GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 667, 9 August 1876, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

{From a corespondent of the Press.) LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Tuesday, August 8. public debts commissioners. The debate on the calling to the bar the Public Debts Sinking Fund Commissioners was adjourned till to-morrcw, owing to the Hon Mr Waterhouse's absence. BILL PASSED. The Timaru Gas Bill passed. QUESTION. In asking a question whether the Government would make enquiry into the case of the ship White Eagle passing the Crozet Island and not taking notice of the signals of distress said to have been seen by some person On board, the Hon Colonel Brett spoke in severe terms of the captain's conduct. Hon Dr Pollen, in replying, said there was no necessity tor such enquiry, and read a letter from a gentleman now resident in Wellington, who was a passenger by the White Eagle, in which the writer denied that there was the slightest truth in the statement that any signals of distress had been observed from the island; HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tuesday, August 8. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30, NEW MEMBER. Mr Karatiana, the member for the Eastern Maori electoral district, took his seat. He was introduced to the Speaker by Sir George Grey and Mr Curtis. SEPARATION RESOLUTIONS. The Speaker, following the usual custom, wanted the House to consider some Bills in which trifling amendments had been made by the Council, but Mr Stout objecting, the House had to proceed to the first order of the day, the separation resolutions, on which the debate was resumed by Mr Button, who observed that the assert tion of the member for the Thames that the Government had not the power to build up institutions after pulling them down, was one that could only be justified by experience, and at the present moment they were not in possession of that experience. The Government had shown no palsied hand in rearing up a Bcheme of local Government, the details of which a great many members had been unable to make themselves acquainted with, through having had their attention diverted from the real business of the country by collateral questions, such as the ene under consideration. They could hardly be expected to apjree with all the details of the Local Government Bill, but neither the House nor the. country could expect that a single session would produce a scheme of Government which would be preferable in all respects, and better adapted to the requirements of thecountry, than the present. Commenting on the speech of the member for the Thames and his resolutions, he remarked that according to the hon member the rest of the colony compared with Auckland was rich, depraved, and despotic, and entertaining such a feeling it could hardly be wondered at their desire for separation. He had heard no solid arguments to show why separation was desirable. Gloomy pictures had been drnwn of the colony's financial difficulties, but were they remedied, or their recurrence in the future prevented, by setting up three governments instead of one? Why, after living for so many years as a united" colony should there be a desire to Eeparatc ? What was ,the casus belli which had arisen to cause us to gravitate from each other ? Tho only solution he could find was that the bone of contention was the land fund. Auckland had asked Otago to give her a share of Otago's land fund, but the latter had most decidedly refused to do so. Wherefore Auckland must needs cut adrift from her ungenerous brother. On the other hand, Otago being tired of the importunities of Auckland, wished to be cut adrift from her. Why should the colony bi shaken to its centre, because the head and tail quarrelled 1 The other parts of the

