General Assembly.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VI, Issue 382, 2 July 1856, Page 4

General Assembly.

HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES^ DEBATE ON THE REPLY TO THE ADDRESS. (CONTINUED FROM OUR LAST.) \ Mr. Fox said the time was now come when he felt he ought to state his views on the policy of the hon. member for Christchurch, and he hoped in doing so no word would escape him which might wound that gentleman's feelings, or disturb the friendship which had existed between them since the day they first met. He had stood shoulder to shoulder with the hon. member foi more than a 3 Tear while they strove to secure the passing of the Constitution Act, and scarcely a day passed durinc that periud that they did not meet in friendly conference on tbesubject. At that time, their views on the inter-' pretation of Sir John Fakington's Constitution were identical, as he could easily show by documents ■which he held in his hand : and he (Mr. F.) could only say that no change had occurred in his opinions on the subject. He (Mr. F.) had been challenged as the leader of the opposition to the policy of that hon. member. He thought this was very unfair towards a new member, who, at the time the challenge was given, had conducted himself with modesty due to his position, and had expressed no i opinions at all in that house. He was now called upon to state the policy of the opposition. He declined to do so; it was the policy of the hon. member for Christchurch, and not Ins, that was on trial. " "Who ever heard of the opposition in the British Parliament being called upon to state a policy before they had defeated their opponents ? His principles were well knowu ; but the policy of a ministry resulted from the mutual concessions of its members and could not be even framed till his Excellency should have sent for some one, who, having selected his colleagues, might by mutual arrangement devise a policy on which they might agree as a common ground. A . good deal of mystification had been created by discussion on the word " municipal, " - used in the proposed address. The debate however, was not on the wording of the address, but on rhe policy developed in the hon. member's three hours speech. That policy was centralism against provincialism, and that was the issue to be tried. The real difference between 'them was, to what power were the Provincial Governments to be subordinated. He (Mr. F.) said, to the controlling legislative power of the General Assembly, in accordance with the Constitution Act. The hon. member for Christchurch sought to subordinate them to the control of the Executive j' and, by" the details of his scheme, to convert the General Executive into a Legislative body for the long interval he proposed between the meetings of the Assembly. True, he proposed to confer on the Provincial Governments, "their full legitimate functions, 3'—to limit the General Government to " all matters which affect the colony at lar°-e, " and to yield the "largest possible amount of provincial powers? " But who was to decide what were these " full legitimate functions, " the "all matters which affect the colony at large, "—and the " amount of provincial power* ?■' Why the hon. members and his colleagues, sitting, not in that House, but in their offices as the Executive Government. Nothino- could be more dangerous than the fusion of Legislative and Executive functions. The true object of a central power was to regulate the external relations of a country—to adjust conflicting interests between its minor divisions, and to regulate all matters in ■which they had a common interest; but not, as the hon. member proposed, to intrude into provincial action. And what was the excuse for all this intermeddling? It was to secure uniformity of legislation. The idea of uniformity was the feeble offspring of the brain of the political student sitting in his closet, and not of the statesman who by extensive-travel in countries possessing inititutions analogous to ours, had acquired a practical knowledge of .their working. Political institutions, to succeed, must be in conformity with the realities of the case. Here there were six settlements physically, socially, nay, even in their religious creeds essentially different from each other—why put them ail into the Provincial bed of uniformity that cinld'stoy of a dreamy theorist? The hon member (Mr. F.)quoied JDe Toqueville to shew that uniformity, enforced by a central power, though productive of an outward harmony, failed to secure the solid prosperity of a people, while it emasculated their understandings and destroyed their aptitude for self-government; and hi-appealed ,to A*r. Gladstone's opinion, that in reference to New Zealand it was calculated to produce* "conflictinguncertainty and confusion." He (Mr. Fox) then expressed his astonishment that anyone who pretended to the smallest gifis of statesmanship, could frame a machinery which carried within itself the elements of its o*n dissolution. The whole plan of the hon-member for Christchurch tnrned on his being «ble to persuade the Superintendents to be the instruments by which he was to work it. " I think " said Mr. F,, "I see my revered friend the Superintendent of Otago, forgetful of tiie blood of martyrs that flows in his veins, eating the crust of humble

