GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 629, 24 June 1876, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

(Per Press Agency.') HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Friday, June 23, The Speaker took the chair at 2.30, NOTICES OP MOTION. Sir J. Vogel gave notice that he would move for the names of Messrs Cox and Kelly to be omitted from the finance committee a"d those of Messrs Montgomery and Read placed instead. Sir G. Grey gave notice that he would move for the names of Messrs Stout and Rees to be placed on the committee. MINISTERIAL EXPLANATION. In reply to a question by Mr Rees, Sir J, Vogel said Dr Pollen was enrolled upon the Civil Service, and would be in the course of time entitled to whatever retiring allowance it would be calculated was due to him. Sir D. McLean however did not belong to the Civil Service at all. Sir D. McLean made a personal explanation in regard to the allegation that he held the office of Land Purchase Commissioner, and drew public monies for other offices besides his Ministerial allowance. He wondered how Sir G. Grey’s memory should fail him so when it was himself who abolished the office'ot Land Purchase Commissioner in 1865, by proclamation in the Gazette. He could say further, that when made a Minister he resigned all offices and emoluments. From 1863 to the present hour he never received a single sixpence, save his pay as Superintendent of Havrke’s Bay. OFFICERS’ GRAVES. The Native Minister replied to Mr Williams regarding the graves of officers and men slain in the war with the natives, stating that all that was necessary was in some cases done, and in others being done. HARD-FORBES CONTRACT. In reply to Mi Stevens re the Hall-Forbes contract, Sir J. Vogel said the loss entailed upon the colony was £18,765. No money had yet been recovered, but he might say that there was reason to expect some portion would be recovered, a compromise having been proposed. He hoped to be able to lay more information on the matter before the House before the session closed. disqualification act amendment. Sir J. Vogel moved the second reading of the Diaqua!ificatio,a Act Amendment Bill, the object of which was to legalise certain elections, and which could inflict no injury upon anyone. Mr Mac Andrew seconded the motion, The Disqualification Act was never intended to apply to such cases as those provided for in the Bill. Mr Murray recorded his protest against the Bill. Government ought to deal with the question as a whole, and not nibble at it piecemeal. Mr Rees considered the 2nd section wanted amendment. In its present shape it allowed persons paid by fees and commission too much latitude. Mr Whitaker pointed out many questions which could be raised under certain interpretations of the Disqualification Act. The Bill was read a second time ; committed, and passed. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON PIAKO SWAMP. Mr Reader Wood reminded the House that already two legal gentleman had addressed the House, and held that the Government’s action was illegal, and though the Premier said the Government ha t legal opinion, he had not produced it. The bon member then proceeded to .wmmeut upon mr Stafford’s action in supporting the Government whether right or wrong. He reminded him of Lord Palmerston, who did not care for the people who supported him when he was right* he wanted people to support him when he was wrong. The member for Timaru found fault that Sir G. Grey had not adduced proof of his charges, but he appealed to the_ House to say if the Premier had not admitted every charge made by Sir G. Grey. The hon member then proceeded to severely criticise the member for Timaru’s remarks last night, referring to Sir G. Grey’s acts as Governor with reference to signing blank pardons. The hon member vaguely referred to the same case wherein a Premier insisted upon having the last sentence of the law carried out upon some person, but that the Governor would not consent. [The hon member then pointing to the member for Timaru, said he ought to thank God he had had a kind heart and a clear head standing between him and judicial murder.] [Mr StAFFOED interrupted, giving an unqualified contradiction that there was ever any instance such as that indicated.] The hon member then proceeded to comment upon the conduct of the the Government’s native land purchase agents, and quoted at length from Brissendeh’s evidence before the Tairoa committee, to show how certain persons were unduly favored. All this went to show that; these land transactions should be put on a proper basis. There should not be one set of land regulations for Government and another for the public. He did not ascribe corruption to the Government in the sense that any of them received a cheque or other beneficial interest from the transaction, but there was corruption in giving to friends and favorites of the Government without due publicity what would have been refused to him if he applied for it. The hon member after commenting with some severity upon the Premier and his bank correspondence, called attention to the fact that the Crown grant was not to be made out for Mr Russell, but for the Loan Company, and that at a recent meeting in London an actury recommended that te ey should not pay such high dividends, as the colony might overrun the constable. Referring to the Premier’s remark about Sir G. Grey as to the bombardment of Auckland, the hon member said if the the letter to the Secretary for the Colonies was that of a lunatic, then the argument of the Premier when he said they would become a ■ laughing stock if they offered eighty thousand acres at auction was the argument of an idiot. The Speaker pointed out the expression was not put in a Parliamentary way. The hon member was understood to regret if it was not.

