GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 675, 18 August 1876, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

{Per Press Agency .) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wednesday, August 16. SEPARATION DEBATE, The House resumed at 7.30, Mr Swanson continued in support of the resolutions. He referred to the conflict of opinion between the Northern and Southern members when discussing the Municipal Corporations Bill. This showed that the requirements r of the two islands were essentially different. Frequently when the people of the north wanted something done to meet their wants, they found themselves overwhelmed by southern votes, who knew nothing about the matter at all. Unity of the colony was a very fine phrase,, but its real meaning was the domination of the civil service from one end of the colony to other. The weak part of the resolutions was what was pointed out by Major Atkinson, namely, that' the Auckland members were divided amongst themselves, and that the other three provinces in the North Island would not allow themselves to be governed from Auckland. All he would like to see was for Auckland to be allowed to govern herself without interference. Let them come to an understanding of some sort and part in peace. Mr Wakefield would prefer speaking on that occasion as a member for New Zealand rather than as a member for Canterbury. The solitary pledge he gave his constituents was that he would vote according to his convictions and as a man of honor. The hon gentleman referred to the speech of the member for Dunstan as the worst exhibition ever seen in the House. The hon gentleman convicted himself out of his own mouth of having violated most solemn pledges to the people who elected him. While he felt grieved that there should have been an exhibition of the kind, he was proud to see the contempt with which the House received the speech. Coming to the resolutions, he heard the member for the Thames blamed for not giving greater details. The only fault with the resolutions was there were too many details ; the principle was the only thing they desired; That was the main point. These resolutions were the only rational outcome of the resolutions of the member for the Waikato, whose proposals were the only true means to make Now Zealand a great and united people, without an element of separation ; and nothing he regretted more than to have to go into the opposite lobby with the member for Timaru when the division was taken on the member for Waikato’s resolutions, though he was proud to see that the member for Timaru has {since declared in favor o£ that truly national policy. In referring to the days when the separation agitation commenced, the hon gentleman considered that the compact of 1856 was no compact at all. The removal of the seat of Government from Auckland was a great blow to that city, and the most shortsighted step ever taken in the history of the colony. Even now it would be better to take all the members up there to transact the business of the country than to remain shut up in their boxes in a city personally distasteful to every one of them. The hon gentleman then contrasted the system of acquiring the waste lands in Canterbury and Otago, where the purchasers could go with the money to the Land Office; but in the North how was the land to be bought ? He wished he could tell them. Here were Europeans anxious to buy and natives anxious to sell, but there was a great figure between—a shapeless form

