MR. AYNSLEY AT LYTTELTON.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 926, 13 June 1877, Page 3

MR. AYNSLEY AT LYTTELTON.

Mr Murray-Aynsley, M.H.R. for Lyttelton, addressed his constituents at the Colonists' Hall, last evening. There was a large attendance of electors. His Worship the Mayor occupied the chair, and briefly introduced Mr Aynsley. He knew it was needless to ask the audience to give Mr Aynsley a fair hearing. This, he was sure, they would do, and he would also ask them to put their questions plainly and straightforwardly. [Cheers.] Mr Aynsley said he had asked them to meet him that evening to explain what he had done and to hear their views as to his action in the future. When lie met them in 1875 as a candidate the abolition question was before the country, and after some trouble this was settled'. As he had stated then, he was for it, and he might say that there had been a number of red herrings drawn across the scent to put off the settlement of the matter, but this was no use, as the majority were determined. Sir George Grey had brought forward certain separation resolutions against which he (Mr Aynsley) had voted. Even had they got the capital of the South Island in Christchurch as was proposed, how long would it have remained ? The South would soon cry out that they had more population, and then it would be removed. They would have three Governments, and he did not think, when they considered tflie expense, that it would be worth the trial. Even supposing they wished to make Christchurch the seat of Government for the future, he did not think that it would be a good thing, because the Auckland people would say it was too far off to be governed from Canterbury. He should like to have their opinion upon this, because he was opposed to moving the seat of Government from where it was. It was central for all, and besides this they had spent a very large amount of money in building, &c. They in this province had got on very well without the seat of Government, and though the result might be the spending of money here for some time, the question would always be cropping up and creating any amount of jealousy. Their exports were increasing, and the land was being sold as quickly as it could be occupied, and he thought therefore that the solid prosperity in the past would be much rather assured by remaining as they were than by having the adventitious ftid of the seat of Government. It had been tried in the North, and Auckland had suffered from the removal of the seat of Government, though it benefitted for a time. He thought, therefore, it would be far better for Canterbury to be without it. They had passed a large number of Bills, amongst others an amendment of the Municipal Corporations Act. The Government had also given the municipalities grants of land, and he believed Lyttelton had received some 2000 acres. If the land was not good that was the fault of the representatives of the town in the Municipal Council. After a very strong discussion the Counties Bill was passed. As they were aware, most of the counties had declined to take it up, and it was in abeyance almost over the whole of the Iprovince. In Waimate he believed it had been taken up. He thought, however, that unless the people took up the system, and tried to pick out the best of it, they would not get a good Bill. In the Selwyn Coimty they had decided not to bring the Act into operation and the result had been that when the next general election for the county took place no electors would be qualified.' Under these circumstances a new Bill would be required. He thought that if the people took up what they could, the system would work well. The counties with the boroughs were charged with the expenses of the hospital and charitable aid, and of course these would be found near centres of population. By some process or other the Government had imposed four-fifths of the cost on the municipalities. He considered that the management should be vested in the representatives of the counties and the Boroughs, each paying according to the use made of the hospitals, &c. There would either have to be extra taxation if the Government had to do it, or the people would have to pay locally. The voice of the people should be heard to the extent of having the [ management of these institutions in their own hands. He thought that a certain proportion of land revenue should be apportioned for these institutions, and the remainder provided according to the use mndp of them. It was quite time that they should be taken out of the hands of the Government. They had also passed a Harbour Boards Bill, which, though not perhaps as good a one as they might wish, was yet the best they could get under the circumstances. They had eighteen Harbour Board Bills before the House after twelve o'clock at night, and if any amendments were proposed, the House immediately said "postpone." If this hack been done nothing more would have been heard of the Bill. They had therefore to take the Bill as it stood. It was found that the Gladstone wharf had not passed to

