GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 662, 3 August 1876, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

(From a correspondent of the Press.') HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES. Tuesday, August 1. mr Whitaker’s resolutions. At 7.30 p.m. the galleries were completely crowded. Mr Whitaker then rose and moved his resolutions. He felt that he had undertaken an onerous duty, and had entered upon the upon the task with all seriousness. He intended to treat the subject, not from any technical or legal stand point, but as a matter of argument and reason. For a long time past they had heard a great deal about repudiation of compacts, and so forth, and it was right that the House should inquire exactly how the case stood so far as its meritswere concerned, andhe should endeavor to place before the House the whole matter in the light in which it presented itself to his mind. First, however, he desired to clear away a misapprehension. It had been saidthat these resolutions would prejudice the question of abolition. He denied it. Abolition had nothing whatever to do with the matter. Whether the provinces were abolished or whether they remained as they were previous to last session, it mattered not one jot. This question must have cropped up, and must have been dealt with whatever the form of government, The question they had to discuss was broadly this, the question of localisation ; that wap, could the boundaries in the colony be arbitrarily fixed, and the people within the boundaries so arbitrarily fixed become entitled to special benefits to the injury of those who were without'the boundaries; was not such a course contrary to all precedent in the past, and opposed to the present practice in coexistent states? Wherever they£choose to look the land fund belonged to the State, the people of the country or the colony, and could not or should not be applied to the particular advantage of particular individuals in particular localities. He set out with this maxim, that the land of a country belonged to all the people of the country, and that particular individuals had no right to it whatever beyond that common right which all enjoyed. After sketching the history of the land legislation of the colony since its settlement, he came to the compact of 185fJ. How was it that those resolutions were passed ? They were passed by a majority of 19 against 10, and the minority felt so strongly that an impropriety had been committed—that something had been done which ought not to have been done—that they apjerled to the Secretary of State, and sent home a protest, which received some consideration, but of which nothing came, and as a matter of course nothing might have been expected to come of it. The resolutions had been for a long time talked of as a compact, a something which the General Assembly was for ever bound to observe—a something which for ever prevented the General Assembly from dealing with the waste lands of the Crown—the waste lands of the Crown which had been committed to the charge of the whole people of the colony. But what was the meaning of a compact ? He took it that a compact meant a solemn engagement between two or more parties by which certain things were agreed to be done. By whom was this compact made; for what was it made? There must be parties to a compact, and who were the parties to this? Was it a compact between the majority and the minority 1 Certainly not. The minority did not agree; they protested against it. He was no*’ talking law; he did not want to talk law, because -it was entirely out of the question. Beyond a doubt, the General Assembly had a perfect right to deal with the land so far as the present was concerned. But he wished to look nt the matter from a common sense pointof view, and to ask by whom the contract was made, and for what purpose it was made. It was never in those days talked of as a compact in any shape or way, and there was never any talk of a revocation of the resolution being a breach of faith. At that time there was a population of 50,000 people in the colony, and how were the representatives of those 50,000 people placed in the position of making a compact for all time 1 How could they bind future Assemblies. Ho one then supposed, nor was it hinted, that the resolution was so binding on the Legislature. The action then was regarded as the solemn act of the Assembly, so far as the present was concerned, but which might the next day bo altered or amended. It was to remain so long as the Assembly thought fit to allow it, and change

when the Assembly desired it. But at the time these resolutions were passed, a Waste Land Act was also passed, and in order that the arrangements now made might be given more stability, it was decided to ask the Imperial Parliament to pass an Act assenting to ths arrangement come to. Considerable discussion attended the proposal and the point was raised, supposing the Imperial Parliament refuses what then will be the result ? and in consequence of this discussion, a special provision was made to the effect that if an Act were not obtained from the Imperial Parliament the entire scheme should be open to revision ; but that inasmuch as the provinces might in the meantime enter into arrangements under the resolution, it was further resolved to guarantee to them any moneys which they might receive. Now he wanted to know what couldjbe the nature of a compact or engagement which was from the beginning to the end subject to be revised by the General Assembly in the event of the Imperial Government refusing to pass the Act required. He contended strongly that the Assembly of 1856 could not bind the Assembly of 1866 or the Assembly of 1876 any more than it could: compel the Imperial Government to pass the Act required. He was at a loss to know why the word “ compact ” had ever been used, and he would ask any member of the House how in the |name of reason or justice any resolutions which neutralised the resolution of 1856 could be called repudiatory resolutions. The Imperial Parliament had washed its hands of the whole transaction, and refused to pass such an Act as was required, and disallowed the Waste Lands Act—an Act