body objected—as one portion of that body—to such an anatomical measure. True patriotism in all ages had been to band together the discordant elements in a community if there were any existing, rather than to separate them. Commenting on the financial part of the scheme, he contended that if one part of the colony was unable to bear its share oi the burden, the other island must necessarily come to the rescue, and perform more than its share. The argument, that separated each island would be able to borrow on better terms was an anomaly. Constant agitation for constitutional change could not in any way increase the idea of the public creditor in the stability of the security we offered them. [Opposition cheers."! Than thus to shake the centre it would be almost better that the two disagreeing members should withdraw —[loud Opposition cheers] —than that the harmony of the whole should be interrupted. [Cheers.] If it [came to such an alternative —if they became such disagreeable neighbors—so intolerant that they could not any longer abide with the rest—he for one said he would be far better pleased if the two extremes should withdraw than that the harmony of the middle should be interrupted. Mr Macandrew —Where would you be then? Mr Button —It had been alleged, as an argument in favor of separation, that the two islands were dissimilar in interests—that they should no longer be together. That argument was losing force day by day, and the only wonder to him was that so many years were allowed to elapse before the arguments came into requisition. The scheme of the member for the Thames was but to reproduce provincialism, but he reminded him that the House and the country had by a large majority decided against provincialism. [Opposition cries of "No."] If the scheme was carried out, and Auckland and Duncdin became the political centres, the other par's of the colony would be as far removed from it as were now the other parts of the colony from Wellington. But it was not the legislature and legislation that the people cared so much to overlook as the administration of the Government. In providing thirty-nine counties, instead of nine provinces, the Government were giving the people full administrative power to the people's very doors, and tbo.se counties were the bodies the people would look after. As regarded to the unity of the colony, was not this a blind—a salve—to relieve the irritation of those who were unable to swallow the condition of having two colonies. If there was no intention to divide New Zealand into two colonies, what necessity was there for dividing our financial arrangements. The very next step following financial separation meant entire separation 1 What need was there for breaking the bonds of brotherhood that had hitherto existed. Our interests were not dissimilar, and in sympathy we were as one. Were a war to break out, that particular part in which war was would receive the sympathy of every part of the Middle Island —not only in words but by acts and deeds. Such being the case they should rather quell any feeling of dissatisfaction, and endeavour to cement them in feelings of common brotherhood. Mr HISLOP complained of the absence of any answer from the Government Benches to the numerous charges preferred against them by members on the Opposition side of the House, from which he concluded that these charges were not capable of being disproved, and that Ministers themselves admitted that the charges against theirs system were thoroughly proved. He had heard many reasons put forward for that silence. One was because of the personal nature of some of the speeches; but that he dismissed with the remark than no one more regretted than himself the references of the member for Auckland East to the Premier's private hospitality. Again, it had been said that the member for Timaru had commanded silence, and threatened if hia advice were not followed, he and his followers would leave the House. [Opposition laughter.] He quoted from Mr Stafford's speeches in 1874, and said now, more than then, the Premier smiled " contemptably and content " on the Opposition. He used the public funds without the sanction of the House, nor respected the voice of the people, and he regretted that a well spent life should have been clouded by a connection with the present Ministerial Bench. The member for Timaru should have recognised in the members for the Thames and Auckland the instruments of Nemesis that would bring down on the Premier'a head the displeasure of an angry and indignant people. Complaint had been made of the want of defiuitiveness of the resolutions. He thought they were too definite, especially the eighth. He referred to the lobby rumors that the Government were purchasing votes by offering to spend money in outlying districts, and instanced Marsden in particular, saying that the vote of that member was obtained by a promise to spend £IOO,OOO in fchat district. He strongly supported the resolutions, but was opposed to insular separation. He reminded the Premier that in 1870 he advised the people of Duoedin to support the public works scheme as being calculated to bring about financial separation, and the Commissioner of Customs that before taking office he was known as an advocate of separation, and he called upen them to explain what had caused them to alter their views. Mr Woolcock summed up the charges brought against the Government, saying if one-tenth of them were true ministers should be kept in close confinement. The Opposition had severely condemned the Government for their borrowing and expenditure of borrowed money, but the main blame —if blame there was—rested with the Parliament that had sanctioned it. Far too much had been made by the Oppooition of our indebtedness, while they forget our assets. He had not yet heard it said that tie snms borrowed were in excess of the increased value given to property in the country by reason of that expenditura of borrowed capital. If we had borrowed largely and invested that money iD improving the national estate, with the result of increasing it in value greatly in excess of our indebtedness, the speculation was a good one. What he blamed the Government for was for not having taken a firmer stand against provincial logrolling, It would have been far more dignified—far better for their once good names, if Ministers had stuck more firmly to their policy, and less closely to their seats upon the Treasury benches. Referring to the method of averting the threatened financial difficulties, he said three courses suggested themselves to his mind. The first was a reduction of departmental expenditure. A member had said he saw his way clear to saving £200,000 a year. If that hon gentleman came

down with an adjustment of affairs by which that sum, or anything like it could be saved, consistent with the efficiency of the public service, he would follow him into the lobby. The next course was increased taxation. The Ministry, through the Premier, were averse to inci eased taxes, but he knew of a way by which increased taxes could be obtained, more than the £200,000 said to be saveable, without it falling upon the great bulk of the people. There were thirteen million acres of land alienated from the Grown and in the hands of private individuals, which had quadrupled in value, by reason of the expenditure of borrowed money, and contributed not a shilling towards interest and sinking fund for the repayment of what was borrowed. He had no antipathy to those holding large landed estates ; but he did say, being specially benefitted by the expenditure that had been going on, they should be special contributors to the interest and sinking fund. He told Minis ers the day was not far distant when the incidence of taxation must be changed, and unless Ministers tackled it the people would demand it. They would not stand contributing £300,000 or £400,000 a year from the bare necessaries of life, while 13,000,000 of landed property, which had quadrupled in value by public expenditure, contributed nothing. The adjustment of taxation was a question that must be earnestly taicen up by the Government, and they should do it before the discontent of the people burst forth and demanded it. If these two courses failed the only other way of meeting any deficiency that might arise wa? to issue Treasury Bills—a s'atcsmaulike and legitimate course to adopt for tiding over temporary difficulties. He admitted things were not so good just now as we could wish, but they were not nearly so bad as the Opposition made them to be. He failed to see the economical character of the so resolutions, or that they were any better form of local government, or that the work of the country could be better dono by three Governments than by one. If by them he could see any prospect of the expenditure being reduced, a more rapid settlement of the country, a more rapid development of the country's resources, effected by them, he would support them, but at the present they went in the contrary direction. A united colony was to be maintained by a division, a reduction of the expenditure obtained by multiplication, and the tendency was to perpetuate provincial jealousies and on a larger scale to cause discord, and to prevent the growth of a national feeling.

