PARLIAMENTARY

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2284, 28 July 1881, Page 3

PARLIAMENTARY

[PBBSB ASSOCIATION TBMtGBAM.J LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wbdnesday, July 27. The Counoil met at 2 30 p.m. The Hon. N. Wiisoh moved—" That in the opinion of the Council the laws relating to the taking of oaths and affirmations should be consolidated and amended." The motion was carried. The Adoption of Children Bill, Vagrant Aot 1866 Amendment Bill and Drainage Bill were passed through committee. The Diseased Cattle Bill was read a third time and passed. The Education Act 1877 Amendment B ;l l (Dr. Menziea) was read a first time ; as was the Imprest Supply Bill, No. 2, (from the Lower House). Nearly the whole afternoon was spent in committee on the Oamaru Harbor Board Bill, in which many amendments wore made. The Council rose at 5 p.m. HOUSE OF~BEPRESENTATIVES. Wednesday, July 27. The House met at 2.30 p.m. NOTICES op motion. Mr Reeves gave notice that he would ask the Government if they were aware that I Chas. Ryland Tylden, Auckland, hod been bound over to keep the peace for twelve months, and that only two months of the term had expired when he was appointed to the commission of the peace. Sir G. Obey gave notice to move that the proceedings of the Christchurch election committee of 1879 be expunged from the records of Parliament. questions. Replying to Mr Pitt, Mr Rollbston said that the matter of administration by the Nelson Waste Lands Board of the provisions of the appendioe E of the Land Act, 1877, as regards mineral prospecting licenses was now being enquired into with the view of preventing large areas of mineral land being locked up for a nominal consideration. Replying to Mr Reeves, The Hon. W. Rolleston said that the Government had no power to cancel the special claim recommended by the poldfields committee in re petition of Collins and Savage, in which they recommend that the grant of a special claim to the Keep it Dark Company be revoked. Replying to Mr Reeves, The Hon. W. Rollbston Baid that the claimants, Arthur Ellis and another, referred to in the recommendation of the goldfields committee had been offered, and refused the enquiry proposed for substantiating their grievance. Replying to Mr Seddon, The Hon. W. Rollbston said the Government had no intention of removing to Greymouth the Government House at Hokitika. Replying to Mr Levestam, The Hon. W. Rollbston said that so far as Government had made enquiry into the matter, they found that tho applicants were entitled to the gold mining lease granted by the Nelson Waste Lands Board to the John-ston-Bedsteads Gully Company. Beplying to Mr Pitt, The Hon. J. Hall said that Government considered that the law allowing a landlord to distrain for rent in arrears should be altered, but that it would depend upon the despatch of publio business as to whether a Bill for its abolition was introduced this session or not.

Beplying to Mr Seymour, The Hon. T. Dice said that the omission to provide a penalty for shooting native game was an oversight, and that if time permitted an amended Act wov'd be introduced.

In reply to a member, The Hon. J. Hail said that an offer to tho effect that he was prepared to construct tho Otago Central Railway on favorable terms had been received from Mr Proudfoot, contractor, but they preferred making provision for the work under the projeoted Railways Companies Construction Act, Replying to Mr Seddon, The Hon. W. Rollbston said the Government saw no reason why publicity should not be given to the fees to be charged for mining on the Kumars education reserve No. 128.

Replying to Mr Seddon, The Hon. W. Rollbston said that he would cause inquiry to be made as to whether the water from the Waimea water race had been wrongfully directed and sold at Kumara. Replying to Mr Bastings, The Hon. W. Rollbston said that Government recognised tho importance of giving effect to the joint recommendation made by the joint Rabbit Nuisance Committee, but it would depend upon the despatch of the public business whether or not it would be given legislative effect to this session, Replying to Mr Weston, The Hon. T. Dice said that an interim report had been received from the Judicature Commission, and a final report had been promised at the end of this month. Oa receiving that report Government would oonsidor the further steps necessary to give effeot to it.

Replying to Mr Weston, The Hon. J. Hall said that the report published of the prosecution against one Bhrenfried, at the Thames, was not correctly stated. The faot was that the proceeding had been instituted under a wrong section of the Act. That was tho cause of its failure. Replying to Mr Barron, Tho Hon. J. Hall said that legal proceedings had been instituted in connection with the railway accident at Kensington crossing, and it would not be judicious for the Government to make any statement calculated to compromise their position. new bills. The following Bills were introduced and read a first time : The Waimate and Temuka school site; the Geraldine racecourse (Mr Wakefield) ; to enable persons eleoted to be members of the House of Representatives to make before taking their seats an affirmation in lieu of an oath (Sir G. Grey). supply. An Imprest Supply Bill was introduced in committee for £250,000, and pasßed through all its stages. NO-COBPIDENCE DEBATE. The no-ionfidence debate was Mr Reeves, who commented on the conduct of members in condemning the Government and the Bills brought down, and yet refusing to vote for the amendment. He denied that the Government had been instrumental in improving the prospect of affairs throughout the colony, and referred to the fact that the Government of the neighboring colonies had refused to vote money for immigration purposes, alleging that the maladministration going on in New Zealand would drive sufficient population from that colony to their shores. He criticised the proposal of the Premier for reforming the Legislative Council, stating that while he ooncurred that the country demanded an elective Upper House, the Premier's proposals to have it elected by that House were altogether at fault. In carrying out the policy of retrenchment he oharged tho Government with practising the grossest possible favoritism. Ho instanced the case of the magistrate at Wanganui, who had been plucked six times in his examination as a barrister, and yet that man had been hoißted over the shoulders of old and tried servants of tho colony. He described the Roads Construction Bill as the quintessence of corruption. They would appoint members of their own party to be members of the proposed Board, in order that thoy might make use of them as creatures for their own purposes. Ho blamed the Government for having unnecessarily protraoted the debate by refusing pairs, and for having otherwise obstructed and delayed the progress of the business. Ho concluded by announcing his intention of voting for the amendment.