from which the light ?' of truth has been taken away—-the Native Department, bristling with officers as land purchase commissioners, men whom he would not trust to spend a bad sixpence for him, This system of paying commissioners at so much an acre upon the land they purchased, was a direct premium upon fraud. The evidence taken last session showed that. He would prefer war twenty times over to such a state of things as that, and they never would have the same occasion to dread war if they followed out the operations commenced during Mr Stafford’s term of office, No, instead of that, his successors took all credit for the victories won by his troops. ' They feebly carried out a few expeditions against Te Kooti, and then allowed things to drop, crying out Sir D. McLean has got peace for .us through the great power of his name. There never was a greater delusion. The colony was no nearer secure peace than she was then. He was the author of the war in Taranaki in 1860, and his ( name stunk in the nostrils of thousands of natives in New Zealand, and he had a following of officials who were a positive curse to the colony. That was the reason why the North Island cSnnot keep peace with the Middle Island. The Premier took all the credit that the prosperity of the colony during the last five years was owing to his public works policy, but he never said a thing more untrue. It was solely due to the rapid and enormous increase in the price of wool. This year, when wool fell, the Prenaier &id, “ Oh, depression is not due to the failure of my public works, but to the fall in the price of wool.” Here was an argument he was perfectly astounded at—the coolness with which the Premier could state such a thing when he must know it to be perfectly untrue. The hon member referred to the fulsome and made-to-order panegyric which the member for Dunstan paid to the Premier. He then contrasted the popularity enjoyed by the Premier and that of bir G. Grey in 1867, when he was on his way home from Wellington, to show that the disgrace under which Sir Q. Grey went home, was a disgrace that any man could be proud of. He defended the credit of the colony and its public men against the basest slanderers who ever ruined a reputation, while the demonstration to Vogel, got up by his parasites and flatterers —the so-called working men—was a disgrace to the colony, The true test of how the Premier stood in the mind of the colony was the contemptuous silence he was received with on the opening of the session. He held that this separation proposal was the natural sequ< I to the mismanagement of the public works scheme. Had that been carried out for the interests of the colony, and not to merely retain power, they would never have heard of separation. The hon gentleman then went on to refer to what he called the period of the corruption of the Ministry—the most barefaced and boldest that ever they saw. They started on a basis of corruption. He felt bound to except the Ministers for Immigration and Justice—(Major Atkinson—l would rather not be excepted.; He really could not oblige the hon member, and must except him, as a study of his political career showed him to be incapable of the corruption for which that Ministry had been famous. Mr Fox admitted brazenly in the House that they would do all they could for those who supported them, and nothing for those who opposed them. Why was Dr Featherston sept home as Agent-General 1 Simply to get him out of the way, because he was a powerful element in the House. Such corruption as had taken place would simply have been impossible while he was there. Then take the appointment of Mr Bathgate (by himself) as Resident Magistrate and District Judge for Dunedin. Was there or could there be a greater scandal or more corrupt act than that ? Then look at the proposals regarding boards of works and sub-boards—-the members of boards to be members of that House# Why it was simply an attempt to take the House into the pay of the Govern ment, practically saying to them if you do not vote for us you will not get the £SOO a year; if you do you will. Was not that corrupt to the very core. The House rejected it as too atrocious, and vomited back so gross a sop. The Government did not attempt to mould their public works policy to the requirements of the country. No, they said let us fling the schedule of railways on the table of the House, and let us scrape a majority out of the general scramble—a disgraceful scramble he would call it. The policy was not worked for the benefit of the colony, but simply to keep the Premier at the head of affairs. Coming to abolition, the real cause for that was that, at the beginning of that session he found himself surrounded with hungry snarling dogs eager for their sops, and who were determined to have them. He had not the public spirit to do his duty and refuse to gratify their raveniags, but took advantage of a side issue op the Forests Bill to throw himself into the arms of the hon member for Timaru, and avail himself of the prestige of that hon member to still ride on the wave of power. The alliance, he had no doubt, was not the pleasantest to the member for Timaru, but he was capable of great sacrifices for the benefit of the colony. The hon gentleman proceeded to criticise the first form in which separation was introduced by the Premier, by which abolition was only to extend to the North Island ; and he pointed to what followed, how all the promises made then, and expectations given rise to, were never realised in the smallest particular. The fact was, the hon gentlemen did not care two straws for abolition. All he wanted was to gratify his personal ambition. When he brought down his first abolition proposals he must have had his mind made up to go home. Why, that was one of the greatest pieces of duplicity a man could be guilty of. He promised to work out the policy of abolition during the recess, but directly he got the Assembly prorogued, he regularly bolted away. Ho was away seventeen months, and directly he came back, without having time to make himself acquainted with the current of affairs, he went to Wanganui and delivered himself of a policy diametrically opposed to the utterancee of his colleagues—a policy which showed he could never have consulted either them or the member for Timaru. The hon member referred to the panegyric paid to the Premier by the Minister of Justice, and pointed out how flat his appeal fell upon the House. He spoke of the Premier dragging his weary body along to defend the credit of the colony. Was that a reason why the Premier had spent about £9OOO, dragging his “ weary ” bones in firstclass carriages. Consideration was asked for a sick minister, but what consideration was extended to Colonel Haultain when sick and blind, came to the House from the front, carried ic a litter by four soldiers, and

he was absolutely refused a pair by the Fox-Vogel Government, and wan actually accus'd of cowardice by Mr Fox. The conduct of the Premier with regard to his private expenditure, he strongly condemned, and said he believed that if the Premier had any idea of what the feeling of the House would be when they learnt of that expenditure, they would never have seen anything of the “ Dear Pollen ” “ Dear Vogel ” letter. It would have been brought down in some mysterious way that would have effectually blinded the House. He held that the only true solution of all their present evils, in default of the member for Waikato’s proposal, was the resolutions now before them, and which would give to all parts of the colony what the Government denied them.

