GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2555, 16 June 1882, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

(PBR PRKM ASSOCIATION. J LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. THURSDAY, JUNE 15, QUESTIONS. In reply to the Hon. Mr Williamson, The Hon. Mr Whitaebh said the Government found it would be too expensive to light the Manutau Harbor, so that vessels could enter at night, and even if it were lighted it would still be dangerous, especially to stranger*. married women's property protection BILE. This Bill was read a third time and passed, BILLS POSTPONED. At the request of Sir G. Whitmore, who was unwell, the second reading of the Peace Preservation Bill and of the Indemnity Bill was postponed till Tuesday. ALIENS ACT. The Aliens Act Amendment Bill was read a second time. SHERIFFS ACT. The Sheriffs Act, 1858 Amendment Bill was passed through committee. Tibe Council rote at 3 p.m. LIOUSB OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday, Joke 15, The House met at 2,30. THE TELEGRAMS BILL. The Fphakee announced that the division the previous evening on tho Protection of Telegrams Bill was ayes 32, noma 27, and not ayes 31 as announced at the time. QUESTIONS, In reply to Mr J. B. Brown,, The Hon. Mr Eollbbtoi? said that if it was desired, general facilities’would be given to members to visit Christchurch Exhibition. Replying to Mr Holmes, The Hon. Mr. Johnston said it was not intended by the Government to appoint a District Board to hear, investigate, and report upon complaints made by employes in his department in such districts respecting their ill treatment by heads of departments or other • Boers. Replying to Mr Green, The Hon. Mr Dish said the Government had taken the rabbit nuisance into their own hands. Arrangements had been made for introducing 250 polecats from Tasmania, and each ship leaving England would bring a supply of fifty ferrets to oope with the nuisance. Parties bringing out these animals would get no subsidy, but they would find a profitable market at their disposal. Replying to Mr Sutton, The Hon. Mr Dice said it was not proposed to bring down a measure for the management of hospitals and charitable institutions similar to that of last session, but the financial statement would indicate- what was proposed to be done in that directionRjplying to Mr I. Wilson, The Hon. Mr Johnston said that it upon inquiry it was found the traffic required it, agoods shed would be erected at Bonthbrook railway station. Replying to Mr Oadman, The Hon. Mr Dice said the Government did not intend to make it compulsory that persons appointed to the Commission of the Peace should undergo an examination in the various Acts they may be called upon to administer, but if a Bill to that effect was introduced the Government would give it consideration. FIRST READINGS. The following Bills were introduced and read a first time :—Canterbury Rivers Act, 1870, Amendment (Mr J. Wilson); to Amend the Fencing Aot (Mr Smith) Native Committees Empowering (Mr Tomoana) ; Oreaki Native Reserve (Mr Tawhai) Mining Company Registration Validation (Hon. Mr Dick) ; to Afford Relief under circumstances to Deferred Payment Settlers : to Provide for the Election of the Members of Waste Land Boards (Sir George Grey). VISIT TO EXHIBITION. Mr J. E. Bbown gave notice that he would move to-morrow that the House adjourn on Thursday, the 29ch, to the following Tuesday, to enable member* to visit the ChrUtohuroh Exhibition. OTAGO HARBOR BOARD BILL. Mr Fish moved the second reading of the Otago Harbor Board Further Empowering Bill, stating ha only wished to advance it a stage and to take the discussion on the motion for going in committee, so that members might have time to consider certain data compiled by the Harbor Board, and which ho would circulate. Mr Macandeew said he would not oppose the cecond reading, although at the same diffa'ed entirely with the promoters of the Bill both as to the amount sought to be borrowed and the work towards which, as ha understood, the loan was intended to be applied. When the Bill got into committee he would be prepared to move certain amendments, the object of which would be to diminish tho amount of the proposed loon and to secure its application to works most conducive to the public interest. As the mover had deferred debating the question to a subsequent stage he should reserve anything he might have to eay until then. Tho Bill was read a second time, AUCELAND GRAMMAR SCHOOL. The House went into committee on tho Auckland Grammar School Bill. After being discussed on the preliminary clause progress was reported. MEMBERS’ SPEECHES!. Mr Pyeb moved that members defray the cost of printing their own speeches in “ Hensard,” and that such costs shell be deducted from (ho honorarium, if any, to which they may be entitled. The cost per night was very heavy, and he thought the motion, if carried, would shorten tho session orb month. That was an important consideration, and it would tend to promote the public bufifleis and to the health and convenience of memotrs. The present was an opportune time for making a proposal of the kind. There had as yet been no abuse of the forms of the House, and this precaution would help to counteract an abuse of the kind. Mr Turnbull moved as an amendment that tho words read “ members who desire to have their speeches reported defray the costs,” &c. He, for one, would prefer not having his speeches reported. Mr J. W. Thomson characterised this at an important motion, but ho thought it was brought forward in the way of a j )ke. He had years ago opposed a motion to have speeches curtailed to twenty minutes, but he now believed he made a mistake. These speeches were now too fully reported. At one time they ware reported in the third person, whereas now they were reported in the first person. In the House of Commons speeches were not so elaborately reported, and he thought a similar course might be pursued hero. Ho himself was accused of being a discursive speaker, and it might in his own care be well were his remarks condensed. Tho reporting staff might very well bs allowed to condense. In that case “ Haneard ” might bo considerably reduced, if not abolished. He imagined the seat of Government would be removed in time. If taken to Christchurch, they could dispense with “ Hansard ” altogether, as there they would gat papers able to report their speeches. The paners of Wellington neither did credit to themselves nor tho colony. The abolition of “Hansard” would be a saving of about £SOOO per annum. Ho would support tho motion. Mr Kelly thought that the debate might be curtailed by an amendment in the forms of the House. Mr Levin said this question of “ Hansard ,r was continually cropping up. They set about matters in a most extravagant way. He defended tho Press of the city, and said that the reports of tho morning paper this year were as creditable os the reporting in any paper in the colony. In tho past that had not been tho case, still it was an earnest on tho part of the newspapers to progress with tho times. Mr. Frau oppojod the motion. He could only imagine that tho mover had outlived his ability to make anything like a decent speech, and he was envious of younger and abler members. Ho defended “ Hansard ” as a useful record of what had passed. Ha also ■ defended the Press of Wellington, adding that tho papers would compare favorably with ths Press of his own city of Dunedin, i Mr Dodson also opposed the motion. In years past he had been a constant reader of “ Hansard,” and he believed with profit to i himself. He defended the reporting as being wonderfully correct. He also defended tho t reports given in the Wellington “Times.” 1 They were exceedingly creditable to the reporter, whoever ho might be. He would vote 5 steadily against any effort to interfere with. “Hansard.” Mr Shepherd denied that the cost was so ? great as had been stated. He did not look upon tho motion as being at all serious, so