which had been passed to give provincial councils the power of legislating in respect to waste lands. Keviewing all the circumstances, was it not open to the General Assembly ? Why was the provision made tor guaranteeing to the provinces the money they received in case of the Imperial Parliament declining to pass the Act. The words were surplusage if the resolutions were binding. The nest point of importance come to was the meeting of the General Assembly in 1858, and it must be remembered that, as there was no session in 1857, that was the first meeting after the resolution had been sent home. It was very interesting, in view of this unchangeable compact, to notice that at this session the Wellington members, with the exception of the gentleman who now occupied the Speaker’s chair were absent. Then they had got this far, The Imperial Parliament had refused to pass the Act they had been asked to pass in relation to these resolutions, and further, had disallowed the Waste Lands Act, so that the essential elements of the compact were completely gone. Then came the session of 1858,?at which the representatives of one province were not present, and what was done ? Did the Assembly, in view of the refusal of the Imperial Parliament, declare that the resolutions of 1856 should have the full force and effect of an Act of the General Assembly. No 1 Nothing of the kind. They were not mentioned in the Acts which were passed. These resolutions, which had provided for their own destruction in case the Imperial Parliament did not pass an Act, were not even referred to. As Jthe Waste Lands Act had been disallowed, the administration of the waste lands now became a part of the colonial policy. In 1858, an Act, called the Apportionment of Debts Act, was passed ; under the resolution the three Middle Island Provinces were to be equally dealt with, but the Assembly did not consider itself bound by these resolutions, for this public debt and apportionment Act imposed upon Canterbury £77,500, Otago £77,500, and Nelson £45,000, Thus in 1858, the'very next session, an alteration in the terms of the resolution of 1856 was made. Then with regard to the North Island Provinces, provision was made under the Public Debts Apportionment Act, for taking one-sixth of the land fund for purchasing native lands. That was another alteration in the arrangement of 1856. Then the Waste Lands Act of 1858 was passed. This reversed entirely the whole of the proposals of the previous session, providing that the General Assembly, not the Provincial Councils, should deal with waste lands, Here was another infringement of the so-called compact of 1856. The hon member then referred to further deviation from the compact in 1861- Canterbury complained of having too much of the debt, and the share of that province was reduced from £77,600 to £74,010, while the share of Otago was increased from £77,500 to £BI,OOO. In 1867 an Act was passed repealing portions of the Act of 1861, and some special charges were put upon the land revenue. In 1868 the Act of 1867 was altogether repealed, Then what had become of the “compact” all this time—this binding engagement which nobody could break ? Had any of the gentlemen who now bandied| charges of repudiation risen in 1858, in 1861, in 1867, or in 1868, and said, “ you are repudiating ?” Why there was not a rag of the compact left. It was all gone, all gone. The hon member referred to the circumstances under which the compact was made. He said at the time the compact was made, the native title had in the Middle Island been extinguished, or at any rate nine-tenths of the land was free of natives, and this had been done at the expense o£ the North Island provinces. [“No, n©.”] At the expense of the whole colony, the North Island provinces bearing their fair share. [“No, no.”J Hon members might say no no, but he challenged them to prove that he was not stating facts. Ic might be true that there had been grants from England, but the money had been granted to assist the whole colony in its difficulties, and not for the purpose of forwarding the interests of particular provinces. The object of the compact then was, that money should be spent in the North Island provinces, which should have the right of pre-emption over the land. But what was done in 1862 ?• The General Assembly at once annihilated its previous action by passing an Act which, in its preamble, set forth that it was necessary for the peace and settlement of the colony that the right of pre-emption should be foregone. This was for the purpose of relieving the Southern provinces of a contribution towards war funds, and so the North Island provinces lost all the consideration for which they had entered into this compact. On the sth May aopeared a Gazette setting forth that the Act of 1862 having rendered unnecessary the land purchase department of New Zealand, there was no longer any use for that department, which was thereby abolished. Where was the compact now 1 Where was the value the North Island was to have received from the compact. Had the compact been kept by both? Had it not rather been broken year after year

through a long series of years by the Acts passed by the General Assembly. From 1856 to 1866 Acts had been passed gradually destroying it, till there was at last only the mere shadow of the original compact left. Then, as to the fairness of the compact, it had been in force for twenty years, from 1856 to 1876, and during that time the land revenue of the North island had been £1,049,189 ; for the South island provinces, £6,152,682. Then what had Auckland, for instance, gained by the Southern provinces 1 Nothing. If Auckland had to pay a fair proportion of the debt, estimated according to revenue, she would have had to pay during the twenty years £3500, Taranaki would have to pay £350, Hawke’s Bay £13,865, Wellington £17,001, making in all £34,000, out of £240,000 which had been paid on account of the debt to the New Zealand Company. According to the revenue the North Island pi evinces would have had to pay the 684,285, and the Southern provinces £305,715. The North Island had been saved a payment of £84,000, and as against that had given up to the South £6,000,000, and