GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 664, 5 August 1876, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

(From a corespondent of the Press.) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday, August 3. PUBLIC HEALTH ACT, The Premier, in reply to Mr Tole, said a Bill to amend the Public Health Act, and to enable an entry to be made on premises where business prejudical to health was being conducted, would be introduced as soon as possible. SEPARATION. Sir G. Grey, in moving his Separation resolutions, observed that they were far more important than at first sight appeared. He trusted he would succeed in doing it in such a way as would place them in a favorable aspect for the House and country. He could only say, if he did not succeed in doing so, the fault would lie with himself and not with the matter he had to bring under the notice of the House. The first resolution—“ That in the opinion of this House the state of the colony required that its financial and constitutional arrangements should be reconsidered ” —consisted of two parts, the one relating to the finances of the colony, the other to the Constitution. Upon the first he would say but little. The Premier the other evening had said that which confirmed the resolution he had just read, and if they wanted any further evidence they had it in the financial statement, which complicated matters instead of simplifying them. When the Premier told the House that “ our securities were unsaleable in the London markets,” it would have been a great and noble act on his part if he had added, “ I took charge of this country when it was in a a state of considerable prosperity. I have administered its affairs during a period in which its staple products have been sold at unexampled high prices, so that great wealth was distributed over every part of the colony. I have had untold millions of borrowed money placed at my disposal, and I ask you to trust to other hands to re-establish "the colony which I have plunged into this condition.” 1 Opposition cheers.] He would have admired the Premier if he had nobly and boldly made such a statement to the House. As it was he needed no further evidence to prove that the financial condition of the colony was such that an immediate remedy must be conceived. That constitutional changes were required all admitted, but those proposed by the Government the country would not for one moment entertain. It would treat them with the scorn they deserved. They had however perhaps the first opportunity in the history of the Anglo-Saxon race to establish by their own intelligent action a constitution which might last for all time. It had been objected to when he made recommendations of this kind, that the remarks he made of blots in the form of government existing at present, were personal attacks; he had no intention in that direction, nor of casting 'odium or blame upon the previous Secretaries of State, or upon the members of the administration at home or here. In saying that the previous custom of administering affairs should no longer prevail, but that a different system should be established, he could not be considered as making any personal remarks. Therefore those gentlemen who had with ability and integrity administered the affairs of their country, when they heard him would believe that he had no desire to offend or say that which was ill-natured or unbecoming or severe. He then proceeded to remark upon the past constitutional history of the colony. When the constitution was about to be conferred on the colony, he received a letter from the Secretary of State to say that an elective Upper House would be a feature of the new constitution, which would have prevented much of the ills that had occurred to New Zealand. But there was a change in the Home admistration, and then he received another letter to state that Her Majesty’s new advisers were desirous of altering the constitution, and one Jof the alterations was that the Upper House should not be elective. Changes had thus been made which the people never desired, and people were left in ignorance of a great deal that had inflicted upon them until it was done. This had been done by the Imperial Parliament and by successive Colonial Ministries, the result being the mutilated contemptible constitution under which we lived, and on this mutilated constitution the Government were attempting to rear a series of petty institutions, which he was certain they would not succeed in forejng on the country. He contended it was necessary to go to the people and get their assent to the foundation upon which we intend to build up our constitution, and to see that the foundation was a good and strong one, and founded on the admiration and esteem of the people, who shall be allowed to build up institutions which would take care of the out districts. They had heard a great deal from the Premier about abolition, and he might say that in attaining the vote he did on the resolutions of the member for Waikato, it was owing in a great measure to the magic word " abolition,” and to the cry of the out districts, which they had had repeated ad nauseam. What was the abolition they had heaid so much of ? What was to be abolished ? Was it the great expenditure and the monstrous civil service ? Was it the corrupt native department? No, none of those things had been abolished, but they had abolished