Mr ORl!OND regretted that the only substantiation of the grave charges made against the Government should be speeches like that of the hon member, amusing and discursive, but not what the House ought to expect. When the hon member who led the Opposition rose to substantiate his grave charges, he utterly failed to bring forward one tittle of evidence to prove his case. Touching the recent surprise, he was glad to see that new members took the first opportunity of giving a free and enlightened expression of opinion. It was an earnest of what might be expected

in the future that they would be equal to the duties devolving upon them. He regretted the issue of the late surprise,which no doubt could have been avoided, though it was easy to bo wise after the event. The outcome of that vote was to place this question in the bauds of the House to be sifted to the bottom, either to be proved or disproved. That was the position. [“ No, no,” aud “ yes, yea.”] The speech of the hon member for Duaediu last night seemed to him, as if he assumed the mantle of the one who used last session to draw the member for Auckland West out of the quagmires his rashness placed him in, but who no longer took part in the debates of the House, but the member for Dunedin had failed most signally. Referring to Sir G. Grey’s letter, respecting cannonading of Auckland, be did not know how it was received in other parts of the colony, but where he came from, it was looked on as a skit and laughed at. The hon member said he was one of the committee which inquired into the Piako Swamp. That was a political committee,fand he regretted there were too many political committees last session, because the effect was bad. He had no doubt that the Piako committee inquired into that matter irrespective of party bias, and they found not a particle of evidence to support a charge of corruption. When the member for Auckland City West re-opened these charges this session, he naturally expected he would have evidence to adduce that was not obtainable before, but he did not do so. The hon member for Auckland West had always harped upon the promotion of settlement, but what had he ever done to promote settlement since he was Superintendent. [Sir George Grey— Government took very good care that their friends should have all the good land.] [Laughter.] Touching the sale, he was of opinion that the regulations were not strictly complied with, and that it would have been better for the Government to forego what might be a very good bargain, rather than carry out what was done irregularly. He, however, felt that the result of that debate would place the Oppositlou in a much worse position than they occupied before, because it would be shown that these charges were utterly unfounded, and the House would not be thankful to the leader of the Opposition for occupying them iu this way. Mr Rees takes up the debate at 7,30, when the House resumes.

