an argument was nnworthy of the Treasurer, and an insult to the House, as it was also in not informing the House of Mr Vogel's intention to visit England—an intention which appeared to have been communicated to his colleagues just at the same time he notified his intention of writing to Mr Russell. He trusted the House would m«rk its sense of such conduct by voting for his motion. It was a great mistake to let the contractors think that the ratification of contracts by the House was a re are matter of course. The sooner they knew where the supreme power and ultimate appeal rested, the better for both contractors and Ministers themselves.

Mr Reynolds utterly repudiated the idea that Ministers desired to throw any responsibility on their absent colleague. On the contrary, they were prepared to accept the entire responsibility for Mr Vogei's action, and he thought the House ought to believe this, and not reiterate the charge, as the members of the Opposition had done. He pointed out the absurdity of moving the second part of the Treasurer's resolution if the words " approved of " had not first been omitted. It would be stultifying themselves to do so. They could not propose a modification of the contract after the House had passed resolutions approving of the same. The Government would reduce the amount of the subsidy to £40,000, possibly below that. He concluded by saying he was certain it was the intention of Sir J. Vogel to communicate the letter to Mr Russell and Mr Russell's reply before the prorogation.

Sir George Grey said there were indications which told him that the beginning of the end approached. He perceived an undoubted symptom that at length the schoolboys, hitherto held in thraldom, were about to rise up and revolt against their master. He gathered from the countenances he saw around him, and from the words spoken that evening, that the limits of forbearance had been passed, and that what the House and the country had so long submitted to, would not be much longer borne. The member for Hutt had indisputably shown that there had been a concerted plan to set that House at defiance. No one accustomed to official correspondenee could doubt that Sir J. Vogel and Mr Russell had agreed on what the terms of their mutual letters should be before these letters were written. Indeed, he thought there were undoubted proofs of those letters having been written in each other's presence, and it was certain that the terms of those letters were such as to set at defiance the whole authority of Parliament. He looked upon it as an unexampled act, and that in the terms of the resolution the House should express its disapproval of the action of the Government. In this respect the present attitude of the House was a revolt against the constant misuse of authority. Why, it was a notorious fact that Sir Julius Vogel had concealed from Parliament his intention to return to Englaud the moment he had got rid of the Assembly. He would ask was this Parliament, so august in its nature, and so skilled in debate, having no respect for its own dignity to allow itself to be thus treated. Each of these facts were insults to Parliament, that Nir J. Vogel should have gone home in such a manner, and before going should have set the House at defiance. Then when at home he remained there instead of returning to discharge the duties pertaining to his office. Mr Luckie—Because he was ill.

Sir G. Grey—lf ill, why did he not allow some other to take his place, and content himself with his just salary. He was astonished to hear the member for Nelson make such an answer. No sick man should draw such large sums as he had. But this Ministry also set the law at defiance in every respect. | Ministers—"No."] He said •'Yea/' How many instauces had beeo

brought before that House 1 Even the name and attributes of their august Sovereign had been used by the Ministry for unjust purposes.

Mr Luckie—And by yourself,

Sir G. Grey—How by himself ? What he said was a fact, known to all. He could give instances. He then proceeded to show how the Queen's right of pre-emption had been used in the acquirement of native lauds, and so using the Queen's name had taken away the rights of one subject, in order to give them to another. He should give his best support to the amendment proposed to the resolution of the Treasurer.

Mr Luckie—lt was not difficult or courageous to assail an absent man. There were members in that House who would not have dared to speak as they had done if Sir J. Vogel were in the House. Regarding the disrespect to the Queen, he reminded Sir G. Grey of having spoken in Auckland about her Majesty as a " poor creature." He supported the Government resolution. Mr Brandon said it waa high time tbe House asserted its authority in the matter of contracts. He would vote for Mr Reeves' amendment.

Hon 0. 0. Bowen said Government were fully sensible of their responsibility in the matter. While thinking it right to ask the House to ratify the contract, they did not think right to ask the House to say it approved of it. Government believed the contract was a good one for the colony, but of course the Opposition might think otherwise. He admitted the Opposition had a right to consider otherwise. He defended the contract, and hoped the House would not refuse to ratify it. It was not perfect. Even Mr Russell, who had negotiated it, was not satisfied with it, and in his letter, which had been laid on the table with the other correspondence, expressed that opinion. In negotiating he had to consider New South Wales, but when New South Wales comes to share the benefit of the service, no doubt she would consent to a modification of the contract.

Mr Montgomery asked Government had they received any further information from the Agent-General than had been already laid on the table.