the provinces. Did it mean that the carcases of the provinces had been dragged out of the way and buried out of sight, because they had been shifted and robbed of the considerable funds and powers which belonged to them. He repeated, under the proposals of the Government nothing was to be abolished. Ha would go further, and say nothing was to be created. At least every effort they made was done with a palsied and uncertain hand. He asked why there had not been a change in the constitution of the Upper House, which, though composed of disinterested gentlemen, did not represent the colony. Neither did the Lower House, or those resolutions he was now proposing would be carried. Otago and Auckland contained respectively one-third and one fourth of the entire population of the country, and these provinces which contained the larger proportion of the people were to a man, he might say, in favour of these resolutions, yet they would be over borne by a small majority, and by what means? By giving three members to Taranaki, three to Hawke’s Bay, and so forth. Ho referred to another blot in the constitution, which was the system of placing members .of the Civil Service in the Upper House and making them Ministers, men whom no constituency would return. Such a system must beget

subserviency among those elected, and they had an instance in the case of a complacent civil servant who had been called into the Cabinet, who had been selected by the Premier as his own Premier without consultation with the constituencies, and who laid down his office when his master returned, a proceeding unparalleled—an insult to the country. He referred to the correspondence between “Dear Vogel” and “ Dear Pollen,” as a correspondence which was a disgrace to the Premier, boasting that he “ did not pretend to say he had been economical,” as a personal boast made regardless of the public interest, at a time when many a struggling mother in New Zealand was thinking how she could provide for her children, and to his expenditure as being extravagant, and the antithesis the example of the great and patriotic men who represented the American States presented, Their case should be not to create the civil service into a great governing class, as was threatened to be done by two civil servants being already in the Ministry. It was that which they sought to abolish—that which had a life, and a life most pernicious to New Zealand. Coming to the proposals of his party, they did not propose to interfere with them. However, he came to his own proposals, and he believed the resolution he held in his hand would command universal respect and esteem. He believed the fact of gentlemen representing more than half the entire population of the colony meeting together and agreeing to make mutual sacrifices in many and various other respects, as were made in these resolutions, would be regarded as worthy of being recorded and handed down as an instance of patriotism worthy of encouragement and future following. It would be seen that the constitutional changes proposed were propositions which ought to be put before the House and the colony, The struggle was of civilisation, culture, and happiness of numbers, against wealth, degradation, and the welfare of the few; of freedom against despotism of a very bad kind. They proposed to maintain the unity of the colony. However, they proposed that there should be two states —as it were two local Governments —one for each island. The people of New Zealand were well capable of framing a constitution better than that which now existed, and what right had the Ministry to prevent the people from choosing what form of government there should be. The people would judge wisely, they might rely upon it, for their own future good and welfare. Dififering widely, as the two islands did in situation, climate, produce, and population, they would do wisely to have separate Governments framed by those who had toiled in the country, and not by the tribe of strangers that had been introduced. The North Island could do better governing its own affairs, and nothing could be fairer than to make the land fund the general estate of the South Island; while promoting civilisation and culture better than could be done by a great Civil Service, their scheme would also make saleable securities that were now unsaleable. The nature of the Federal Government was only indicated. Those with him did not seek to impose their will upon New Zealand; they left the details to be decided when the two islands formed their own Governments. They gave unlimited power to the people. As to the proposed seats of Government, there were recommendations amounting to pledges that those voting for them would give effect to them. The proposal to make Christchurch the capital of the South Island was one of extraordinary generosity ; without scruple or demur it had been acquiesced in, but even that was not to limit the power of the inhabitants to decide. What could be more noble than to make the land fund of the Middle Island common to the whole colony ? He denied that the natives in the neighborhood of the King country were enamored of the native policy of the Government, which the natives in those districts strongly denounced. Those with him did not contemplate the revival of the provinces in the shape they had existed, and this was somewhat in contrast to the conduct of the