Sir G. Gbey did not argue for the words of the resolutions, but for the principle. Very serious objections had been made to the remarks of persons agreeing with hini| remarks which were necessary—hay, justifiable; At any rate, whatever they had to say they said it openly, ana gare every opportunity for contradiction. But let them remember that Government had influence over a large section of the press of the colony, and that the Premier was the principle proprietor of at least two newspapers, which referred to him, and those who acted with him, in a way that caused him considerable pain by reviving slanders of many years ago. The hon gentleman read a letter from Mr H. Weeks, Onehunga, apologising for an injury unwittingly done to him by signing a letter which had been used against himself. The hon gentleman deprecated this corruption of the press to deprive the people of their liberties. The hon member then proceeded to defend the action of those who acted with him in making such charges as they did against the Ministry. Objections had been taken to the time at which he introduced his resolutions, but had he not spoken out then that the people should have tb e right to say what should take the place of their ruined institution ? that they should have a potential voice in deciding what their future form of Government should be, and the way he proposed he believed was perfect. The legislatures in each island should be summoned in the usual way, and a convention of both subsequently called for. The member for Geraldine just told them that for twenty years there had been a plot to destroy i provincial institutions. What fair play could they expect Provincial Councils to have to enable them to carry on a useful existence. This was a lamentable thing to hear that a statesman whom people looked up to should aim such a fatal blow at the institutions of the colony. He would weary i the House if he was to detail all the steps taken to carry out this purpose. When he spoke of degradation, and the struggle for the happiness of the many as against the welfare of the few, he -was misunderstood. What he meant was that if the people of New Zealand did not rise up to defend and preserve their rights now they must inevitably sink into degradation. He was told that he ought not to have said that the House did not fairly represent the people, but it did not. The representation was not based on population or anything else. What right had civil servants to be elevated to the Upper House, and to be considered representatives of the people. He was told by the member for Bangitikei that he had so long enjoyed uncontrolled power that he would not make a good member of that House; but he asked nothing for himself, and only asked the simple boon of allowing the people to say under what form of government they would hereafter live. What made the country great 7 The provices had brought it to that pitch of prosperity that had since been so miserably ruined by t,he Premier. Why should the credit; of the colony be ruined because they had two provinces or four. He was sorry to see his colleague from the Thames, who sprung from the people, joining those who would rob his constituents of their rights. He regarded the present proposals of t&e Government as calculated to bring about the same bad state of things that existed in England in the middle ages. Never was there anything more monstrous. Why did not Government; let their Counties Bill apply only to those provinces which chose to adopt it. He bad heard a remark from a Canterbury member the other night which filled him with pain. That gentleman said if Auckland’s wants are so great he would vote for assisting her. His answer was that a gift that was a right was no gift, and was a curse to the receiver as well as the giver, and would be repelled by the people of Auckland as an insult. The hon gentleman then referred to the announcement by Mr Stafford that he would next year vote for Mr Whitaker’s proposals. That was meant for a bribe for Auckland ; but the truth of it was that there was a compact between the member for Timaru this year (7 and the Government). He would under the land policy of the Government get a renewal of the lease of the runs for Mr Stafford and his friends for the next twenty-one years. Then, after they had skimmed the cream off, the skim milk would be offered to Auckland. This arrangement, he believed, was made in Canterbury between two private individuals, the ostensible object of the visit being merely to accompany the Governor. A more monstrous thing was never heard of in any country. The hon gentleman then proceeded to comment upon the Disqualification Act, and its effect upon the purity of the House. The Act must be either un. lawful or infamous in making these resolutions vague. He had the hope that when two Legislatures had been called into existence he would endeavor to get returned to one of them, and then it would be hia duty as a simple member to submit a matured scheme, leaving it for the people to approve or not. Ho maintained he was right in not asking that House to force upon the people any particular scheme of government. So great an end as they had in view all were prepared to sacrifice something. He hoped these proposals would be pondered over at every fireside, and if they were he believed no more loans would bo allowed without the consent of the people ; neither would they ever be contented to allow themselves to be ruled from a Legislature removed from their observation. He claimed that he and those who acted with him represented the mass of the inhabitants of the colony, or put it this way : Auckland was one-fourth of the population of the cohny, and she was unanimous in her demand for his proposals, and it was admitted that the half of the remaining popoulalion of the colony admitted that the claims made were just. Why should they bow down to those on the [Government benches 7 What had they done to bring down tlusa misfortunes upon themselves 7