pie held out to him by the hon. member for Christ church. I think I see my friend the Superintendent of Wellington, forgetful of his fourteen-yeart championship of popular rights, coming with ' baited breath —wliispering humbleness,' to ask for his instructions. I think I seethe Superintendent of New Plymouth waiting on the Devon Road for the arrival of the overland mail, to bring him his weekly orders. I think I see the aspiring blood of Nelson sink in the ground, and its Superintendent, having sold his birthright for an imaginary mess of pottage, contented to take the pauper gruel doled out to him by the matron of this great central workhouse-". Did the hon. member know these men no better than to suppose that they would exchange the garb of freemen for his official livery? But the hon. member proposed,if they would do so, to effect " organic chauges " —yet he who had protested against any one laying a finger on the sacred Constitution Act, would repeal its most important clause, and make the Superintendents nominees. He would tell him that the minister who attempted that, would sign his own political death warrant- Another evil that he foresaw in this centralized scheme was the amount of central legislation which would be required by the Assembly. That Üble would groan under pilee of correspondence, reports, and bills. Members would be kept for months from their homes, and the country would be disgusted with representativs institutions—a result which perhaps some of the -gentlemen opposite earnestly desired. He could not pass over the attempt exhibited in the construction of the ministry, to govern by the aggregace in that House of the Provincial minorities. . The hon. -member had taken as his colleagues two genilemen smarting from recent provincial defeats, and to whom nothing would be more agreeable than to avenge, on their opponents, the handling they had received in the provinces. What a weapon for this end was the power of advising dissolutions of the Provincial Councils—a weapon which no doubt , they would exercise as often as it held out a pros- : pect of advantage to their party. The great argument for provincialism was that it had entirely succeeded. For nearly three years, till his Excellency's arrival, there had been no central government in New Zealand—at least it was in such feeble and incapable hands as to be utterly powerless Yet never had the Provincoi made such progress The hon. member for Christchurch WO uld °deny that, and, taking, pe rh aps, Wellington f or h { 3 example, would w lt h an attorney's eye noint out a few technical f au l ts in the acj of Sat™" !3' \ ? WPParticulars. articulars 5" which they intruded on central functions; but was this to be set against ' the remarkable progress of the settlement, where miles upon miles of metalled roads had been made '■ where ship-load upon ship-load of emigrants had ' been imported, where a great mountain barrier had been cut through, aud access obtained to 300 000 acres of fertile land, where friendly relations between the races had been cemented, where the material pro.ress of the settlement had advanced with unequalled strides, aud where} above all provincialism had educated the people in those great principles, the soundness of which he was tnnfTf^ conclusion, the hon . msmber alluded to the attack made upon him by the hon member for the Hutt (Mr- Bell) on tl/ prev Vo US day, in reference to Ins opinion of Auckland, expressed m the « Six Colonies. » Had that attack proceeded only from the instability under which the hon member laboured in consequence of his impending defeat ne could have pardoned it, but it was evident that his object was, by sowing dissention between him (Mr. F.) and his Auckland friends, to prevent the formation of a new ministry. Such an attemnt he could only designate as wicked. But the hon member in the heat of Ivs anger came rusliino- in with his guard down, broke his weapon, and °the blow la.led of its object. He (Mr. Fox) stood before the men of Auckland as no skulking adversary; what he had said of them he had said in print, and he had always found that when honorable '' opponents ceased, their strife and knew each other tiiey became the better friends for theirpast hostility' The firebrand which that hon. member had cast among them, had quenched itself in its own smoke.