Government, who while robbing and destroying the provinces, sought to get up a province in a rich district of the North Island, giving to a barbarous race all the powers they took away from the rest of the colony. In the North they felt that their interests were imperilled by the present state of things. Eirery day made it worse. If they were not speedily allowed the management of their own affairs, they would not be able to take them over, because the difficulties would be too great for them to face, and the reason was that the feeling of the two islands on the land question was so different. In the North runs were broken up so that there were a hundred families. In the South one man held tlqe land. They felt strongly that the youth of the North Island had the right to have such openings made for them. But they did not desire to iaterfere with interests in other parts of the colony, which would be left to manage their own. He continued by referring to the part he had taken in the past and elsewhere in framing the constitution. He contended that the righteousness, justice, and adaptability of this recommendation had never been questioned. He claimed for his party the desire and determination to prevent the minority from oppressing the majority. Whatever might be the form of Government adopted by the majority of the inhabitants, after the question had been fairly submitted to them in the manner which his resolutions admit of, they would unhesitatingly comforn to the wishes of the majority, and do their very utmost to make them successful, On the other hand they would do their utmost to resist any attempt to deprive the people of that right of choosing their own form of government; resist any attempt to take from them representative institutions unless they themselves by their representatives consent to that being done, and unless by their representatives in their own particular legislatures they desire to be deprived of that right. By all means that law, justice, and right permitted, they would attempt to attain legitimately and justly the rights to which they were entitled. In conclusion, he said his object was not to obtain office, but let him see that boon he waa contending for bestowed upon the people of New Zealand, and with happiness he would retire in peace for the remainder of his life, with a claim to the gratitude of every man who lived in the country. [Loud cheers.] Sir J. Vogel said he could scarcely understand from the remarks of the hon gentleman what were the proposals for a new constitution, although he professed to explain. Indeed, the resolutions on the notice paper seemed to give all the information the hon gentleman proposed to afford i Whoa he read

the resolutions of which the hon gentleman had given notice he confessed that he had no inconsiderable amount of difficulty in comprehending them; They had been many weeks in preparation, and he had thought therefore that they would be a literary production, and not a reproach to those who had constructed them. It would have been more respectful to the House to have taken care to construct the sentences more carefully. Reviewing the speech as it was, he denied that New Zealand was in such difficulties as were represented, difficulties which if they did arise were provoked and aggravated by those whose prejudices carried them away. Any passing influence shared in common with other colonies by a fall in the price of its staple products was no reproach to its condition and the resources of the Government. Doubtless there had been a large expenditure since he was in office, but the results were visible from end to end of the colony, iu works, population, and the increased value of land. On that point he was content to abide by the verdict of the House, the country, and those who came after, to say ifjthat expenditure had been a wise one and for the benefit of the country, fCheers.J It was insinuated that some one else was required to bring the colony back to its prosperity—that they were to suppose that some one else was the hon member himself—but he thought, in the course of his speech, it must have suggested itself to the hon member that many members would hesitate to vote—would as soon cut off their right hands —rather than assist in placing the hon member at the head of the Government. [Cries of name.] It was his duty to be very plain on this occasion, and to the hon gentlemen who cried ut so loudly he|said it could not be expected that the hon member for the Thames should be at liberty to use most insulting remarks towards Ministers and the House itself, without receiving a reply. He was ready to admit the hon gentleman had done the State good service in the past, but that on that account his ravings and insults were to go on unanswered was not complimentary to the hon gentleman. While the hon gentleman did occupy a leading position in the colony he was never easy unless in the midst of those disputes in which he delighted to revel. In the past he had been continually quarrelling either with the Imperial Government or its representatives, and this kind of thing was not at all required now. We were getting on very comfortably. The Imperial Government did not desire much of us, and we were not making unreasonable demands upon the Imperial Government, but if the hon member for the Thames got into power there would very soon be an ill-feeling generated. What had