The hon gentleman, in conclusion, moved the first resolution. The Peemibb pointed out.that the resolutions were moved as a whole, and could not now be considered separately ; and suggested that the opinion of the House should be takeif upon the point. Some discussion ensued, Mr Sheehan and Mr Stout arguing that the course proposed was perfectly in order. A good deal of discussion ensued, the Premier and Major Atkinson pointing out that the resolutions had no meaning unless kept as a whole, end that no good purpose could be served by dividing the resolutions: that in fact it would lead to a good deal of confusion. Sir O'. Grey said he drew these resolutions with care with this intention, Mr Header Wood and others quoted the resolutions of 1872, when the questions were put separately* When the Speaker was appealed to, he ruled in favor of the right to put the resolutions separately, on the authority of May, The Premier then announced that the Government, would vote fpr the first, second, and last resolutions, and against the others. The first two were agreed to on the voices, the third (the test question, that there be one local government for each island) was then put, and the House divided, the result being 47 against the resolution, and 32 in favor, and it was lost by a majority of 15. On the fourth resolution being put. another division was called for, and negatived by 46 to 32, Sir R. Douglas voting for the resolution, and Mr D. Reid being out of the Chamber. The fifth resolution being put, Mr Stout called for a division, the result being that the resolution was negatived by 46 to 32. The sixth and seventh were negatived on the voices. The eighth resolution was put, and the House divided, the result being 47 for, and 30 against it. [The division list was published in yesterday’s issue, 1 - The House adjourned near midnight.

THURSDAY, AUGUST 17. The House met at.2 30; ' „ . •■ ■■' ' IiBAVB OF ABSENCE, T ' Notice .was given to ask ton days’ leave of absence for Mr Reader Wood, BILLS INTRODUCED AND BEAD FIRST TIME. The following Bills were read—The Maintenance of New Bridge over River Avon Bill, Hokitika Harbor Board Bill. LAND ORDERS. Mr Cabbington obtained the appoint ment of a Select Committee to enquire into certain land orders dating back thirty-five years, expenditure sanctioned. ■ - Mr Stout moved that copies of all the estimates of expenditure and revenue sanctioned by the Government under The Provincial Appropriation Extension Act, 1876, and of allcorrespondence relating thereto, and also all letters referring to sanctioning of contracts and works under that Act, and The Abolition of Provinces Act, 1875, be laid before this House, The Pbbmieb said the papers were exceedingly bulky, and instructions had been given to have them copied. He had also telegraphed to Canterbury and Auckland Co furnish copies of the estimates supplied, with all other particulars, as soon as possible. In the case of Canterbury alone, the pile of papers was tremendous. The opinion expressed bj the .hon member that the Government had no power to act as they had, he was free to hold, but the terms of the Act had been very difficult to carry out, and a good deal of pressure was put upon the Government by some provinces; as in Otago, which after furnishing estimates in excess of the estimated revenue, it was discovered there was £25,000 of outstanding liabilities which had to be paid, the public creditor could not be allowed to suffer. While all possible baste would be made in the production of all papers asked for, in the meantime a precis of the correspondence would be laid upon the table. Mr Donald Reid explained how the outstanding liabilities referred to had been merely a mistake in making estimates, caused by the number and variety of the works in progress. -■■■<■. J The motion was agreed to. SECOND BEADING POSTPONED. The second reading of the Native Lands Sales Bill was postponed till the Ist of September, so as, to allow time for its translation and circulation. LOCAL GOYEBNMENT BODIES Mr Mubbay moved—" That there be prepared and included in the tables attached to the next financial statement a return showing the indebtedness of the various local Government bodies on the 30th of June, 187'.” Agreed to. ; . t ■ RETURNS. : - Mr STOUT moved—" That a return should be prepared during-the recess showing the approximate population in every electoral district in the colony on the 31st December, 1876 ; that such return when prepared should be published in the New Zealand Cfaxette," According to the Constitution Act representation should be according to population, but it was not the case. Agreed to. Sir R. Douglas moved for a return showing the items on which the sum of £51,038 16s 4d has been expended (as shown in return to the order of the House, No 1011), such return to show the expenditure by electoral districts. Agreed to. Mr Btout moved—" That a return showing the amount of estimated expenditure on various lines of railway, the amount of contracts, and amouut of extras allowed on the contracts, be laid before this House.” The mover said he noticed that in many cas-is the original contracts had been exceeded as much as fifty per cent. Hon K. Richardson said they had no objection to the return, and explained that these increases in the contracts generally arose from extras, but if reductions in contracts were also considered the per-centage of increase would not he found to be much, SURVEY fees, Mr De Latoub moved—" That in the opinion of this House it is desirable that in future alienation of crown lands by sale, license, or lease, tha survey fees, if any, should bo charged on an uniform acreage basis, irrespective of the distance from any survey office, and that this resolution be referred, to the waste lands committee to report as to the best means to give effect thereto Hon Major Atkinson explained that the matter had been hitherto entirely under the control of the Provincial Governments, hut he should point out that if the Government were.to have to send out a surveyor to survey one section, the land might as well be given away. THE MURDEEBB WINIATA. Sir O, Grey moved there be laid before the House copies of all correspondence be-