if it went on for the next ten years at the rate it had gone on for the past twenty years the whole payments would be by the Northern provinces, £519,000,' the Southern provinces, £310,000. On the ground of expediency the unfair system should be done away with. It was about time the land fund was returned to the original owners. It had been long enough in the hands of one part of the colony, and there should be a change. The expediency of the change must be apparent from a study of the financial statement. The Treasurer had several times in his statement referred to the necessity for a simplification in the system of finance, and no one who,; had j read the statement could disagree with the remark. He had tried for a couple of days to understand the finances of the colony, and he was afraid he knew very little about the matter. There were so many mysteries, so many thimbles, that it was impossible to say under which the pea was to be found. The whole system was misunderstandable, and it was about time some arrangement was made for the simplification of matters. The only remedy was to make the land revenue colonial revenue, and really it would not moke much difference to the southern provinces. He referred to the proposals of the Government to take contributions from the land fund for railway and educational purposes, and said the Treasurer might as well take £750,000 as £75,000. The principle was the same, and once introduced would be worked out. In fact it was absolutely necessary that money should be forthcoming. Many of the estimates of the Treasurer would not be reached, such for instance as the estimate of land funds from Auckland; and he (Mr Whitaker) expected not to see a credit balance at the end of the year of £2900, but a deficiency of tea times that amount. He referred, in conclusion, to the financial statement tables of Provincial land fund receipts, which had been done so that the outlay might compare favorably with other colonies, and he objected to such a course being taken. However he did not desire to pick holes in the Treasurer’s coat. What he desired was to show the badness of the system, and to suggest that the remedy for the confusion was the adoption of these resolutions. And not only was the colonisation of land revenue necessary to do away with the confusion ; it was absolutely necessary for the sustenance of the credit of the colony. They wanted two millions of money, and what was the state of the market so far as New Zealand securities were concerned. His private advices told him that New Zealand securities were much lower than any colonial eecurities, and the reason of this was obvious. We had gone to the length of our tether, even beyond it perhaps, and capitalists saw the position in which we were, that if a slight check occurred we should not be able to pay our debts. The only remedy was to make the land revenue colonial revenue, Were this done the Colonial Treasurer could show that the revenue was three millions a year and the expenditure a little over two millions. That would be a sound condition to present to the lender, and money would be forthcoming to us on the same easy terms as it was to other borrowers. They knew that no one would be more relieved if the motion were carried than the Treasurer, Rethought he had shown that a change would not be inequitable, on the contrary, that it would be expedient for the sake of our credit. [Cheers ] Sir J, Yogel commenced by asking the indulgence of the House. The hon gentleman had objected to the word compact as referring to the arrangement of 1856. He was quite willing himself to make the hon gentleman a present of the argument he had used as to that term, but he thought he was correct in saying that the hon gentleman was a member of the Government from the year 1856 to 1858, and was therefore clearly as much responsible as any other member of the then Government for all that had been done during that time. The hon gentleman had laid a great deal of stress upon the uncertain wording of the resolutions not being such as to show that the colony was bound bodily by them, and also that the resolutions had not been placed in the form of an Act, He did not think they should treat this question from a quibbling point of view; With regard to this arrangement, he did not see how anything could be clearer than the seventh clause of the Land Revenue Appropriation Act of 1858, which was as follows :—“ After and subject to the payment to be made under the provisions hereinbefore contained, all the revenue arising from the disposal of the waste lands of the Crown in the several provinces of the colony shall, in pursuance of warrants to be from time to time granted by the Governor, be paid over by the Receiver of Land Revenue to the respective Treasurers of such provinces, for the public uses thereof, subject to the appropriation of the respective Provincial Councils.” The hon gentleman was at that time a very able lawyer, and a number of honorable members of the House placed great reliance in him, and it could scarcely be imagined that there was not the most perfect confidence among those members that this subsequent legislation was giving full effect to the compact of 1856. But he ventured to say that a number of members were deceived, They thought the guarantee was obtained —that the law was made as firm and as binding as possible, the intention of the resolution of 1856 being that the land fund should in future be provincial revenue. He could scarcely conceive that any hon gentleman would have believed it possible that the member for Waikato would stand forward at this time and attempt to upset entirely hia own work,