drawn the hou member back into public life but the hope that he would be able to satisfy his grudges against the Colonial Office ? [No, no.J Then he had spoken upon the question of the constitution of the Upper House, as he generally managed to do each time he made a speech, and his remarks with reference to that body were as undeserved as they were uncalled for. He (Sir J, Vogel) had no hesitation in saying that during the last two or three years the Upper House had been of good service to the colony. He had on several occasions to say severe things about the Upper House, and when one had carefully prepared schemes, got them through the Lower House, and then found them rejected in another place, it was not unnatural that some little annoyance should be felt, but he would say this, and in saying he did not speak in the nature of an apology, that judged of by the results the Legislative Council had done a very great deal of good for the country by improving and checking hasty legislation. It might be that in time to come there might be modifications, but it was not then his purpose to suggest the desirableness of such a thing, nor to say it was necessary. What he had to do that evening was to deny the general assertion that the Upper House had been disastrous to the best interests of the country. Then the hon member must talk about “ a corrupt Government.” This was another subject which must be introduced into every speech he made, and in doing so, as it seemed to him (Sir J. Vogel), he insulted not only the Government but the members of the House who supported the Government. Why did he not bring forward instances of corruption ? Why did he not move a vote of censure, or carry out his threat of bringing in a Bill of impeachment against Ministers. That was the legitimate way. Such a course could at least be understood. As to the reference to his (Sir Julius Vogel’s) personal expenses whilst visiting England in the public service of the colony, he should not discuss it. Possibly it might be found from the records that his expenses had not been so large as had been allowed on previous occasions to other people, but that would be for the House to consider, and he should not discuss it, [Hear, hear.] It would be out of place for him to do so. As to the services which he had rendered, or attempted to render to the colony during the past few years, he could only say that if they were not appreciated, he had wasted many valuable years of his life. He had been exceedingly sorry to fiud that the hon member had sufficient bad taste to attack personally u member of the Government who was not in the House, and who had no opportunity of replying. He (Sir J. Vogel) was prepared to characterise the conduct of the hon member for the Thames, it was the reverse of courageous or brave. It appeared as if he had a deep rooted aversion to every public man in the colony but himself, and he seemed to think the desire to gain money was the beginning and end of their existence as public men. He (Sir J. Vogel) regretted exceedingly to see such a spirit, for such an idea was not only exceedingly ignoble, but exceedingly mistaken. There were a great many men in New Zealand doing their best for the colony, and he would say this, that any man who tried to serve the public would personally be a great loser by it, A man who had sufficient abilities to attain a leading position in public affairs would do very much better if lie applied those abilities to the furthering of his private interest. The comments upon Dr Pollen were exceedingly unfair. With regard to his resignation of the Premiership, it was very well understood what course would be taken when he (Sir J. Vogel) returned to the colony, but he might say that he had requested Dr Pollen to retain the Premiership, but he had declined, and had asked him (Sir J. Vogel) to resume the position; to hold up bis colleague to ridicule and prejudice was ungenerous. Each successive Administration for a long series of years had acknowledged the great services of the Hou Dr Pollen, and ha would add this, that it would be much better for the colony

if there were a few more men of the stamp of Dr Pollen in the colony, men who could not only talk but act, bear in mind the interests of the country, and not make flashy showy speeches, for no public man in the colony had more thoroughly won his way into the hearts of the people. The hon member then had spoken of people building up their own institutions; but what more could the people do than they bad done. There had been a new Parliament elected, and elected solely upon the constitutional question ; and if the people did not express their wishes through their representatives, who had charge of their interests, how could they do so at all 7 Were they, as the representatives of New Zealand, having charge of her interests, to abandon the present constitution without knowing what was to replace it 7 [Opposition cheers.] He presented the Opposition with the laughter his remarks provoked, but the Government had a perfect knowledge of what they proposed should be provided, nor would they deprive the people of their constitution after those changes were made. He was not prepared to admitthat, because they were taking charge of certain departments which the provinces had been carrying on, and because they were localizing the other departments and other charges, they were