tween Major Te Wheroa and the Government regarding the possibility of capturing the reputed murderer Winiata. Agreed to. STEAM COMMUNICATION. Sir G. Grey moved that all correspondence relative to the opening up direct steam communication between this colony and Brisbane, or between this colony and Fiji, New Caledonia, Samoa, or Tonga, be laid before this House. Agreed to. FOREST CONSERVATION. Mr Wakefield moved that there be laid before the House a return showing all agreements entered into or appointments made by the Government up to the present time in respect to the conservation or planting of forests, as well as a description of the duties at present being performed in consequence of any such engagements or appointments. ” The Premier said there was no objection. The matter remained in precisely the same position as last year, when the House was informed that a temporary arrangement had been made with Captain Campbell Walker. The motion was agreed to. SOUTHLAND DISTRICT DRAINAGE BILL.

The. Government opposed the second reading,as the Bill had not-been circulated. The matter was forced to a division, and the Bill postponed. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON THE CANTERBURY PASTORAL LEASING BILL, .. MrSTOurfcaaid that some of . their (? .squat* ters> friends had been busy going about instructing members to vote against the Bill, and he had no doubt that it would be'impossible to, pass any ; BiU on this question unless it hllowed the Canterbury runholders to retain their runs upon their own terms, The system to be introduced was to give a perpetual license, unless the land was sold. Because wool had fallen Canterbury wanted their industry protected by getting a perpetti aft lease ; or, in other words, voting them a sum of money. The hon gentleman went at great length into the legislation regarding Canterbury runs,.contending that the Canterbury land laws -should remain unaltered until 1880, but it was the runholders themselves who moved in the matter, in order to see how they would stand in 1880. The land in Canterbury had been parcelled out years ago amongst certain people, and it was sought to keep . those people always in possession, to the exclusion of all other people in the. colony. Why, it was worse than the entail law of England. Mr Stevens pointed out that the member for Dunedin was laboring under an entire misapprehension. The general desire of the people, and the leading principle of the Canterbury land regulations, were, that the present occupiers should have an opportunity of retaining the land at as high a rent as could be obtained, but not to interpose any bar to the sale of the land. When the present runholders obtained possession of the land ene provision of their tenure Was that they should hold the laud for pastoral purposes until such time as it was wanted for sale. This arrangement would be reversed by the present, Bill. He jiid not believe the hon member who last spoke cared one straw about the Bill, but for the sake of party feeling, he made the best debating speech he could. To purchasers of land no arrangement could be fairer than that obtaining in Canterbury, as a glance at the class of settlement throughout the province would show. He asked was the plan of putting all' the land up to auction on one day the best way to go to work to get the best rent for it, or was the arrangement regarding compensation likely to be most satisfactory either in the interests of the country or the squatters. The hon member was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment.