far that the removal of the seat of Govern ment had been alluded to. He would just soon trust to the morning paper in Welling ton as to the papers in Christchurch. Hu hoped they would atnolly adhere to tne present arrangement. , Captain McKbnzih admitted that me pecuniary aspect of the question might o matter of some importance to certain members. , , Mr BbACKBN moved as a further omenoment that members bo made to pr-J t.’.o corrections upon their speeches. Mr Feed wick supported Mr BracKi.ne amendment. The; eOO -section!) increased the cost of “ Hansard ’’ oue-fourth. Mr Pvkb defended the reports in the Wtl--lington Press, which would bear favorable comparison with the reports of any other place. He had been urged to bring forward the motion by a number of members in the House. The resolution as it stood excluded Ministers as they received no honorarium. He would also ba ready to exempt the loaders of the Opposition whoever they might be. Mr TurnbuU’a amendment was negatived on the voices. _ , , The House divided on Mr Bracken s Amendment, which was lost by 45 to 21. The House divided on the original motion Ayes, 27 ; coes, 36. The motion was lost. EEBOTBICITV. Mr Kcelv moved —“ That the House, is of opinion that the Government should, during the recess, cause inquiries to bo made by competent persons aa to whether the. Parliamentary buildings could with advantage be lighted by electricity.” The debate was interrupted by the 530 SITTING. The House resumed at 7.30. PIBE BEiaiDBS BIDE. Mr tiBfBBTAM moved the second reading of the Fire Brigades Bill. He explained that a Bill with a similar title was put forward last year. That measure proposed to rate insurance companies specially for the purpose indicated. He could not bring himself to support that Bill, believing as ho did that the cost would bo added to premiums, and accordingly the provision was omitted from this Bill. An efficient system of fire protection produced a corresponding diminution in the rate of insurance, so that •» measure of the kind was one which recommended itself os an economical step. I had been said that fire brigades should be established by corporations and other local bodies, bet he contended that it was of importance that the principle should bo affirmed by legifllation. a , The Hon, Mr Dick admitted the principle of the Bill to be good, but took exception to the manner in which it was drawn. These, however, were mere technical drawbacks. It contained also one or two more substantial defects, but these were capable of being rectified in committee. A number of provisions contained in the Municipal Corporations Act bod been imported into the Bill. In that case it would bo as well to repeal those clauses in the Corporations Act, and leave them all to be dealt with by the one Act. Mr Fish moved—“ That the Bill be read that day six months. ” Unlike the previous speaker, he could see that it was most objectionable in principle. There was ample provision in the Corporations Act, 1866, to deal with the subject ;of fire prevention. In small towns and boroughs the Bill would be inoperative. These places had enough to do to make and form their streets without being hardened with the maintenance of a tire brigade. If it required legislation that legislation ought to emanate from the Government. The Bill originated with a fire brigade, and not from the public. Mr Peacock and Mr Feld wick objected to the Bill, and Mr Hutchison supported it. Mr Hoekbs opposed it on the ground that it was an unwarrantable interference with local self-government. Mr Lbtestam in reply, said he would in committee aeoept reasonable amendments provided they did not interfere with the principle. Ho was not the framer of the Sill, and therefore was not responsible for its phraseology. He brought forward the measure at the instigation of the associated fire brigades of New Zealand. The House divided on the amendment that the Bill be read that day six months. Ayes, 36 ; noes, 13. THE PHBOHABB OP VOTES.