altering the constitution of the country, the real difference between their proposals and those of the hon member was, that ho proposed to give to the two Island Parliaments entire power with small exceptions and its entire revenues, without coming to any clear understanding as to what the Federal Government should be in future, while the Government divested themselves, as far as it was possible, of their powers in favor of the local governing bodies, They proposed to give the districts the power which had been exercised by the provinces in olden times, and these counties would be more important in power and wealth than were the provinces originally. The hon member in making this crude proposition for separation seemed to proceed upon the wrong assumption that each island represented a distinct community of interests and that the several aggregations of people were bound together by common ideas and feelings, but on the face of it this was very absurd. If the hon member thought the provinces of the North Island were united in their interests, and totally differing from the provinces of the South Island, he made a great mistake. For instance, there was far more sympathy between the province of Canterbury and the province of Wellington, than therere was between the province of Canterbury and the province of Otago. [No, no.] | Hear, hear.] Gentlemen might say “ No, no,” but it was the case, and why 7 Simply because Otago assumed to have the right to dictate to the whole of the Middle Island. Again Nelson and Wellington were more closely allied than Nelson and Otago, and the same thing applied to the West Coast of the Middle Island, Then if he went to the North Island what did he find 7 That the inhabitants of a very large extent of territory north of Auckland had complained very loudly that from first to last they had been entirely neglected by' the Provincial Government of Auckland, and they appealed to the General Government for aid and assistance. How many of these members coming from the North of Auckland would the member for the Thames carry into the lobby with him 7 A Voice—The division will show. Sir J. Vogel— The hon gentlemen ought to know, if they have any regard for their constituents, they will not. Sir G. Grey— l do not know that. If they have any regard for the interests of their constituents, they will do it. [Opposition cheers ] Sir J. Vogel said the remark he made about Auckland referred in a lesser degree to Otago. The Superintendent of that province did not expect that he would carry all the Otago members into the lobby with him, Mr Macandrew—Almost all. Sir Julius Vogel— But how many of these members would go into the lobbies happy in the knowledge that the motion would not be carried, and that the leaders of the Opposition would not have the Government of New Zealand. He was perfectly convinced that, when the people of Otago came to know and realise the full effect of the proposals put before the House by the Government, there would be a very great revulsion of feeling in those parts of the province which at present were the strongholds of the hon member for Dunedin. He then referred to the remarks of Sir George Grey, in reference to the land legislation, and deprecated the holding out of promises in respect to cutting up runs in order to catch votes. The land question should not be a party question at all. It was a very difficult and delicate matter to deal with, and members would have to devote their best attention to it without studying the interests of party. It was a question upon which men might conscientiously differ, without accusing each other of impure motives. He was not going to make vague promises as to what was to be done, nor would the hon member do so if he were in a similar position. The Government were possessed of the idea, and he believed that on the whole these proposals would be found satisfactory. He twitted those Provincialists who last year were so rabid in their inconsistency, and said that by bringing forward these resolutions they had shown that last year they had properly estimated the feelings of the country. They had asked for delay on the ground that the feeling of the country generally was against abolition, and that the people would defend Provincialism almost with their blood ; but this year, by bringing forward such resolutions as these, they admitted that their view had been wrong, and the view of the Government right. Why had the hon member for the Thames and his followers admitted this 1 The resolutions had not been explained, and really there was very considerable doubt as to what they meant. It seemed to him that before such resolutions could be given effect to, there must be Imperial legislation, and that this action was taken in order to bring pressure to bear on the Imperial Government? Why was not more information given on the subject ? Who were to be Governors 1 What was to be the system of government 7 Who were to be the heads of the new Government ? A Member —These are matters of detail; ask Pollen 7 [Boars of laughter.] Sir J. Vogel paused for a reply, and considered it a fair question for him to put. Six G. Grey —Perhaps I ought to answer the question. I will give the hon member the earliest notice on the subject, in order that he may offer himself as a candidate. I [Opposition cheers, [