Mr. Richmond sa.d that after the brilliant display of debating talent the house had .just witnessed in the speech of the hon. member for Wanpanui (Mr Fox^ it was with great diffidence he rose to address the House on the very large questions of policy now before it. He had, indeed, a sound cause, but he SvX/ Ihe might injure it by his imperfect advocacy. He would state, as briefly as he could, the reasons why he should vote with neither section ot the opposition upon this amendment- The war cry of the section headed by his hon. friend the mover of the amendment (.Dr. Campbell) was, as he understood it,'men, not measures/ Now a great truth was implied in that maxim. He would not deny the necessity for moral confidence in public nu-n. But he would warn hon. members, who on tins ground had joined the opposition, of the difficulty ,„ which they will ha/c placed themselves. Sll W C? °-i the "i 00™B^"* of which they

pies of that very policy which they now pretend to | reject. They will be twitted with that very inconsistency by their present allies. The ground of the opposition of these hon. members was, as was well understood, the presence in the Executive of one ! particular member. Now he thought that an issue on this single point might have been raised in a Parliamentary way: but to him it seemed that the mode they had thought fit to adopt, was iuadmissable and most inconvenient to the country. But as this issue was substantially raised, he would apply to the particular member objected to, a criterion furnished by the highest, even the most sacred authority; he trusted he should not be deemed irreverent in so doing. It was said, 'Ye shall know them by their fruits.' Now applying this test to what he had witnessed of the public course, the fruit of the gentlemen objected to, he was bound to sayhe thought the objection had not sufficient foundation. But the proper question raised by the amendment was the great question of the Session " Provincialism or Centralism ? ' An extreme Provincialism or a moderate Centralism. And by a ' moderate Centralism,' he meant that degree of control over the Provinces, which'was provided for by the Constitution Act. Now Wellington aud Otago were in earnest in their opposition on this head. Theirs was a substantial opposition. He-held that '"Separatism' was possible in. the Middle island, however undesirable it might be. But in the Northern Island it was not undesirable merely; it was an impossibility. The large Native popuiatio,, consolidated of necessity the Provinces of the Northern Island. Seeing t en, that the separation of the Southern Provinces from the Northern and from each other might be possible, he whs glad lo find that on this occasion he should divide in company with every member here present from the Province of Nelson, and with the majority if not with the whole of the present s members for the Province of Canterbury. " Now, whether it was due to a certain more liberal tone of mind in the members of those two Provinces, or whether it was that to the southward of the Ninety mile beach, mere considerations of pounds, shillings, and pence, had completer sway than in any other portion of these islands—(as in Great Britain such considerations were supposed to be more powerfully felt to the north of the Tweed) from whatever cause it might be, he Tegretted to learn that the hon. members for the. Province of Otago were likely to range themselves with the opposition. He yesterday heard with great admiration;the speech of his hon.friend the Superintendent of Wellington. In that speech he reviewed fthe provisions fof the Constitution Act; commencing with the powers of the Provinces. Now, it appeared to him (Mr. It.) that, finding the Provinces invested with plenary powers of legislation on all bat the thirteen excepted subjects, that hon member thence inferred that the legitimate sphere of the General Legislature was restricted to those thirteen heads. He said the hon. member denied that; but such was the impression he left on him and such was, he knew, the doctrine of his party' whereas, in truth, the Provinces had a sphere of legislation which was legitimately peculiar to themselves—it was their ' Municipal sphere.' A"- a m, the Assembly had a sphere peculiar to itself ;°and' beside what was comprised within those two spheres there was a certain common ground—a debateable land, where Central and Provincial Legislatures rightfully had a current jurisdiction. 'And here he might just glance at a" point in the speech of the hon. member. Ue i a id it down that the General Assembly had no power to repeal the ordinances of the Provinces, They had had of late a crop of legal crotchets, such as never unfortunate country was afflicted with before. Every Province had its crotchety and this was the Wellington crotchet. He held it to be a. mere question of words. About the substantial fact, that no Provincial Ordinance could stand against an Act of the General Assembly, there could not be two opinions. So much as regarded the mutual relations of the Central Legislature and the Provincial Legislatures, and speaking of the relations of the Provincial Legislatures'to the Central Executive, it seemed to him that the hon. member in speaking of the Provincial Legislatures and the powers accorded to them, quite forgot the Governor's 'veto,' and qnile forgot the 31st clause, enabling the Governor to instruct Superintendents to reserve bills,—that 'abominable clause ' which his hon. friends could not bear to hear mentioned. The hon. member said that the provincial Legislatures had sucli and such powers, and he resented all interference with iiose poweis. But he choose to forget that thejGo vernor wasja component part, de facto, if not technically, of every Provincial Legislature. Now, the main feature of the policy of the hon. member for Christchurch, w t is the mode in which that share which ihe Governor had in these Provincial Legislative powers was to be exercised. To provide for this—to secure the exercise of the veto in conformity with the matured public opinion of the colony, aud with a due regard to its general interests—was one great object in the establishment of Responsible Government. But the hon. member for Wellington did not want to have it exercised at all—so he talked of tho proposals on this head of the present Government, as if they were an arbitrary and unconstitutional mv"*"* *-f <sfl<*