The arrangement was considered particularly favorable to Auckland, and when Mr Fox proposed that instead of such an arrangement there should be simply a charge of half a crown per acre for all land sold in the Middle Island, the Ministry declined, considering that it would be too favorable to the Middle Island. Considering all the circumstances, he thought it would have been much more reasonable if a proposal to alter this compact had come from any other than a gentleman who was in the Ministry at the time these resolutions were given effect to. That hon gentleman had laid great stress on the proposal made at a subsequent period to relinquish the preemption right of the Government to purchase land. Years had passed since that time, and he was not aware of this question ever having come before the House in a set form until that evening. He had no right whatever to attempt to upset the compact of 1856 on the ground of the relinquishment of the pre-emptive right of purchase at a later period. He must say this, that he believed the colony, that House, and every one concerned, would much rather see the compact of 1856 upset on its merits solely, than by attempting to make out a case to the effect that that arrangement was not intended to be binding at the time it was made. The member for Waikato had attempted to make that out, but he had failed, because the real effect of the compact was that it should extend over a long period of years. In order to give full effect to its provision in 1858, a ratification took place in the Land Revenue Appropriation Act, and if that was not a complete ratification, it was so understood by the members of the House. What he contended for was that this compact had survived for twenty years, and the effect of coming down with such a resolution that evening was not calculated to benefit the colony in the slightest. It would be very much more desirable to argue this question from a broader point of view than one of a technical character. He was not going to pretend that it was not in the power of a Parliament which does to undo, but they should look at this question from an entirely different point of view. These resolutions raised up very different questions, of a very important and he might say embarrassing nature. At such time as the present it was well known that they had been made the starting point of the discussion upon the subject of Separation, and they affected very much that larger question which had now been before the country for nearly two years, viz, that of Abolition ; and another important question, that of the outlying districts. The Government would strongly oppose these resolutions therefore, on the score of their merits and their inopportuneness, and he should be very much surprised if the gentlemen who undertook last year to support the Government were carried away by such proposals. He was not going to say that there would be any singular breach of faith on the part of hon members who last year thought fit to uphold the Government if they abandoned them by supporting the resolution of the hon gentleman, but there would be certainly political bad faith in such a course, if all those gentlemen who undertook to follow the Goverement in carrying out abolition last year should now vote for the resolution before the House, and thus virtually shelve the question of abolition this session, and afterwards come *to the members of the Government and say to them, “We promise to do this, that, and the other, if you decide to propose certain things/’ He thought the Government would be entitled to say to them, “ While we do not question your personal good faith and honor, yet it is very evident to us that so temporary and shortlived are your political opinions, that it would be unsafe to embark on a political course of that kind, as we could have no guarantee that you would not alter your opinions in two months.” He wished to trouble the House as little as possible with dry details and figures, but he should like to show the House how the resolutions of Mr Whitaker read in the light of the Government proposals. The simple meaning of them, as against those of the Government was, to take £217,000 of the surplus land revenue of Otago and Canterbury and spend that amount on other parts of the colony. With respect to the resolutions of the member for Geraldine, ho might say that they went in the same direction as those of the member for Waikato, although their effect would be slightly different. He did not think, however, that the colony of New Zealand had come to such a pass that it would be called upon for the sake of £200,000 to carry out a measure which it deemed to be unjust, inexpedient, impolitic, and he unhesitatingly applied all these terms to the resolutions of the hon gentleman. With regard to Mr Whitaker’s reference to the financial statement, there was no doubt that they were entering on a year of some difficulty, but he did not think that was any reason why members should endeavour to run down the financial position of the colony, He was opposed to the suggestion to increase the taxation of the colony. Times such as the present had occurred before, and it had not been thought necessary or desirable to increase the taxation. It would be far more preferable to do as they had done before, and resort to a floating debt. If these resolutions were carried the effect would be a total resolution in the constitution of the country. For years and years it had been a favourite admission that the outlying districts were not fairly treated by the large centres of population, and it was only now that they had a reasonable prospect of being made to a large extent independent, by the changes the Government proposed to make ; but if the colony "took over the land fund, these districts would not be any better off than at the present time. The proposed county system gave to the country districts the power of - working out their own destinies. It would be far preferable, in his opiuion, to continue the present form of Government, than throw upon that House the difficulty of dealing with the public works of the colony, If the House were to be made the arena for discussing the construction of roads here and bridges there, and other works in different directions, it would be better to continue the present form of government. The Government proposed to leave to the outlying districts themselves the prosecution of such works, while the General Government would undertake such works as main lines of railway throughout the colony. Mr Whitaker said the Premier was laboring under a wrong impression, He did not propose to do as was stated. On the contrary, he proposed to tack his resolutions on the Counties Bill, and make thesa part of it.