the Superintendent, and hence not to the Board. However, he trusted that next session these little defects would be remedied, and that the charges would be reduced. He might here say that he desired to thank the ratepayers for having elected him as their representative at the Board. They must recollect that the Harbor Board was a body who wore working for the benefit of the public. He believed that the result of the labours of the Harbor Board would be that their harbour would become a popular one. As regarded the trucks, in July last he called the attention of the then Minister of Public Works to the question, and he had replied that there were plenty of trucks. Well, there might be, but the result showed that the work was not done, for some reason or other. The fact was that through bad management, or some other cause, their port got a bad name because everything was delayed. Mr Wason had brought in a Bill to compel the occupiers of the runs to allow their runs to be put up to auction. Now this would simply be ruin. What lie wanted to see was a fair assessment of the runs, which would be equitable alike to the runholder and the public. The members from other parts would not or could not understand the difference between leases and licenses and occupying, and the result was that the matter stood over until next session. As regarded leases, he was opposed to granting them, because it would lock up the land for some ten years. Their system of free selection in Canterbury had worked well and he wished to see it continued. He did not think they would abrogate their right of free selection here. As regarded deferred payments, lie did not think they wanted it here. They could always borrow money on their land, and for Canterbury he was against deferred payments. The question of payment of members was also brought up, and it was endeavored to make it £3OO a year. It had been originally £IOO, and had been raised to £2OO. He objected to the £3OO a year, because if this were done they would have people returned to Parliament who would make a trade of their seats. They would do away witli men going into Parliament to do the best for their country, and would establish a class of professional politicians. On the other hand, if they paid nothing they might keep out men who would well represent them, but would be unable to do so on account of their means not being sufficient. But if they gave any man £IOO a year it would be sufficient for the necessary expenses of a man whilst serving his country. If they gave them more they woidd encourage their representatives to go in for business which their representatives ought to pay out of their own pockets. The House had also earned free passes for members, against which he voted, because he thought that it was a system which never should have been introduced. If they made the free pass only available for distances over twenty miles from a person's home, he thought it might bej granted, but not as now. There was another question which had been before the House, and that was Mr Stout's Local Option Bill. He had opposed it and would also do so again if it came before the House in the same shape. He would be prepared to support any measure that would reduce drunkenness, but he did not think it right for one section of the people to say to another " You shall not have anything to drink because we do not want it." Hotels were necessary, and to have them established they must license them to sell liquors, but he would be prepared to see stringent laws against persons keeping hotels giving drink to persons who had already too much. [Cheers.] As regarded education, he was in favor of intermediate schools, leading up to the University. This he would manage by means of scholarships, leading up to the University. By this means, they would assist boys who were willing and able to work hard to attain these scholarships. This, he thought, was the limit to which State aid should go. Let them have here scholarships, and then they would find that their best boys would come to the front, aided by the State. When he was before the electors before, he spoke of the anomaly of having the nomination of candidates publicly as opposed to the spirit of the ballot. When he went to the House, he had spoken to the present Attorney-General, who quite agreed with his views, and it was likely a measure would be introduced to alter the present mode. At present they had the ballot, but only in part. As regarded the land fund, I after certain expenses had been deducted the I County Councils divided the remainder. Under Provincialism Councils used to do this work. Now municipalities being outside counties, they got no benefit from the land revenue. Last session it was proposed to put the land revenue into a common purse, and until this was done there would be continued agitation about it. The Government had now got 2 per cent, of it, and it was probable that before long they would have more. Before he next met them it was necessary that they should look the fact in the face, that they might lose their land revenue. But before this was done they should see that part was apportioned to the hospitals and charitable aid, and part to the consolidated revenue, upon which should be charged the expenses of their schools. They had to pay for these things, and it did not matter whether they did it out of their revenue, to which all contributed, or paid it by taxation. In the future, no doubt, their railways would pay the interest on their construction. That was railways which were not political railways ; and no doubt before long a very considerable reduction would be made in this respect on the burdens now imposed on the taxpayers. In the separation proposals of Sir George Grey he desired to charge the South Island with £236,000 per annum as their share of the interest of the loans, whilst he only proposed to charge the North Island with £196,000. The loans were contracted for all alike, and it was not fair to charge the South Island with more than the North. As regarded the Friendly Societies Bill, the Minister of Justice had tried hard to get the Bill through, but the House would not sit late, as members were anxious to get away. It was therefore necessary to let the Bill stand over until the approaching session. It might be perhaps that the delay would be found beneficial, as it would allow the members of Friendly Societies to consider the amendments necessary. As regauded the Piako Swamp business, he believed that part of the land was part good and part bad. The Government had sold it at 2s 6d per acre to a company on the condition that a road was made. He did not for one moment approve of the Government going out of their way to sell the land at less than the regular price ; while he said this he did not think that there was anything in the transaction which warranted the stir which , had been made about it. If the parties j connected with it had not been so pro- | minent, there would have been little or ' nothing heard about it. As regarded

the constitution of the Upper House he was opposed to an elective House. The Upper House was a check upon the Lower, which had the exclusive right of bringing in money bills. If they made the Upper House elective they would interfere with money matters, and hence they woidd have a dead-lock. Well, then it became a question whether they should be elected in some other way or merely nominees of the Ministers of the day. [A Voice—" Let them take their seats as peers the same as in the old country."] This would not do here. There were no old families living for centuries on the land, hence this would not do. By the nominee system they would have the ministry of the day sending in a number of new members, and carrying a measure before the public knew anything about it. Therefore he was of opinion that they should keep the Upper House as it was now, so as to retain it as a check on the hasty legislation of the Lower House undertaken to court popular favor just before an election. He should be happy to answer 'any questions that might be put to him. [Cheers.] In answer to questions,

