GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1048, 6 November 1877, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[By Telegeaph.] [pee peess agency.] HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Monday, Novembee 5. The House met at 2.30 p.m. THE PEIVILEGE COMMITTEE. Mr Teavees brought up the Privilege Committee’s report. Mr Teavees gave notice he would move that the House concurs in the report, and that an address embodying it be presented to the Governor. He understood the Government desired that the consideration of the motion should be postponed till this evening, to allow members to consider it. After some discussion, it was decided to proceed at once. Mr Teavees moved his resolution. He entirely agreed with the report although not present at the committee when it was agreed to. No disrespect was intended towards his Excellency, but the House was bound to vindicate its privileges, and it could do this without for an instant assuming that his Excellency had wilfully violated these. The House was not called on to consider either the position of Mr J. W. Wilson in the matter, nor the relation between the Governor and his Ministers. It was simply a question of the privileges of the House, which seemed to him invaded in the reasons given by the Governor for refusing his Ministers’ advice. The papers were laid on the table by the Governor’s command, and therefore by his Excellency’s own act the House was in possession of the Governor’s reasons apart from any question between the Governor and his Ministers. Although no direct precedent was found, numbers were found showing that the Crown could not properly take notice of any debate on a motion pending in the House. By the course he had adopted the Governor had inadvertently brought to bear his own weight and influence against the Ministry by giving the House reason to believe that his advisers did not possess his Excellency’s confidence. His Excellency had actually based executive action on a debate pending in the House, and applying the principle of all the precedents to the present circumstances, it appeared the privilege of the House had been invaded. If the Governor had refused to place the papers before the House Ministers might have resigned and have justified themselves by making known the facts. The publication of the matter had therefore nothing to do with the question of privilege. The wrong was committed as soon as the Governor gave his reasons, and was unaffected (?) when the House became cognisant of the facts. He could not for a moment suppose His Excellency had been guilty of any intentional breach of the privileges of the House, and the address to the Governor should, he thought, distinctly affirm this. He moved his resolution. No one speaking, the question was put, and on the voices the Ayes were declared to have itA division was called for by Mr McLean, when Mr Travers’ motion was carried by 33 to 19. The following is the division list : Ayes : Baigent, Ballance, Barff Brown (Ashley), Brown, (Tuapeka), Bryce, Bunny, DeLatour, Dignan, Eisher, Hamlin, Hislop, Hodgkinson, Joyce, Larnach, Montgomery, Murray, Nahe, o’Rorke, ! Pyke, Rees, Russell, Seaton, Shrimski, Stout, Swanson, Takamoana, Thomson, Tole, Travers, Wakefield, Wallis, W. Wood. Noes : Atkinson, Bower, Brandon, Fitzroy, Fox, Gibbs, Hunter, IV' athousc, Kenny, Macfarlane, Maclean, Morris, Ormond, Richardson, Richmond, Seymour, Sutton, Teschemaker, Whitaker. Mr O’Rorke then took the chair, having been requested to do so, as the Speaker was indisposed. After the disposal of some unimportant business, Mr Stout enquired what had been done with reference to the resolution previously passed by the House adopting the report of the Privileges of the House Committee, The Acting-Speakee replied that the resolution would be embodied in an address and presented to the Governor in duo course. Mr Teavees said the usual course was for the Clerk of the House to draw up an address embodying a resolution of the House, to submit that address to the Speaker, and, if the Speaker approved of the address, it would be forwarded to his Excellency. no-confidence debate. The debate on the no-confi fcnoe motion W&s then resumed.