Sir J. Vogel went on to say that if he understood the resolutions aright, it would appear there was to be no colony, but two provinces. The colony was to give up its revenues and receive what the provinces might choose to dole out to it; but there must first be a repudiation of all liabilities. It was not sufficient for the provinces to say that we will give you this and that. The colony at present possessed a revenue, and certain engagements had been entered into. He went on to characterise the scheme as crude, and existing only in the mind of a few hon members, and pointed out that the hon member who was responsible for the resolution had precluded the possibility of _ its being discussed, because he knew nothing whatever of the matter except that there were to be two provinces, and had brought forward nothing for debate. He asked members to adopt it on his responsibility, that it was a good scheme, but he could not give members an opportunity of judging for themselves. Such a preposterous idea as that the colony was to sacrifice everything, and trust to what it could get from the two provinces, themselves placed in somewhat difficult circumstances, he hardly over heard of. He could not conceive how such a plan was to be carried out f Could such an idea have a place anywhere but in a mind more visionary than practical. The hon member would make parts greater than the whole, and the whole subordinate to its two parts. If it was to bo carried out on the basis of the present representation, Auckland would have eighteen votes, as compared with sixteen for the rest of the North Island —was the rest of the island prepared to accept that position f Otago would have twenty-one against twenty-nine votes for the rest of the Middle Island. He repeated thosi members who vo ed for separation voluntarily abandoned the compact of 1856. They must bear in mind that in supporting" these resolutions, they were inviting the House to reconsider that compact. After showing that the Government proposals gave the towns and country selfgovernment, while those of the Opposition handed those powers to two large provinces, and 'defending the Civil servants, he concluded by appealing to the House to support what he believed was the wish of the people. [Cheers.] Mr Reynolds said that for many years past he had been in favor of the colony being divided between two provinces. He was not in favor of separation, but was in favor of two Provincial Governments, He felt sure that these two legislatures would legislate better th an the central legislature. He voted for the measures and not the men, and if he studied his personal feelings he should vote for the Government, and not the Opposition. He had seen with regret the resolutions of Mr Whitaker negatived as it was, because he knew that many persons voted against their ‘ feelings. He knew this from personal conversation with such members. He was firmly convinced that if the members of the House were asked one by one, it would be found that in their feelings they were with the hon member for Waikato.

(Per Press Agency?) Friday, August 4. The House met at 2 30. THE ADJOURNED DEBATE ON SIR G, GREY'S RESOLUTION. Mr Rees referred at once to the Premier’s remarks in reply to Sir G. Grey, and he was surprised at them, for they were always the same in substance, being merely the old speeches broken up and re-arranged. He said the member for the Thames was visionary, but let him look back upon his own political career to say whether there had been ever such an author of visionary schemes. What a visionary scheme was that of the way to pay off the national debt of England. He wondered how the Premier could refer to Sir G. Grey as be did—to one so much his intellectual superior. Indeed he was surprised how the Premier could have blinded the House and the people of the colony to his deficiency as a statesman or debater. He could not account for it, unless he had thrown a glamour over them. Two years ago he (Mr Rees) published a little pamphlet, and the statements therein made had never yet been contradicted by the Premier or any of his followers. As to the hon members who were going to vote for the resolutions, but who would cut off their right hand sooner than see Sir G. Grey in power, he challenged that hon gentleman to name a single member who had given any intimation to that effect ; Sir G. Grey was asked why he did not proceed at once against the Government by a Bill of impeachment, but he ought to know if he did not, that according to law, that could not be done. The member for Thames had been twitted with a so-called inconsistency between his position this year and last, and was asked why he did not admit he was all wrong then ; but would it not be as pertinent to ask Government why they did not come to the House and say Gentlemen, we have enjoyed an enormous expenditure, and promised to bring great prosperity about, but we regret that we have kept none of our promises—broken every pledge. Addressing himself to the resolutions themselves, the hon gentleman said he agreed with the member for Waikato, that our finances were so confused and involved that it was almost impossible to understand them. He had, however, given great attention to the finances of the colony, and he was prepared to prove that the Treasurer’s statement was absolutely incorrect, and did not agree with the published figures of the Government themselves. He would also prove that unless some prompt