(Per Press Agency.} The House resumed at 7.30. Dr Hodgkinson supported the resolutions in a long speech. The plan proposed, he said, was simple and comprehensive. Government had ruined the constitutional edifice, and now tried to set up thirty-nine paltry governments. Hitherto, Parliament had been servile and subservient, otherwise Premier could never get, and then maintain his present position. Government were corrupt, extravagant, and a disgrace to the colony. He regretted that Mr Stafford had not the carrying out cf the public works scheme, when the colony would have benefitted. Still, he was the man who struck the first blow at the constitution. As long asthe presentcentralistic system existed, representative Government was a shame and a delusion. The hon gentleman claimed for the proposals that they provided a good foundation on which to erect a superstructure which would secure better and more economic Government. Mr Bryce dealt chiefly with the arguments of the last speaker, but on the question of borrowing said, heavy as debt undoubtedly was, our position in the money market was not so bad, and if the expenditure had been excessive, the bhune lay with the House for putting such pressure on Government, and no member of it more so than the Superintendent of Otago ; and these men were now the loudest in condemning what they ought to be responsible for. Touching the details of the scheme, it appeared there was no provision to support federal government, as each province was to have all the revenue|within itself. Even if the arrangement were carried out, the South Island could not evade certain responsibilities if war broke out in the North. The present Ministry were as well fitted to sit on the benches as any men in the House, and any change of Government would be a shock to the colony. Mr Wiiitaker went more into an explanation of the nature of the proposed scheme that any member of the Opposition. The stumbling block hitherto regarding financial separation had been the apportionment of the public debt; but now that being settled, there was no longer a difficulty in the way of arranging the whole matter, for which he cited several precedents. He recognised now that the provinces were irrevocably gone ; and the question was, should they accept the Government's or Sir G. Grey's proposals. The latter was most simple and comprehensive. AVith all their experience of provincialism, no system of government worked so well as when the colony was governed as two island, with a GovernorGeneral at Auckland. Under the present proposals they would have a Parliament in each island, sitting six or eight weeks yearly, with a federal Parliament in Wellington, once every four or five years, to deal with customs, lighthouses, &c. This would bring better and more economic legislation. He saw no reason for disunion, and said the public creditor would be secured better than ever. The hon gentleman cited South Africa, the United States, and the German Empire, as instances of the popularity of federalism. The hon gentleman advanced a number of reasons to show why it was to the interest of both islands that the scheme should be carried out. The Hon C. C. Bowen said Mr Whitaker was the only man on the other side who said anything meriting reply, the debate hitherto being mainly confined to gross personality, such as he hoped he would never hear in the House again, and to which it was not to be expected any reply would be made. The hon gentleman dealt mainly with Mr AVhitaker's arguments. When the colony was governed as with a Lieutenant-Governor, there were only 15,000 inhabitants, and the Government was anything but a happy one as far as Wellington and Otago were concerned, and would not be at all acceptable to-day. It was a mistake to refer to the Federal Government of the United States as an illustration, as that Government possessed infinitely greater powers than was proposed to be given in this case. He wondered on what principle public debt was to bo apportioned, unless upon splitting the difference. Why was the seat

of Government to be given to Canterbury unless as a bribe, that province never going for Separation. The hon gentleman denied the imposition of railway charges and education upon the land fund, and argued in favor of cultivating a generous and national spirit as compared with provincial. Then, as to the expenditure, by the end of the year nearly a 1000 miles of railway at £6OOO per mile, would be open, and that was something never before achieved in any colony or country. After using other arguments he deprecated the extinguishment of national feeling in favor of Provincial or Island jealousy. The House adjourned at 11.35. POLITICAL NEWS. The Government to-day received telegraphic advice that the whole of the balance of the million and quarter loan had been taken up at par, and that £BOO,OOO had been paid on account.