Mr Hamlin said that Major Atkinson’s conduct was most extraordinary, in bringing on his motion after having given the members of the Government the assurance that he would accord them every opportunity of sifting into the public accounts if they so desired. Ho had accused Sir George of being an autocrat. He (Mr Hamlin) had known Sir G. Grey for a long time, and he never knew him to be guilty of any conduct of an autocratic nature. The hon. member for Egmont had shown himsalf to be an autocrat, and last year he deprived many efficient officers of their appointments at a moment’s notice. Reference had been made to the Native Land Bill, which the late Government declared to bean excellent measure, bub he could assure them that if the Bill had been passed war with the native race would have been inevitable. It was patent to any discerning minds that in bringing this motion forward the hon. member tor Egmont was instigated by sordid and mercenary motives. Major Atkinson requested the Speaker to take notice of the member’s last remark. The Speaker said the words were unparliamentary. Mr. Hamlin would bow to the Speaker’s decision and withdraw the words ; but such was the impression made on his mind by the conduct of the member for Egmont. It had now been demonstrated to the country that there were other men quite as capable as the last Government of conducting the business of the country, and he thought they should have an opportunity allowed them. They should have a fair trial. The hon. member, Mr Takamoana, had stated that there would have been a war if the late Ministry had remained in office. He (Mr Hamlin) had spoken to one of tho King’s executive, and he did not at all keep secret what the intentions of the Natives were. Ho believed there would be a war if the present Government was turned out of office, and before it was done with they would perhaps have to borrow ten millions of money. Therefore it behoved the House to avert war. This could be done by keeping the present Ministry in office, because they would not only open up the country, but at the same time conciliate and satisfy the wishes of the Maori people. Mr Tole thought that after Major Atkinson’s speech Mr McLean was no longer entitled to describe himself as the weakest member of the late Ministry. He strongly condemned the conduct of Major Atkinson in bringing down this motion as unfair and unprecedented, and dictated simply by a desire to get back to offiee. He contended that constitutionally Ministers were, under present circumstances, entitled to retain offiee. Even if the present motion were determined adversely to them, they should continue to hold office till the course of legislation was arrested. Mr W. Wood thought that after the action taken in the privileges case, it was desirable to adjourn, in order to give the Government and the House time to consider the position of affairs. Major Atkinson opposed adjournment. Mr Rees contended that after a vote was come to, the Governor must either continue to defy the House by refusing his Ministers’ advice, or make the appointment which they recommended. In former case Ministers would have no the course but to resign. The matter was still ponding. The privileges of the House were still being infringed, and no business should be proceeded with till the privilege question was settled. It was not fair to the Governor or to the Ministry to go on till the Governor had replied to tho resolution of the House. He held there was no legal Governor of New Zealand at all, as the Constitution Act did not provide for the appointment of any Governor, nor had the Assembly done so, neither did our constitution recognise any Ministry or Executive. If _ the Governor insisted on his constitutional right to invade party privilege the House would, in defence of its rights, have _ refused to do any more business with him, ami Ministers would have to consider whether they would remain the Governor’s advisers. Mr Travers thought it was usual when such an address was to be presented to adjourn till it was presented, but thought that a member of the Government should have moved this before the no confidence debate was resumed. After some further debate, the ActingSpeaker, with the consent of the House, left the chair till 7-30 p.m.

PARLIAMENTARY INCIDENTS. FURTHER ADJOURNMENT. [fbom the correspondent of the pees] Wellington, Not. 5,8 p.m. Things political have held just the same position for the past J:ew days pending the breach of privilege question. The majority of the Opposition has not changed, though Carrington and Kelly’s votes have become sealed to Sir Q-. Grey for the session. The Government have been working to obtain one or two votes considered doubtful, rumor saying that all sorts of inducements have been used. The Opposition did not oppose the resolutions come to by the committee, afraid that Sir G. Grey would take advantage of a defeat to resign on an inside issue before the vote of no confidence was carried, and, as the division list will show, many did not vote. Since the House met this evening the Governor sent a reply to their address, saying he had referred it to his advisers. This has posed the Government, and Sir G. Grey has moved the adjournment of the House while the Government consider the question. This is now being opposed by Mr McLean, Mr Moorhouse, and others. Mr Fox advises adjournment, so it will probably be assented to shortly. Mr Fox, while assenting to an adjournment, insists that the Opposition are not guilty of the waste of time caused.