Sir J. Yogel quite recognised that such was the hon gentleman’s intentions, but he contended that the two were incompatible. He was of opinion that the resolutions, if carried, would so revolutionise the state of the House that either one of two things must happen ; a new Government would probably be formed, who would abandon abolition without making provision for the local government of the country. He would undertake to express the opinion that, if the land revenue were to be taken from one part of the colony as proposed, it would have the effect of making the land fund consolidated revenue. As to what Mr Whitaker had said about the public accounts, he said no system of accounts could be devised to be comprehensible to persons who would not take the trouble to master their particulars. The Government proposed that the expenses of dealing with the land such as they had, should be paid out of the land revenue, next the interest on the provincial liabilities; surveys, which was a reasonable charge; subsidies to road boards and counties, which was also a legitimate charge ; lastly, there was the charge of the cost of education, which perhaps might be open to more exception than the others. He did not know if hon members had taken the trouble to examine how reproductive the expenditure on education was. If they looked at America, they would find in the Dnited States two distinct classes of people, the educated and the uneducated, and they would include in the educated class nearly all native born Americans, and their position was vastly better in life than that of the immigrant class who arrived there from different parts of the world. And this contrast in position arose simply from the difference in education. It was not too much to say that by giving a boy seven years’ education you fitted him for the rest of his life, during which he might with health and strength earn £SOO more than he would otherwise earn. Hs regarded this charge of education therefore upon the land fund as perfectly legitimate. He then referred to the position Otago and Canterbury, and alluded to the tunnel in the latter province, which he said was an undertaking more daring in its nature than the public works policy entered on a fewyears ago. It was a bold proposal, and showed a vast amount of energy and determination on the part of the settlers there. The ability of the province to undertake such works, and its general prosperity were owing to the manner in which its waste lands had been administered, and the high price put upon them, Otago had acted in the same manner, and the hon member for Dunedin, Mr Macandrew, had devoted his life in the interests of the province. In Auckland, however, the administration had taken quite a different turn. The question was, whether it would be well to sell Canterbury and Otago lands cheaply in order that lands in Auckland might fetch a high price, which had previously been disposed of for next to nothing. The effect of carrying these resolutions would be to totally upset the machinery which had grown up over a long period of years. It was unreasonable to propose a uniform land fund in the colony until there was a uniform land law. He was not going to commit himself to any expression of opinion on the subject; but he would say that whenever there was to be a uniform land fund, a uniform land law should precede it, the difficulty in dealing with the land throughout the colony being so great, in consequence of the provinces having different modes of administration. He repeated that it was highly undesirable io raise the question of the compact of 1856 at the present time. It had been a land mark of legislation for many years. Whenever changes were made in the mode of dealing with the revenue, the arrangement of 1856 was kept in view and jealously guarded. The spirit and intention of the compact had been carried out up to the present time faithfully, and he thought the House should not lightly commit itself to an expression of opinion to undo the work of so many years. The resolutions might be carried, but he felt confident that they could not be made acceptable to a large portion of the colony which deserved great consideration, he alluded to Otago and Canterbury. As to the discontent felt by Auckland with regard to its land fund, that discontent was very different, and deserved less consideration than the discontent which would be felt by Otago and Canterbury if these resolutions were carried, and by which they would be deprived of that which for nearly a generation they had been taught to look upon as inalienably their right. He wished to touch upon another subject, and to express himself upon it very clearly. He had heard a good deal said about separation, which simply meant that, instead of there being nine provinces as now, there should be two, each province to have its own land revenue. If they were going to make the land revenue cease to be provincial revenue, then those hon members who went into the lobbies in favor of separation renounced plainly the right to the compact of 1856. With regard to the position of our loans at home at the present time, he admitted they were not saleable on the ground that an impression prevailed that the colony had lorrowed very largely considering the size of