At 7.30 Mr Stevens resumed the debate on the Canterbury Pastoral Incenses Bill. He r urged a variety of reasons to show the Bill was deterimental to the public interests.

A very long discussion followed, and the following members supported the Bill on various grounds ; Messrs Lumsden, De Latour, Sheehan, Rees, Thomson, and Hursthouse. Their chief arguments were that an attempt was being made to obtain special legislation for a special class, by giving runholders a perpetual tenure, that settlement in Canterbury had been too much retarded by the squatters who spotted or gridironed the lands of the province,! that if the titles to pastoral lands were not to be extinct in 1880 they should not legislate upon the waste lands at all till then, that the principle of the measure was sound as likely to secure more general occupancy, that the runholders enjoyed the advantages of the pastoral licenses long enough and ought to relinquish in favor of more beneficial occupation.

Mr Murray and Mr Rowe each endeavoured to obtain an adjournment, which the Government opposed. Mr Wason also opposed the adjournment. Those who objected to the Bill were Messrs Murray-Aynsley, D. Reid, Brown J.E., Major Atkinson, 0. 0. Bowen, Fitzroy, Hodgkinson, and Wakefield. It was contended by them that free selection and the present license system worked beneficially, that the Bill woulds trike at the root of the land regulations, that the price of &2 per acre checked the runholding monopoly, that the spotting system had been found not to answer, that good faith compelled them to renew the leases of the squatters until the land was sold, if not that _ a commercial crisis must inevitably follow in consequence of the large amount of money invested on the strength of the tenure, and the whole of the credit of the colony be shaken ; that the Bill opened the door to any ring of speculators to buy up the greater part of their pastoral lands, if sold at auction, at once as proposed, and ruin small licensees whose rights had grown up during twenty-five years! that the existing land regulations induced settlement in greater proportion than the laws of Otago; that it was nonsense to talk of small holdings in any large proportion of lands being likely to be remunerative; that as the Government was going to deal with the whole matter, their Bill ought to be waited for; that nearly the whole of the Canterbury people were opposed to the Bill, as shown by all but two members voting against it. In the course of the remarks of the Pbe mier he referred to habitual use by the member for the Thames and his immediate followers of language that made him at times feel almost ashamed he was a member of the House.

Sir G. Grey moved that the words be taken down, and also the words “ foulmouthed abuse” said a few minutes previously by the Premier. The Speaker ruled that the latter could not be taken, not being mentioned at the moment, but took the former, i Mr Stafford endorsed the words of the Premier, aud asked big be taken down.

The Premier, called on tor an explanation, said one or two members held themselves at liberty to make unworthy and disgraceful insinuation and opporobriona language to the members of the House, and even against those who were not there to defend themselves.* He referred to not more than two members who used such improper language, The Premier retired, Mr Barfp moved that the explanation is satisfactory. •'

Mr Rees defended himself, saying he was one of the members referred to, and he was never ashamed of anything he said, and was not afraid to say to any man’s face what he thought, when he believed he could show at least reasonable grounds for making the charges. “ ” - Mr Stout moved an amendment —“That the Premier regrets the use of the intemperate language taken down.’’ A good deal of discussion followed regarding the amenities of debate, which ultimately dropped on the suggestion of the Speaker, that the amendment and resolution be withdrawn without any censure being passed either way. Premier, upon entering, said he thought he had a right to complain of the course adopted. The Speaker quoted precedent in a similar case in 1856, and The Premier at once resumed his argument against the. Bill, which he endeavored to show would be unworkable, e; The debate was adjourned for a fortnight. The House rose at 2.20.