Sir Qbobqb Obey moved the second reading of the Prevention of the Purchase of Votes Bill. He explained that the purchase of £25 of property in an electorate purchased also a vote in such electorate. Tnat state of things tended to political corruption which ought to be discouraged. Great laud companies would be formed, and these companies oould very easily purchase votes, and in that way promote their own purposes. He denied that this provision was designed to give legitimate power to property. Fifty thousand pounds’ worth of property in one electorate only had one vote, whereas that sum distributed throughout the different districts would secure perfect wealth of political power. Mr Lb vesta m seconded the motion, and ■poke in favor of the Bill. The Honj W. Eoulbstoit said that in 1872 Sir Geo. Grey disclaimed the idea that he was against a dual vote. In 1880 he was in favor of the leasehold franchise. It appeared to him that they had arrived at principles with respect to the franchise which should not be disturbed. He did not think the opinion of the country was that every man should have an equal voice in [the Government, The property qualification was a fair guage of the intelligence and thrift of the country. There may be some pleas in favor of the leasehold franchise, but he contended that there was no euoh call for taking away the franchise already existing. If there had been any real call for a change ho wonld have been prepared to consider the question, but he did not believe that any ■nob call existed, and wonld oppose the Bill.

Mr TubitbUil supported the Bill, stating that, despite the arrangement made for holding the elections on the one day, special trains were ran on the Ohristohuroh line, and men got oat and voted in all the districts at which they had qualifications. To give any one an excessive vote in making the laws was ■imply an act of oppression. It was a great temptation to the dominant class to make laws to Bait their own purposes. Again it was calculated to induce them to lay the harden of taxation on the shoulders of others.

Mr Hitbbthocsb moved that the Bill be read that day six months. So long as the franchise—freehold and residential—existed, they must allow the electors to exercise their electoral rights without hindrance. Ho deplored the politics! apathy of the day. They found at the late elections that not more than half the electors exorcised the franchise. Under these circumstances the more they could interest the masses in the government of the country the better. He regretted the extension of the franchise on the liberal principle on which it had been placed. He did not think that the property vote as it stood could bo to any great extent abused, since the elections were held on the one day. In a country like this property should have its fair proportion of power. Mr Pxkb supported the amendment. Property must be represented. It was a fallacy to say that men only were to be represented. It would be a bad time for the colony when property, either leasehold or freehold, was not fairly represented. The mover of the Bill was a man born before his time, and he

reduced Parliament to a debating class when he brought up a Bill like this. He objected to be governed by popular opinion, unless in ao far as that opinion was in accord with justice and equity. He had never heard of the purchase of votes. What was called the purchase of votes he called the free exorcise of the public mind. Why not bring in a Bill to make it criminal for a man to hold property. That was the natural outcome of this Bill. Sir George Grey was pledged to bring in a Bill providing far the leasehold qualification, and now he said he would do nothing of the kind. Never was there a more faithful representation of the fallacy of the residential qualification given than at the late election. He knew of the names of six persons on one of those supplementary rolls who had not been in the colony six hoars. Property they knew was there, bat what was residential qualification ? A man with a swag on his back by the roadside. All their legislation for the past few years had bean detrimental to the poor man. Mr Moss supported the Bill. It was not the proper man, but the man of property who could realise bis property and was in a position to leave the country under these circumstance*. He contended that the reflections cast upon the residential qualifications were wholly unsupported. He thought the debate this evening bad been instrumental in arriving at a clear division of parties. It was the want ol a policy on the part of Govern.

,nent that rendered the O disap pointed. Mr Hirst opposed th d oontendiog that it had not been part o j> political programme o£ the late elec* j o ne, and that, consequently, there was n' ; oyidenco of a demand for the proposed char e _ Mr Joyce spoke jIV of the Bill, o nsideling that in mi p,l matters the plural voting system hs been a retrograde step Property mast a 1 (rajg exercise preponderance, and in that way property classes need not fear the propo' of tho Bill. Oaptaiu_ M .cKenzib contended that the late eleotio being silent on the subj- ct, showed tb was n o demand for the Bill. He object to the title of the Bill. The Bill was (evidently intended to centre all politics 1 . in tho hands of men working for we who were here to day and gone to. monv jv. He strongly objected to this. M.r EDcoson supported the Bill. The dis trie ,1 ;be represented had for two sessions been di sfcronohised by imported votes. He could r .ot ‘understand why one class of property should have a vote and not another. It was ohly land which could secure a vote. That to hie mind was olase legislation. Mr Sbddon spoke in favor of the Bill. Mr Weston said he would be in favor of a limited power being given to property. He meant by that ho would allow the residential qualification, and say one more qualification for property. As the Bill stood he would oppose it, Mr Smith contended that apart from this qualification property bad its preponderance. Employers of labor if they treated their workmen, or landlords if they treated their tenants right were hound to influence them. Mr Fish opposed tho Bill. Messrs W. U. Green, Feldwiok, Munro and Holme* supported it. The latter stated that in committee he would move that the number of votes be limited to two. Sir George Grey replied. Ha denied that the title of the Bill was a jest. It was an actual fact. Loft sitting at 1.45.