POLITICAL INTELLIGENCE.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2537, 26 May 1882, Page 4

POLITICAL INTELLIGENCE.

fFBOIt THE “ PRESS ” | WELLINGTON, May 25,

The debate on the address in reply has been continued all this evening with a very drear/ cffjot. Mr M. W. Green has had the most of the night to himself. He rose about eight and spoke nearly two hours, very fluently, but with most irritating prolixity, evidently fancying (like Mr Holmes the other night) that he was at one of his own election meetings. His egotism, too, was very rasping. His perpetual repetition of the first personal pronoun being peculiarly wearisome and nauseating. However, ho declared himself a thorough going supporter of the Government not with standing his having attended the Oppooition caucus. This needless deviation was due to his inexperience in Parliamentary practice. Mr Hursthouse, who followed, poked a good deal of fun at this flowery and pulpit like eloquence. Mr Fergus is now up, and we are apparently in for a long debate, which can fulfil no possible useful purpose, unless it acts as a safety valve for some of the novices, but I fear they have still a large supply of steam in hand. Under the Employers’ Liability Bill, introduced by Mr Green, it is provided that compensation should be paid to any workman for personal injury arising from defects in the way of works, machinery or plant, from the negligence of any person in the superintendence, from any act or omission done or made in obedience to by-laws or particular instructions, or from negligence of any person in the service of the employer having control of any signal point, engine or train upon a rdilway. Compensation will be paid to the workman suffering harm or in case of death to his legal representative. The maximum amount of compensation is not to exceed three years’ earning! for the injured person, and the action for the recovery will not be maintainable unless notice of injury is given within six weeks, and action commenced within six months, from the occurrence of the accident. The provisions of the Act are to apply to the Government as well as other employers, and a course of procedure is supplied for enforcing it. The term “ workman ” will not include a domestic or menial servant, but will refer to any railway servant, laborer, servant for husbandry, journeyman, artificer, handicraftsman, miner, or person otherwise engaged in manual labor. THE eight hotjbs bii.li (Mr Green)

Constitutes eight hours’ work out of every twenty-four on any legal working day a legal day’s work, and forty-eight hours per week a legal week’s work in all occupations, whether ot a mental or physical nature, and provides that all work or labor performed in excess of that time shall be reckoned as overtime, and paid for either at the same rate as ordinary hours or at the same rate as may be agreed between employer and employed. Domestic servants, persons employed in dairies, and those engaged in such employment as allow a smaller number of working houre are to be excepted from the operation of the Act. The Evidence Bill (Mr Hu(chison) provides that an accused person shall be competent, but not compellable, to give evidence for or against himself on bis own trial, and that husbands and wives shall be competent, but not compellable, to give evidence against one another.

The Stanmore committee mot to-day, but after some discussion adjourned until tomorrow, in order to allow members to consider in the interval whether it would be better to pass the Indemnity Bill introduced by Mr Turnbull, specially in order to whitewash Mr Pilliet, or pass a Bill to amend the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, 1881, giving such amendment Bill sufficient retrospective action to apply to the Stanmore case.

Some of the Opposition seem rather suspicious of the readiness displayed by the Government in assisting Mr Pilliot. It is said that Mr Montgomery and Mr Mac andraw would have preferred to see the new writ for Stanmore issued at once, believing Mr Andrews to be safe for the seat, and, therefore, desiring to secure his vote. Some of their followers are beginning to hint a suspicion that it may bo designed to keep the Stanmore seat dangling between earth and heaven until the impending trial of otrength with the Opposition shall have been satisfactorily concluded. In any case, I fancy She Stanmore vote will not have much chance of counting in the first division. This will probably take place on the chairmanship of committees. Major Atkinson was to have moved Mr Hurst’s election this afternoon, but the debate on Mr Maoandrew’s motion in favor of the House always rising at 12 30 a.m, lasted until a quarter of an hour before the regular time of rising for dfnner, and then Major Atkinson very quietly ‘ and simply stated he should not move until to-morrow. This was at first commented on with much exultation by the Opposition as a symptom of weakness, until it become known that the Government had two men on their way to-night by the Te Anau, whioh will materially modify the relative strength of parties. At the same time lam doubtful as to Mr Hurst’s chances, even though he will, I hear, have the support Of Mr Hamlin and his friends. The Opposition now declare openly their determination to put up J. W. Thomson and their ability to carry him. This may be mere bounce, but it must bo admitted that Mr Hurst’s nomination is not such a popular one as some others would have been, Mr Hamlin, for instance. The Otago men are specially jealous that Auckland should carry off both the chief Parliamentary prizes—the Speakership and the Chairmanship of Committees. It is impossible as yet to predict the result; but, of course, even should Ministers be beaten on such a question, they would not treat it as a no oonfidenoe vote.

The first vital struggle will almost certainly be on the Native Bill. A desperate effort will be made by the Opposition to defeat the Government on that score, but I find so much division of opinion even in the extreme Opposition camp, that I still believe the Government will pull through triumphantly. I fancy there are several Opposition members who will support the Native policy, even at the cost of voting against their side. Others again heartily approve the Government’s West Coast policy, and only complain that it was not carried oat in full when Mr Bryce first urged it. Same approve everything but the proposal to retain Te Whiti and Tohu without trial. On the whole, however, I quite expect to see Ministers baffle the attack on the question, and turn the tables on their assailants.