Mr Reynolds replied in the negative. Mr Montgomery did not blame Sir J. Vogel, who was an absent man, but he blamed the Government for overstepping the limits of the power assigned to them. They had seemingly conceived that Sir J. Vogel, as head of the Government, could do whatever he might propose with impunity, but the time had come, as Sir G. Grey said, when Parliament would assert its independence. In reply to Mr Holies ton, who stated that the letter was not laid on the table at the end of last session, Mr Reynolds stated that the letter, after much search, was found in a box belonging to Sir J. Vogel. That was the explanation regarding the letter. Mr G. McLean said if the colony were not bound by the contract to New South Wales he would vote against its ratification, even at the cost of turning out the Government. He did not believe in the contractors. He held that this company was merely a resuscitation of the old one, and that the name of Mr Hezekiah Hall would be found amongst them. He also added that the company were not in good repute in America. As to Mr Russell being sent home specially, why was not the Agent-General employed ? It was a slight upon him, and if he could not be trusted, why did not the Premier undertake the duties. As to Mr Russell making no charge, he had no faith whatever in gratutious services. Mr Russell did it to keep up his influence and could make it pay indirectly. He would vote for the Government resolutions, because he thought the terms of contract might be materially modified. Mr Pyke did not see how the House could ratify the contract, and at the same time authorise Governmeut to modify it. The two were contradictory. He would not vote for Mr Reeves' motion, which was a trap to supplant the present Government. He did not wish any change in the Ministry during the present session, but would vote for the amendments to be proposed by Mr Macandrew. He would not be a party to sanctioning an expenditure not authorised by the House.

Mr M'Gillivray would vote for the Government resolutions. Mr Reid would vote for Mr Reeves' amendment, and thought it would be carried by the House. The House had too frequently ratified illegal engagements entered into by the Government. It was time the practice was stopped. They were beginning to feel the effects of their past recklessness. The House was beginning to have a sense of its responsibilities. He would rather confirm the contract as it now stands with a coastal service, than leave it .in the hands of the Government to make modifications, which would probably be oi the mail steamers calling only at one port. Mr J. E. Brown said the great mistake hitherto, in the Californian service, was bringing the large steamers down the coast. Mr Macandrew, referring to Mr Brown's opposition, saw and spoke of the many advantages the colony would derive from the ■erviee. Mr Wakefield and Mr Carrington would vote with the Government. The question was put, that all the words after " that" be omitted. On a division, as follows: Ayes 18 Noes 45 Mr Macandrew moved the following proviso—" Provided always that the terms of said contract shall be so modified as to comply with the whole of the conditions sanctioned by the House at its previous sessions, that is to say, the duration of the contract shall not exceed six years, the cost shall not exceed £40,000 a year, and the outward boats shall proceed right through to San Francisco, taking their departure from Port Chalmers, Lyttelton, Wellington, and Auckland. Hon Major Atkinson pointed out that Government could not accept the proposal, as the acceptance of it would stultify themselves, after the House had just ratified the contract. Mr Fitzherbert would support Mr Macandrew. Mr Gibbs opposed. Mr Wales and Mr Cuthbertson would vote against Mr Macandrew and the Government. The division for Mr Macandrew's proviso was—For, 18; against, 46. Mr J. E. Brown moved—" That the committee desires to express the disapproval of the Government authorising Mr Russell to commit the colony to an expenditure in e*« cess of that authorised by the House."

The division was as follows : For, 21 . against, 39. Mr White moved a resolution (o the < ffeci that Ministers would not in future transgress the instructions of the Mouse, which •was negatived on the voices. The main resolution, as amended, was then put with this result—Ayes, 41; Noes, 11. The following additions by the Hon Major Atkinson were moved :—" That in the opinion of this House the annual charge imposed on the revenue of New Zealand for a mail steam service ought not to exceed £40,000; and that it is the duty of the Government to immediately enter into negotiations to procure such modification of the terms and conditions of the contract as, subject to future ratification by this House, will effect that object." Mr Eolleston moved, after the words " forty thousand," the insertion of " and the duration of the contract ought not to exceed six years."