its income, and also because the credit of the colony had been damaged at the hands of those who should have adopted a very different course. The rapid manner in which public works had been pushed on might have the effect of compelling us to pay a little more for the loans than under other circumstances would have been the case, but he saw nothing in the position of our loans at home to make us feel the slightest sentiment of regret on account of the Public Works policy, as carried out during the last few years. He then read the following statistics, as showing the present position of the country. The population (exclusive of Maoris) amounted on December 31st, 1870, to 258,400 ; on the 31st December, 1875, to 375,856, with an increase during the period of 125.560, or 53 per cent. Increase of Cultivation—The land in cultivation in February, 1870 (exclusive of land in sown grasses), amounted to 347,980 acres; the same in February, 1876, to 557,612 acres, showing an increase during the period of 219,632 acres, or at the rate of 61 per cent. The land in sown grasses amounted in February, 1870, to 649,524 acres, in February, 1876, to 1,819,801 acres, an increase of 170,277 acres, equal to 180 per cent. Increase of Holdings—The holdings of one acre in extent and upwards having cultivated land, including sown grass land, increased from 13,576 in February, 1870, to 17,252 in February, 1876, an increase in number of 3773, or 20 per cent. The increase of crops—The total land under

grain and other crops amounted in February, 1870, to 250,979 acres ; in February, 1876, to 616,187 acres, an increase of 160,205 acres, or at the rate of 64 per cent, He then proceeded to dwell upon the time lost by these resolutions having been brought forward,most hon members having come to the House under the impression that they would have to discuss the abolition proposals. He had done his best to show that the resolutions were entirely inexpedient, and notwithstanding the temptations which the hon gentleman had so eloquently adduced in favor of them he hoped hon members would by a large majority throw them out. In conclusion he thanked the House for its indulgence, and if he had not done justice to his subject, hoped members would make allowance for the difficulty under which he felt himself to labor. [Cheers.] After the usual half-hour’s adjournment, Sir G.JQrey said, as every member had made up his mind on the subject, he would say as little as possible, But a further consideration prevailed upon him to be brief, The country stood on the biink of a precipice, and the remedy proposed by Mr Whitaker was merely palliative. Only a quick remedy could relieve us from the difficulties with which we are threatened, or put us upon a course which led to continued prosperity. Therefore as the remedy proposed did not in those directions come up to his anticipations, or to those of a large majority of members, he did not think it was incumbent to go at any great length into the question that had been raised. Still he felt it to be his duty to remark upon one or two points that had arisen in the debate. He unhesitatingly affirmed that the delay which had arisen in the public business rested with the Government, It was only within the past few days that their plans had been laid before the House, and at the present moment some important matters were withheld. He alluded to the Bill that is to deal with native lands. Such great measures as the Counties Bill should have been published in the Gazette at least a month before Parliament met. It had been distinctly admitted that night that we were entering upon a year of great financial difficulty. It was a matter of inexpressible concern to him that the Premier had made no mention of taking the course to free us from the perils which threaten the country, viz , a great and speedy reduction in the expenditure. I Cheers.] The remedy proposed by the member for Waikato was one for which the House should thank him. If carried they would aid the views they held in common, but if rejected they would render still more necessary the remedy he was about to propose. It was his intention after the business had been disposed of to give notice of the resolutions which embodied that remedy, and would move them at the earliest possible period the convenience of the House would admit. Out of courtesy he must deal with the resolutions of the member for Geraldine, and it would be neither becoming nor just in him to attempt any improper interference with that hon gentleman; His resolutions were—(l) That in the opinion of this House the state of the colony requires that its financial and constitutional arrangements should bo reconsidered. (¥) The unity of the colony should bo maintained. (3) There should be twolocal Governments,one foreach island. (4) The Colonial Government being responsible for the colonial debt, for which the annual charge for interest and sinking fund is £815,000, the North Island shall be charged with £190,000 per annum and the South Island with £625,000 per annum. (5.) With the exception of those matters of great colonial importance, which must be reserved for the Colonial Government, each local Government shall have the entire control and management of its own native affairs and the disposal of its