CONTINUATION OF PIAKO SWAMP DEBATE. The Speaker took the chair at -7.30 p, m. Mr De Latour continued the debate on tho Piako Swamp purchase, strongly opposing it on various ground. Mr Bryce defended the sale as singularly expedient; one which would probably not have been made yet, if not in the manner it was. He quoted Mr Murray’s evidence before the Select Committee to prove that a fair price was received for the land by the Government. He contended that the large expenditure on its reclamation did great good to the district when looked at in connection with native affairs, and ridiculed the jdea of the Government going into such speculations, Mr Murray considered the sale was not necessary nor advantageous, and said that roads made through the swamp were next to useless for traffic. Government ought to have made a railway through it. Mr Stevens would vote for the motion. The sale might have been an administrative error, but the House was bound to ratify it. Mr Rees strongly opposed the motion, which, if carried, would be condoning a flagrant piece of wrong doing. Not a Premier in any of the many possessions of the British Empire would dare to bring down such a resolution. He advised the House not to ratify the. contract, and if Government pressed it, to walk out without voting. Mr Rowe, though opposed very strongly to alienating large blocks of the public estate, would vote for completing this sale. He knew all about the case, and sailed over tho swamp years before the majority of members in that House ever heard of it. Mr Nahx objected to the sale because the Maori King was not consulted. Mr Macfarlane explained that the sale of the coal field which Sir George Grey said was made to I. L Russell, had been entirely effected by himself on behalf of the Waikato Coal Company while Mr Russell was absent at home. ’ Mr Wakefield said that though somewhat uneasy at the commencement of the debate, that that transaction was “ dark,” he was now satisfied there was nothing improper; at the worst, it could only be called an administrative error. He would support the resolution, because it was the only way 9 out of the difficulty in which the House had j placed itself. Its very boldness was a merit, in allowing members to vote for it who would not do so otherwise. He strongly opposed the alienation of large blocks of laud ;< Mr Montgomery said the Premier had not made it clear to them that there had been no additional land given to the purchasers of the Swamp. Government should not have sold the land without surveying it. He did not believe there was any corruption in the matter. Mr Whitaker gave all the details of the transaction from its inception to its completion, showing that the sale was not only legal and regular in every way, but was an absolutely good bargain for the Government, and productive of very great benefit to the province, by finding employment for hundreds of immigrants. Instead |of getting more land, tho Native Minister actually kept back 8500 acres of the best for the natives. In 1871 the land could have been‘bought for Is Gd or 2s per acre. Over £35,000 had already been expended upon it; but an immense amount would yet be required. He denied Sir George Grey’s allegation, that he was concerned in other land transactions, or had ever taken any favour from tho Government. ■ Several others having spoken for and against, a discussion ensued as to whether the House adjourn or go on. The House ■ adjourned at 2.5 a.m. till 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday. {prom, a correspondent of the Press?) A Parliamentary paper, circulated yesterday, shows that Parliament will be asked for a vote of £4260 by way of special allowance to Sir Julius Yogel, to cover the cost of his mission tp Eogland. The explanation given by Sir J. Vogel, with respect to his departure for England, is as follows : —“ It was urged that tho House should have been informed during the session of 1874 that I was going to England, but in fact it was not then decided that 1 should go. Undoubtedly during the session the Government came to the conclusion that it would be necessary that a member should go to England to set right the affairs of the

Home Agency. A suggestion had been made that I should go, but it was in no way decided. To have announced the possibility or probability to the House would have led to an inexpedient discussion concerning the conduct of the home agent. The necessity for a Minister dealing with the loan negotiation was not at that time discussed, excepting "that it was thought it would be necessary for me to proceed to Sydney to arrange about the Treasury bills aud other matters. I believe that that conclusion was recognised by Ministers, as also that it pointed to the contingency of my proceeding on to England. Hence the reference in the letter to Mr Russell to the possibility of my so doing, b.ut there was nothing like a decision on the subject come to.” Mr Manders will on Tuesday night ask the Minister of Justice if Government is prepared [this session to introduce a Bill giving to the District Courts Act an extended jurisdiction, so as to include sentences being inflicted for[a period equal to ten years’ penal servitude for criminals, and power to try all cases civilly up to the amount of £SOO, such cases being those that the Courts now deal with up to the extent of £2OO, and adding thereto causes for libel, slander, breach of promise of marriage, and seduction, but not including cases of law titles, treason. &c, as set forth in existing Act. If not, if they will leave the matter so that it may be considered next session of this Parliament. Hr Burns has given notice of his intention to move, “ That the Government be requested to call for tenders for the manufacture within the colony of such locomotives, carriages, vans, trucks, and other railway rolling stock, also, for turning out shifting tables, as may be further required for use on the several railways in the colony.” The new Licensing Bill, adding several new clauses to the old Act, prepared at the instance of Mr Thorapkins, president of the Canterbury Licensed Victuallers’ Association, has been entrusted to Mr Bowen to bring before the House at an early date. Mr Stout has also a Bill to present from the Dunedin Licensed Victuallers’ Association.