Messra Wales, White, Reid, Fitzherbert, Sir G. Grey, Messrs Cuthbertson and Montgomery thought the Hon Major Atkinson's resolution unnecessary, and would vote against it. Mr Stafford said although the Government could enter into preliminary negotiations, it would strengthen the hands of the Government if such resolution were carried. Mr Rolleston's amendment was negatived on the voices, and the Hon Major Atkinson's resolution carried by 30 against 24. Mr WALES moved this proviso—" That Buch modification shall not extend the time of the contract, or alter the route of the steamers." This was rejected on the voices. The resolution was reported to the House, and agreed to. PRIVILEGES ACT. The Parliamentary Privileges Amendment Act enacts that every witness sworn to give evidence before the Legislative Council, House of Representatives, or committees of either, shall have, in respect of the testimony given, the like privileges, immunities, and indemnities in all respects as are possessed by any witness sworn and examined in the Supreme Court. The Bill was read a first time. Mr Reid hoped Government would not press it through all its stages to night, as he wished it to be discussed in a full House. He wished it to apply to the one particular case (Mr Bridges) out of which it had ariseD, and not as this Bill, to be of general application. Hon Major Atkinson said the lawyers and himself, and others whom he had consulted, believed the present Act sufficient to protect witnesses in giving evidence before the House or Select Committees ; but as doubts had arisen, and it was ordered by the House that afternoon that an Indemnity Bill should be introduced, Government had done so to clear up any doubts. Mr Williams objected to persons being protected for mere exprrssious of opinion, which might be of a most libellous character; which, as he thought, might be the case with Mr Bridges, who, he believed, was actuated solely by malice. Mr Fitzherbert would not oppose the Bill if applicable only to the case now before the public accounts committee, but objected to make it of general application. Sir Cracroft Wilson, in reference to Mr Williams' objection to persons being protected from expressions of opinion, pointed out that opinions were not evidence, and it was only evidence that was protected. • Mr Sheehan would vote for the Bill. It would be absurd to have to make a special Bill for each particular case. Mr Reid would oppose the Bill unless a clause were inserted, terminating its operation one day after the prorogation of the present Parliament. Mr G. McLean moved the adjournment of the debate, which was negatived by 27 to 4. Mr REID again made a long speech against the Bill, as a continuous one, and said Government ought not to force the Bill too nastily through the House. The Treasurer said Government were only doing what they had been ordered to do by the House. He hoped Mr Reid would not set his solitary opinion against the almost unanimous desire of the House. Mr Pyke supported Mr Reid. It being now after 3 a.m., Messrs Swanson, Fitzherbert, and other speakers begged Mr Reid and Mr M'Lean to withdraw their opposition, for it was perfectly hopeless and a simple waste of time, the House being determined to sift the scandal raised by Mr Bridges to the bottom. Mr Fitzherbert said—Let us forget party feeling, and clear away this floating scandal. He would heartily support the Government. Mr HUNTER thought that in accordance with the wish of a full House, this Bill should at once pass all its stages. At 3.30, MrG. McLean said as the House would not agree to the amendment, he should be obliged to occupy the time of the House for an hour or two, in shoeing why he opposed the Bill. The hon gentleman read voluminous extracts from the evidence taken before the public accounts committee, and then touched discursively on other matters, the removal of the seat of Government, &c. At 4.45 a.m. a division on the second reading was taken—Ayes, 24 : Noes, 3. The Bill was read a second time. On the motion for going into committee, Mr Reid again objected to the Bill passing unless its operation ceased with the present Parliament. He spoke very warmly about Ministers not acceding to his request, and said it was riding rough shod over them. He said Government were wasting the time of the House. It was not he who took up the time of the House, but the Government, because they would not agree to his proposal. Sir D. M'LEAN pointed out how unfair was such language. This was not a Government measure. Ministers were only acting in obedience to the order of the House. It was Mr Reid and such as he who were setting themselves against a majority of the House and recklessly wastingtime. Mr Pyke at length asked Mr Reid and Mr McLean to withdraw from further opposition. They had done their duty. Mr Hunter, replying to Mr Reid, who had said this was a party movement, showed how this was opposed to fact; and instanced that Messrs Fitzherbert, Wood, and Sheehan were all in favor of the Bill, though they could scarcely be called supporters of the Government.

The Bill was committed. Mr Beid moved a new c'ause, to the effect that it should expire after the ensuing prorogation. The division for the new clause was—For, 3; against, 19. It was reported without amendment, read a third time, and passed. The House adjourned at 4.45 a.m. until 7.30 p.m.

Tbp division on Mr Reeves' and Mr Macandr w'« amendments re the San Francisco contract was as follows:

Now, 46—Messrs Andrew, Atkinson, Ballance, Basstian, Bowen, B yce, Bucklaud, Oarrington, (Jreighton, (Juihbertson, Hunter. Ingles, Jackson, Johnston. Katene, T. Kelly, Kenny, Luokie, May, McGillivray, McGlas han, Sir D McLean, Messrs G. McLean, Mervyn, Munro, O'Neill, Ormond, Parata, 0. Parker, G. B. Parker, Pearce, Pyke, Reynolds, Richardson, Richmond, J. Shephard, T. L Shepherd, Stafford, Steward, Tribe, Von der Hyde, Wakefield, Wales, Webb, Williams, Wilson. Ayes, 18 —Messrs Bradshaw, J. C. Brown, J. E. Brown, Bunny, Dignan, Fitzherbert, Gibbs, Sir G.Grey, Messrs Macandiew, Montgomery, Murray, Reeves, Reid, Uoileston, Sheehan, Swanson, Takamoana, Thomson, The division on Major Atkinson's amendment was :

Ayes, 30 Messrs Andrew, Atkinson, Bowen, Bryce, Buckland, Garrington, Gibbs, Hunter, Ingles, Jackson, Johnston, Katene, T. Kelly, W. Kelly, Luckie, May, M'Gillivray, M'Glashan, G. M'Lean, Sir D. M'Lean, Messrs Munro, O'Neill, C. Parker, Pearce, Reynolds, Richardson, Shephard, T. L. Shepherd, Williams, Wilson. Noes, 24—Sir D. Bell, Messrs Bradshaw, J. B. Brown, Bunny, Cuthbertson, Fitzherbert, Sir G. Grey, Messrs Harrison, Macandrew, Montgomery, Murray, Reeves, Reid, Rolleston, Sheehan, Steward, Swanson, Takamoana, Thomson, Tribe, Von der Heyde, Wales, Webb, White. Pairs for —Messrs Curtis, Creighton, O'CoDor.

Against Messrs Ward, J. C. Brown, Brandon.