remedy were adopted, the most serious financial difficulties must ensue. The hon gentleman then proceeded to show that the statement of the Colonial Treasurer and the statement of the Minister for Public Works last year did not agree at all, that, in fact, there were discrepancies of hundreds of thousands of pounds, yet notwithstanding the discrepancies the totals were mostly made to come out the same. He quoted from these documents to show that in respect to railways alone there was one discrepancy of four hundred thousand. The hon gentleman then proceeded to criticise the financial statement of this year, to show that the public accounts were not kept properly. He went copiously into the details and informed the House that the amount of income and expenditure showed that the colony was £IOO,OOO to the bad, So grossly wrong was the statement, that he found payments which should have been paid last year were passed over and put down to this year, and would have to be paid. If members would compare the items of expenditure as put down in the statement with the actual amounts recorded, they would find that almost in every instance the figures had been put down by mere guess

work. They were about £IOO,OOO out in an of expenditure of £700,000, This ought to arrest the attention of the House, or instead of £400,000 out they would soon be £500,000 out. By the end of the third quarter of last year, the last of the four million loan was exhausted, and ever since the 31st of March they had been using the balance of the former loans, guaranteed and unguaranteed. The balance of £1,400,000 which was shown in the statement did not, and could not exist. There might possibly be half but certainly not more. It was easy to put figures down, but how would it be when they were unable to meet the drafts of the Crown agents. The ’hon gentleman then quoted at length from his pamphlet to show that the promises made by the Premier when he brought forward his scheme had all been broken, and that had the people of the colony an idea that all these conditions would have been systematically broken, they would never have endorsedthatglowing policy. He also quoted further from his pamphlet to show all the predictions he had made then were borne out by the results. According to the hon gentleman’s figures the colony would owe twenty-five millions by the time the public works scheme was completed, and the whole of the revenue would be required to pay the interest and the sinking fund. From all the so-called deposits in the Bank of New Zealand not one single penny had been received by the colony. Our whole system of finance was fallacious, the statements illusive, and not meant to enlighten the people of the colony as to our position—that, in fact, it made them think it better than it was. He took great exception to the estimated cost of Government in taking over the whole of the provincial machinery. It was absurdly fallacious on the face of it, He re gretted the House did not appear to foresee that a great reaction would follow the completion of public works. It was always the case after large public expenditure, and cited the case of Canada before the establishment of the Dominion of Canada, yet there was not the slightest preparation for any such reaction. In relation to the Consolidated Fund, he would impress on them the necessity for retrenchment in expenditure, and for devising some means whereby the current expenditure would be met without increasing the enormous burden under which the colony was beginning to stagger. The Premier deprecated an income tax, but he believed the House would have to consider whether or not some such tax should be imposed. Ic was clearly the fairest they could possibly have recourse to. If general public impression was any guide, they might make up their minds that the colony could not go again into the money market before 1877. As to the constitutional aspect of the case, it appeared to him that all the great advantages enjoyed by New Zealand in entering upon the race of progress had been wasted, and Government appeared to have become a mere board of works, and existed solely for the prosecution of public works and the introduction of immigrants. Government surely had other duties to perform than these. If Government had been carried out in the proper spirit of government, they would not be compelled to have recourse to such a disgraceful measure as the Disqualification Act Amendment Act of last session. He had no doubt that their discussion upon the new constitution would become great in history, and ho hoped no selfish or unworthy motive would animate them in that discussion. The consequence of the Government sinking into a board of works was the growth of a national selfishness, and if the Counties Bill were passed, they would see each of the thirty-nine counties desiring to got all it could for itself, because these committees had no conscience. He believed that the utterances of Sir Geo. Grey had done more to raise the feelings and aspirations of the rising generation than twenty public works policies would do. The hon gentleman, referring to the action of the Government with regard to the roads and public works north of Auckland, accused them of diverting £15,000 from what it was intended for, and of creating discontent amongst the people of out districts. They were nauseated with the cry of abolition, a cry