Mr McDonald announced that he would vote for the amendment. He complained that the Government had never succeeding in passing a measure calculated to benefit the colony. He complained that the Maori rating proposal was not in any way adapted to the requirements of the bulk of the Native lands situated in the North Island. He condemned the counties system, and otherwise took exception to the present mode of local administration. Major Habbis said that he would fill up the time for a fow minutes to enable the Colonial Treasurer to reconsider his apparent determination not to reply. He criticised the position of parties, blaming the Government for having acoepted the amendmont as an adverse motion. The House adjourned at 5.30. EVENING SITTING. The House resumed at 7.30. HO CONFIDENCE DEBATE. The no-confidence debate was resumed by Mr Kichabdson, who considered that the

1 amendment wai hasty and inconiiderate. He thought that the Bating Bill might be pu' into such a shape us would make it a useful measure. The Roads Construction Bill was, he thought, hopelessly bad, and he would vote against that measure. At the same time he intended to vote against the amendment, as he thought it would be a great misfortune to have two elections in a short time without redistribution. If the Government would hold over their Bills until the forthcoming election, that would be the best course to pursue. As a preliminary step in that direction he argued the necessity for losing no time in bringing down the Bedistribution Bill. He gave it as his opinion that in the first instance there should have been fewer counties, and that it should have been compulsory on them all to bring the Act into operation. That was the direction in which he would still go, rather than that an additional Board of Works should be constituted.

