THE HAWKE’S BAY TIMES. NAPIER, THURSDAY, AUGUST 1861.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume I, Issue 9, 29 August 1861, Page 2

THE HAWKE’S BAY TIMES. NAPIER, THURSDAY, AUGUST 1861.

By the Auckland papers received per Zephyr and Pole Star, we have a report of the discussion on the New Provinces Act Amendment Bill, which took place in the House of Representatives on Saturday, the 3rd, and Tuesday, the Gth, instant. This debate was of the most animated description, and was spoken to by most of the leading members of both political parties. During the debate, an amendment was brought forward by Mr. Carleton that this Bill be read a second time that day six months. This was seconded by Mr. Colenso, but subsequently withdrawn in favor of another by Mr. Weld, to the elfect that the Government should introduce a measure conferring local self-govern-ment on all outlying districts before the New Provinces Act should be repealed.—This amendment was ultimately passed ; but as it did not affect the second reading of the bill the House found itself on Tuesday night just where it was in regard to the question when the debate was began on Saturday. In the Legislative Council an attempt was made to introduce a similar measure “ to suspend the operation of the New Provinces Act until the end of the next session but after undergoing the ordeal of a more spirited discussion than is usual in that “ grave assembly,” leave to bring in the Bill was refused, so that on the whole there seems but little fear of the Act being touched during the remainder of this session, and still less of any step towards re-annexation, although as it was probable that portions both of Canterbury and Auckland would petition for separation and the promoters of the New Provinces Act did not think it desirable that either of these Provinces should suffer dismemberment although the Act left no option with the Government in the event of their complying with the terms of the Act, all parties might yet unite to suspend its operation until some measure could be devised to supply its place. The most remarkable feature in the discussion, was the manner in which those who originated the New Provinces Act now abandoned it, all seeming agreed as to the necessity of its repeal and only differing as to the conditions by which it should be accompanied. As we intend to give the report of the discussion in our columns as we find it in the Auckland papers, we will here confine ourselves to the points of greatest interest which were brought out in its course, particularly those relating to this Province, and the remarkable confession of our late Superintendent, brought forward by Dr. Featherston and borne out by Mr. Stafford, which seemed to take Mr. Colenso by surprise, and probably prevented his making any defence on the part of the Province. Mr. Fox moved the second reading of the bill, which was not intended to re-annex Provinces already separated but to give the Government the power to grant or refuse further separations according to circumstances, as under the New Provinces Act as it stood they had no option.Mr. O’Neill opposed the subdivision of Provinces, as expenses of Government and salaries absorbed all the revenues of a small Province, and was for re-annexation where four-fifths of the electors wished it. Mr. Dick introduced a clause for the re-annexation of those Provinces which had been separated, and had become discontented. This clause seems to have caused the failure of the Bill, —as Mr. Bell and several others who would have voted for the repeal of the Act, as brought in by Mr. Fox, opposed it as containing the re-annexation clause. Mr. Jollie would improve the old Bill, but not repeal it, nor suspend its operation. Mr. Richmond believed the Act to have been necessary when passed in 1858, and, also in 1860, but, though the time had now come for its repeal, himself -and colleagues bad always foreseen-this time would come. He opposed the re-annexation clause —believed the Act had proved the ruin of his party,

but did not regret this, as he considered the work they had done a good one. Dr. Featherston was surprised to find with what readiness the late Government were willing to abandon a measure of such great importance as the “New Provinces' Act,” as soon as Auckland was*threatened to be affected by it; thought re-annexation only justice to the old provinces; small offshoots could not carry on great public works. The Act had not conferred local self-govern-ment, but had tended to the destruction of the off-shoots, as well as of the old Provinces. If the operation of the Act was not suspended two or three years would see the whole of the colonizing reserves of the Islands swept away; as it was the revenue to be derived from them which caused the separation cry. Referring to Hawke’s Bay, he shewed that the late Superintendent had obtained that office because the Council could not perform the duty of electing between two others ; who were in consequence withdrawn, though both of them did enjoy the confidence of a large number of electors, and lie was elected in their place, in whom they did not repose any confidence, —who also had given a written pledge to resign on a certain understanding, and who, avowed himself a “menial puppet of the Council,” havingpledged himself to “a land jobbing corruption.” Mr. Colenso enquired if Mr. Fitzgerald had used those expressions in that House ? Dr. Featberston could not say; but, many honorable gentlemen had heard him. Mr. Stafford replied that such was the case ; that gentleman did state the particulars of his election in that House. Dr. Featberston continued: —the Superintendent of Hawke’s Bay was, with two clerks, to have performed all the Government of the Province, at a cost of less than 1,00 01 per annum, while the fact was the expenditure of the original Province had been doubled; it had cost the new Province as much to govern a population of 2,500, as it had the old one, a population of 14,000; the salaries of officials, together with the “scientific experiments,” in the harbor, had absorbed nearly all the revenue—as not one-third had been spent outside the town, —in all, and in every respect, the New Provinces’ Act had proved a failure. Mr. Fitzherbert in a sarcastic speech commented on the fact that, the originators of the New Provinces’ Act, had considered its work as done, as soon as it threatened to dismember Auckland and Canterbury ; if it was good for the other Provinces to be relieved of their surplus lands, why not for these as well—all the Provinces should be served alike ; Canterbury and Auckland should not be deprived of the advantages conferred on Wellington, Nelson, and Otago. Mr. Ormond’s reply was made during the course of the adjourned debate. We regret our contracted space prevents our giving here more than a mere outline of this gentleman’s speech ; —Hawke’s Bay had not been a loser by separation. Dr. Featherston’s statements would convey erroneous ideas, and widen the breach between two Provinces, whose interests were identical. He had no wish to perpetuate these differences ; it had been said, the condition of Hawke’s Bay at the time of separation, was a proof of the care that had been bestowed on it. He would show by figures what that amounted to,- —during five years, 1854 to 1858, 122,000£. had been expended on Wellington, and only 7,900 1, on Hawke’s Bay, while it had contributed 44,000 Z. of land revenue, without customs or scrip. In spending in town what should be devoted to country purposes, they have followed the practice of Wellington, and made the main road through the country to the port, from the Land Revenue. Reference had been made to the dredge ; it was hard he should now have to support what he had consistently opposed, but, he must say the work was intended for the benefit of all, —country as well as town ; mistakes had been ’made, and money had been wasted, but, it was amongst ourselves,

and better thus, than that it should be sent to Wellington. I)r. Featherston had once admitted that land revenue should be spent in the district in which it was raised, (report of speech, April, 1857 ;) had this been done at Hawke’s. Bay, that Province would have been satisfied; they had not had a dead lock, if they had it was not peculiar to them ; so, neither was the fact of their having been unfortunate in their Superintendent, as other Provinces had also been unfortunate in this particular. The New Provinces’ Act gave districts like Hawke’s Bay their only chance, as its voice would be over-ruled in that house, —the outlying districts still felt the want of local self-government, and when means adequate to meet that want were supplied, the Act might be repealed. Mr. Fox found the same evils in the New Provinces, as in the old; little Picton had appropriated the funds that should have been spent at the mouth of the Wairau, just as the late Superintendent of Hawke’s Bay had spent on his dredge, that which should have benefitted Waipukurau. The speaker informed the house that the amendments passed had not affected the second reading of the bill, which it was quite competent for the Government to proceed with, if it thought proper to do so.