own revenues. (6,) The seat of the local Government of the North Island to be at Auckland. (7.) The seat of the local (government of the South Island to be at Christchurch, (8.) The seat of the Colonial Government to remain as at present in Wellington;” Local self-government would be far more adequately brought about by the means proposed in these resolutions than by any scheme which the Government have submitted to the country. He felt confident when these proposals are made and become known to the public that they would earnestly recommend themselves as the best chance of safety from the perils which have been brought upon the country. Having that conviction firmly in his mind he would not delay the House longer, but would give such explanations regarding them as should recommend them to the favorable consideration of hon gentlemen, and obtain from them that assistance in carrying them out that he and those co-operating with him firmly believed they deserved at their bands. Mr Macandrew need not - say it was his intention to oppose the resolution on the same grounds that he opposed the financial policy of the Government and its proposed constitutional changes, because both aimed at the same thing, viz, one purse for the whole colony, and the destruction of the compact of 1856. He regarded that compact as absolutely binding upon the colony so long as New Zealand has any regard for public faith, and the resolutions of the member for Waikato go directly in the teeth of both the spirit and letter of that compact. The same thing might be said less directly but ultimately in regard to the Government proposals. That compact, stereotyped as it was, affirmed, sealed, and ratified as it were, by twenty years’ prescriptive right, and from that fact, must be regarded in the same category as the law of the Modes and Persians, which changed not, He felt, that if this Legislature rescinded that compact, it would be admitting a principle that contained the elements of the greatest possible danger, ami which might result in the greatest disaster to the country. He did not believe that any of the members supporting these resolutions would for a moment be cognisant of anything approaching spoliation. If he were called upon to make an election between these resolutions and the Govern ment policy—if he were forced to vote for one or the other—he rather thought he should be disposed to give the preference to the resolutions of the member for Waikato—[Opposition cheers] inasmuch as they were straightforward, open, and above board. There was no ambiguity about them. They went right to the point. If he might use figurative language, the member for Waikato in broad daylight sent his dagger into the heart of his victim before his victim’s face, whereas the Government proposals suck the life’s blood in a very roundabout process, one not so easily detected. It was a rather singular circunn stance that the Speaker and he were the only members in that House who opposed

the compact in 1856. He waa much interested in looking over the debate on that occasion, and it struck him as very remarkable, looking at the events of the past twenty years, how completely their action had been justified by those events, culminating in the resolutions now before the House. No doubt at that time the North had the best of the bargain, and because subsequent events proved it waa not, was no reason why it should be repudiated now. Another remarkable point which attack him was that the only member of the House who supported these resolutions, and for aught he knew was a party to their construction, was the member for Timaru ; and he rejoiced that on the present occasion the hon gentleman and himself would be found in the same lobby in support of a policy he then defended, but in defence of vested rights that had grown up under that policy. No other gentlemen being desirous to speak, and there being loud calls of “ Question,” “ Divide,” the Speaker called on Mr Whitaker to reply. That gentleman waived hia right, and the Speaker declared the motion lost on the voices. (The division list was published in yesterday’s issue.) Sir J, Vogel said that it would be unreasonable for the Government to be expected to go on with other business until the resolutions of Sir G. Grey were disposed of. If Sir G. Grey would consent, he could, with the leave of the House, give notice of his resolutions to-night, and they could be brought on for discussion to-morrow. Sir G. Grey said that the Premier had suggested that it was desirable that he would support the suspension of the Standing Orders, in order that his Separation resolutions might be given notice of, and he encouraged the Premier to think that he would accede to this, but he now thought that, by taking private business on Wednesday, he would bring on his resolutions on Thursday. Sir J. Yogel objected to any business being transacted before the separation resolutions, but would take an adjournment of the House until Thursday to give Sir G. Grey the time he required. After some discussion, and a motion for adjournment being lost, Sir G. Grey gave notice of his separation resolutions for Thursday, and moved that the House should adjourn until half-past 7 o’clock p.m. on that day. The House then adjourned at 12.49 a.m.