Mr Hhephaed said that wide spread dissatisfaction existed throughout the oountry with the existing state of local government He did not believe that there was any general desire for a return to Provincialism. What was wanted was an amendment of the present system. What was promised when abolition was given effect ft had not been realized. What was promised was an inexpensive form of looal government with substantial revenue, so that local residents might be enabled to take a more direct share in the local administration. He quoted Mr Vogel's resolution of August 24th, 1874. They had not realised these anticipations. He acquiesced in the statement that the want of sufficient money had been a great cause of the discontent. It was a mistake, however, to say that it was the sole cause. The subsidies were no doubt a great incentive to abolition, and their withdrawal had created a serious obstacle in the working of the counties. Under the Bating Act he pointed out that the rate on Orown lands would be imposed at the w>'l of the Surveyor-General. That was a power to which he objected. If Orown lands were to be rated, he failed to see on what principle of fairness railways should not be rated. The traffic to and [from railways out up the roads fearfully, and in England a large revenue fins derived by the looal bodies from rates imposed on railways. He agreed that in many cases the imposition of the rate on Maori land would amount to confiscation, but tho opposition of the Native members had killed it. Referring to the roads construction scheme, he said that, if oarried out, the result would be that before long they would have to have recourse to borrowing. The whole scheme of finance was highly unsatisfactory. It was not for any private member to propound a scheme of finance, as suoh member had not facilities to judge of the question. He thought that these Bills might be considered as completely out of the way as if a motion to read thorn that day six months had been oprried. On no side of the House had they been well received. Sir Gecxje Grey's Bill he stigmatised as a mere matter of speculation. It was unreal and unsatisfactory. Mr Sheehan'a proposal for the restoration of the provinces could not be seriously considered. Mr Saunders' proposals could only be designated as Provincialism run mad. What was wanted was to deal with these institutions as they had them, and develop them into a more efficient state of operation. County Councils he would have elected from the towns as well as the rural districts, and he would give them powers akin to those English boroughs which, were counties in themselves. He reviewed the various Acts which Government claimed could only be administered by the central Government. Police, prisons, publio health, branding, gold mines, sheep, surveys, timber floating, lunacy, and hospitals, were all subjects that could be better dealt with by tho local bodies than they could by the central power. The redress of grievances question was next dealt with, the speaker contending that the local bodies would be quite sufficient for that purpose, What was wanting was not provincialism, but the powers and extensions under which provincialism operated. Mr Hutchison said that the question was, Is or is not this proposal satisfactory ? There could be no doubt but that the reply had been in the negative. The only really sonsible thing that hod been said on behalf of the Government was that the mover of the motion had not been true to his allegiance. He could not understand the gravamen of the offence. If the Government did not choose to take warning from the speech made by Mr Ormond last session, the Government could not possibly expect to oommand his allegiance. Had not tho Government felt itself under compulsion he did not believe that the Government would have troubled them with any local government proposals at all. At the outset they were told by the Government that the country was not asking for looal government, and yet at a later stage they bring down this local government scheme. What was required was a scheme based on a compromise, to take a little here and "get a little there, until they had accumulated a sum total in the shape of a workable scheme. He did not think it would bo such a difficult achievement. Some halfdozen of temperate minded men brought together for half an hour would, he imagined, be equal to the occasion. The proposal for the valuations being made by the central Government was beginning at the wrong end. It was the local bodies that knew best about the valuations of their own properties, and not some inexperienced officer empowered by the General Government. The rating of Native land was not only an unjust proposal, but was likewise erroneous in prinoiple. Their aim should be to assimilate their laws for tho government of both races. Beferring to the Roads Construction Bill, he said that it would be better for the local bodies to borrow,' not from the Government, but in the open market. It would inorease the safeguards, and the interest would be paid in the colony to persons residing within the colony. They had been told by speakers on the other side that they had a good Government, and they seemed to argue that because they had a good Government that they as a House were to accept of bad Bills. Their economy had been greatly extolled, but ho questioned if it had been a wise economy. Great men like Dr. Pollen got the uttermost farthing, while the poorer man had to stand aside and submit to a more rigid olass of economy. The Treasurer gave a most dejected pioture of the state of the colony a few months ago. That was a most cruel proceeding ; it had caused trade to languish, and thrown hundreds of men out of employment. The result of that was that many who had invested small sumß in building up homes for themselves had to sacrifice their money and leave the place in seorch of work. There were many such in this plaoe, and the effect was not only the loss of the property, but the breaking up, and, in some instances, demoralisation of their homes. Now they were told that after all things were not so very bad. Tho faot was that the late assurance was just about as far from the truth as the former alarm. They had been menaced with a dissolution. He had no doubt but that if defeated, Government would endeavor to get a dissolution, but he questioned if it would be given. Be that as it may, what they had to do was to vote on this point irrespective altogether of tho more remote consequences. Mr Beycb was not satisfied with the Bill before tho House, and ho questioned if there was a member in the House satisfied. In the nature of things it was not reasonable to expect that a generally satisfactory scheme could be put forward. The time had como when the local bodies would have to look to themselves and not the Government. Government mip.ht not have intended to introduce a vital alteration in the local governing system, but they certainly did intend to make certain changes in the financial arrangements, as witness the fact that they put a statement of that kind in the Governor's mouth. Tho great dissotisfaction that existed amongst local bodies was the want of money. He denied the statement made by the previous speaker that the Treasurer's Bpeech a couple of years ego had had an unfavorable effeot on trade. The fact was that trade became firmer, and commenced to revive in consequence of that speech. He would not blame Mr Ormond to tho full extent he had been blamed in connection with this amendment; still he thought that it was his duty to have given the Government more specifio notice of his intention to bring forward the amendment before doing so. The speech made by Mr Ormond last year could not have led them to anticipate hia present action. What he then complained of was the property tax. In these circumstances it would hove been much fairer had he raised a direct issue upon the repeal of that tax. Mr Ormond had no right to assume as he did that the carrying of his motion would result in a dissolution, and if he was not prepared to accept all the responsibilities of tho situation, then he had »o right to move the resolution. It he did attempt to form a Government he thought that he would meet with insurmountable obstacles in attempting to repeal tho property tax or seli

the railways, as he did not believe the gentlemen with whom he was leagued could possi bly join him in such a proceeding. Ho did not believe that the country wanted the pre - sent system of local government essentially ' altered, but just improved in such a way as to make it work more freely. He defended the Government in the opinion that the amendment must be regarded as a vote of want of confidence, which he would vote against. Mr Bbotck moved the adjournment of the debate, saying that he understood that arrangements had been oome to" for the convenience of the Government, that if the debate was now adjourned the division should take place to-morrow. Hon. Major Atkinson said the Government had agreed to take the division tomorrow, but not for their convenience. As the matter had been put on that ground they would resist the adjournment.

The House diviaed on the motion for tho adjournment of the debate. Ayes, 18 ; noes, 42. Mr Shehhan said that an arrangement had been made with the consent of all parties to an adjournment, but he had been compelled to vote against the adjournment put now, because Mr Brown had entirely misrepresented the grounds on which the adjournment had been agreed to, which were the convenience of all parties, not that of the Government or any of its members. The Hon. Major Atkinson thanked Mr Sheehan for his explanation, in which he entirely concurred. He had felt bound to oppose the motion in consequence of the offensive terms in which Mr Brown had proposed it. Mr Beovtn said he had been asked to move the adjournment, and had thought it was because of tho Premier's ball.

The adjournment was then agreed to, and the HouseSrose at 10.45.