that made him almost ashamed of his fellow creatures. What would abolition do for them but sweep away their free and liberal institutions, privileges which would be wretchedly compensated for by a thousand counties with their petty powers. Was it not the veriest nonsense to hear the Premier talking about Road Boards working out their own destiny. Why he ought when he passed away from this scene, to have as an epitaph “The man who enabled Road Boards to work out their own destinies” placed on his tomb. Touching the substantial endowments promised to the counties and Road Boards—the £112,000 they were to receive out of the consolidated revenue ; well, he could assure the House it would never be obtained from that source. They would find that nothing but fresh taxation would ensue. The hon gentleman then referred to the quantity of parish business that occupied the House, and pointed out that by accepting Sir G, Grey’s resolution they would relieve the House of all this small and local business. At present the House was too unwieldy. Hitherto there had been no line of demarcation between the Provincial Government and the House of Representatives, which latter always succeeded in over-riding the provinces. The long and the short of abolition was that the General Government saw provinces had money that was urgently demanded by their needs, and they wanted to seize that. It was quite a reasonable proposal to ask for each island to work out its own destiny. Ho made bold to say that no central Government in Wellington could preserve the peace of the colony. It was well known that public feeling was so strong in the North as well us South Island; and it was not at all improbable they would resent by armed resistance the invasion of their rights and privileges. Let them look at the past history of the United States and they would see that very similar circumstances preceded armed demonstrations. Little as Ministers knew of finance and public policy, they knew a great deal less of administration. Here was a Government that admitted it had given way so far to pressure as to spend a million and a half not originally contemplated. What confidence could be placed in a Government that would submit to such pressure. So far as he could ascertain, every department of Government was mismanaged. In fact, he doubted whether Sir Julius Vogel, the Native Minister, or Dr Pollen had any legal right to sit in the Executive, The hon gentleman referred to the action of the Government with respect to the judges, and said that Sir G. Arney had been driven oil the Bench in order to place Mr Gillies there, and so get rid of a bitter political opponent. It had aTso been said, he did nob know with

what truth, that the present Minister of Justice was made a Minister with the view of being ultimately placed upon the Bench of Justice. The House resumed at 7-30. Mr Rees went on with his speech, speaking until nine o’clock, severely criticising the Ministry, individually and collectively; accusing them of general mismanagement and reckless extravagance, and of such gross misconduct of public affairs as to render them quite unworthy of the confidence of the House. He dealt \ chiefly with the finances and the administration of justice and native affairs, and said that if a clerk had done the same as the Premier, while at home, he would have been put in a felon’s dock. He accused Ministers of bribery, and influencing newspapers for the purpose of hoodwinking the public and keeping themselves in power, and giving appointments to members and their friends, and also of giving public works to certain districts for the purpose of gaining political support—as in the case of the central prison at Taranaki, and the public works at Greymouth ; also that the hospitality of the Premier in the way of balls and dinners was given with the same object. Mr Wason followed in support of the resolutions. He had hailed abolition when it was promised, but one by one his hopes of obtaining justice for his district were disappointed. After he came to the House, and when he saw the Counties Bill and the Financial Bill, he despaired altogether. Mr Lusk made a long speech in defence of the resolutions, and in condemnation of the policy and administration of the Government, and said it appeared from the silence of the Ministerial benches that all the charges made by Mr Rees were unanswerable. He saw no other remedy to allay the discontent and apprehensions that prevailed from one end of the colony to the other, but to adopt Sir G. Grey’s proposals, and allow each island to manage its own affairs; now was the time, another opportunity might not present itself. Mr Fitzroy opposed the resolutions. He had waited in vain to hear any explanation or particulars of the scheme proposed, but nothing but a skeleton was shown them. Mr Thomson made a long speech, denouncing the Government and all their works, and strongly supported the resolutions as the only plan to rescue the colony from the disastrous position into which it had been dragged. He spoke up till one o’clock. Mr Button moved the adjournment of the debate. Mr Stout warned the Ministers, who had shown no desire to speak during the evening, that they must not treat an Opposition with such indignity as to treat their remarks with contempt, by taking no notice of them. There were men in the House who would not put up with such treatment.