Mr Aynsley said that he was prepared to support any measure for the suppression of drunkenness ; but not for any unfair measure. By the 13th clause of Mr Stout's Bill, if carried —if the veto were carried in Christchurch —they would not be able to have houses in Lyttelton. They would by this make people who had invested a large sum of money, and kept their houses well, suffer for the sins of those who kept disorderly houses. Did they think that by refusing the whole of the licenses in the district that they would stop people from getting drink? He said no. They would, by the law proposed by Mr Stout, simply introduce the system of sly-grog selling in every part of the district. By keeping the public houses under strict supervision and closing those houses which were badly conducted, he was sure that the people would become more sober. He was in favour of public houses being open for, say two hours in the afternoon on Sundays and one hour in the evening, and the doing away of the supply of liquor to travellers. From what he had seen of Mr Stout's Local Option Bill he did not think that Mr Stout was the man who could introduce a Bill which would be satisfactory to the public. He (Mr Aynsley) was prepared to do all he could to suppress drunkenness, but he wished it first proved to him that the measures proposed would stop drunkenness. Measures like Mr Stout's Local Option Bill would do more to encourage drunkenness by the establishment of sly grog selling than the prevention of it. As regarded the constitution of the Licensing Bench, he should be prepared to see it elective if they could do away with any local bias or influence. Now the Bench went to work without the fear of the popular voice turning them out. If they made them elective, and thus dependent on the public favor, they became useless. He should like to see the measures proposed, and their general scope for effecting this change, before giving his promise either one way or the other. As regarded the question of importation of liquors, if this were stopped, as Mr Webb's question seemed to imply, they would soon have a large trade springing up in the manufacture of liquor locally. As regarded education, he was in favour of there being only a nominal charge for it, say up to 10s per annum. He would be in favor of putting a heavy fee on those who did not send their children to school. He was opposed to the schoolmaster giving religious education to the children, because if this were done the schoolmasters would be appointed not because they were the best fitted for the school, but because they belonged to this or that denomination. Religious education should be given by the minister of religion only, and not by the schoolmasters. [Cheers.] Mr W. Holiaes proposed—" That a vote of thanks be given to Mr Murray-Aynsley for for his exposition of his views that evening." Mr Higinbotham seconded the motion, which was carried.

Mr Higinbotham moved—" That the electors of Lyttelton express their confidence in Mr Aynsley as their representative in the General Assembly." Mr Weastall seconded the motion.

Mr Nalder said that he should have been only too glad to have proposed a vote of this kind had it not been that it was opposed to Mr Aynsley's own views. That gentleman had stated that they should have the ballot, and the whole ballot, and if they put such a motion as this, Mr Aynsley would see at once which side people were on —which was opposed to the ballot. Mr Allwright, as an opponent of Mr Aynsley's, could not agree with the resolution, and if it were persisted in should move an amendment. The resolution was one which should not be put for the reasons stated by Mr Nalder. He for one could not agree with the resolution that Mr Aynsley had the confidence of all the electors of Lyttelton. He asked his Worship to rule against the resolution as Mr Higinbotham was not an elector. Mr Higinbotham —I am on the roll if you look, Mr Allwright. His Worship the Mayor said that, after Mr Higinbotham's statement he could not refuse the resolution.

Mr Allwright then proceeded to speak at some length, contending that Mr Aynsley had done nothing for Lyttelton. All his interests lay in another direction, and yet for him they rejected a man who had done more for Lyttelton and its progress than any one. He should move as an amendment—" That Mr Aynsley docs not possess the confidence of the electors of Lyttelton." If the resolution were withdrawn lie would withdraw his amendment.

Mr Nalder would like to ask Mr Aynsley to request the mover of the resolution to withdraw it. He was not afraid of the result, but he thought that the resolution was opposed to the spirit of the ballot. Mr Aynsley said that he thought that in all political meetings they should stick to the ballot strictly. If they did not they would make much enmity and personal ill-feeling throughout the community. Let them go on and hare a mere vole of thanks, which meant simply "thank you for addressing us." This war, sufficient for all purposes, and avoided all had feeling amongst neighbours. They might go to the ballot box and record their votes without engendering bad feeling by openly showing what side they were on. He would now ask the mover of the resolution to, withdraw it, as his (Mr Aynsley's) feelings, were to avoid any ill-feeling. Mr Higinbotham, after some few remarks, obtained leave to withdraw Ins resolution.

Mr Aynsley proposed a vote of thanks to Ins Worship the Mayor, for Ids kindness in presiding that evening. This was agreed, to, and the proceedings terminated.