vested rights of the Provincial Legislatures. And here he would dispose of a fallacy of the hou. member for Wanganui. It .seemed extraordinary to him that the Executive should assume Legislative functions. He confessed he was surprised at this from the hon. member, just as if Legislative functions were not by the Constitution vested iti the Executive —that is, in the Governor —who, like the Crown in England, was at once the head of the Executive and one of the Estiites of Parliament. This was the ABC of Constitutional law. Now, in the address of the hon. member for Wellington, there ■was one point of great unfairness, in reference to the proposed, future relations of the General and Provincial Executives. He seemed to twit the hou. member for Christchurch with the difficulty of dealing with the Superintendents as respected the proposed delegated powers. There was, doubtless, a great difficulty here, which the Act had cast upon them. But he did hope, that when hon". members who were Superintendents of Provinces should have returned to their homes, and they had all cooled down from the heat of those debates, those.hon. members would not see their duty in the light in •which \t now appeared to the hon. member for Wellington. That great difficulty had three possible solutions. The first, that of the hon. member for Wellington, and his adherents. It was very simple and effectual, being merely the extinguishment of the Central Executive- The second solution, which was that which the lion, member at the head of the Government proposed to attempt, consistedin a loyal adherence to "the Constitution as given to them, without abnegation of functions by the General Government —a loyal adherence on the part of the General Government, and also on the part of the Superintendents. The third solution was that organic change for which he for one was prepared, and which he would demand, rather than see the Colony torn to pieces, the restoration of the Constitution to the form at first given to it in the British Parliament, which would vest the nomination of the Superintendents in the Ministry, or, in other words, in that House. Such a change would not in reality, be stripping the people of New Zealand of their franchises- He was as much a friend to popular government as any of the hon. members for the town of Wellington. The Superintendent of Wellington spoke witli dignified earnestness of his responsibility to the people. He 'magnified his apostleship. Let him do so, and he (Mr. It-) too, ■would magnify his. They all stood on that floor as Representatives of the people- He would not be a traitor to the power which sent him. there.' Bui should it prove, as the hon. member threatened,that there were two sets of men, both-claiming.to represent the people, whose conflicting wills rendered government impossible, then he would be for terminating the struggle in the way he .mentioned' Now, there was another great principle, the monopoly of which was claimed by lion, members in the corner behind the chairs (Messrs. Fcatherstone, Fox. and Pitzherbert)—local self-government. : He would not give this principle up to them. Was local salt'government done away within Saxon England when the Heptarchy happily merged in a United Kingdom? On the contrary, there was never a more perfect form of local -elf-government than the tythings or hundreds, which owed iheir origin to the same race. And if the New Zealand Hexarohy were destroyed to-morrow, they might still have a perfect Local Self-Government. Ultra Provincialism was not Local Self Government. He contended it,was rather opposed to a truly local self-government- These Provinces were very larg<s. Wanganui and Ahuriri were hundreds of miles from Wellington ; and he would ask if government by a Provincial clique at the chief town of a Province could, with' any propriety, be called local self-government? Wanganui had been made a municipality, but perhaps Wanganui might some day prefer to be a little less dependent upon the bounty of Wellington. There was another point of unfairness in the speech of the Superintendent of Wellington. He found fault with the acceptance by the hon. member for Christchurch of the terms respecting the Natives, contained in the Ministerial agreement with his Excellency- And as to its being improper in that hou. member to have accepted those terms without the sanction of the House, he and his colleagues had full right to do so on their own behalf ; and they now came down to the House with that address, to submit themselves, as ministers who had accepted those terms, to the judgment of the House, lie could not understand the objection to this course. He must, however, say that he considered the address, as moved, much too positive on that very difficult subject. The matter was one on which it was very hard to be quite definite. It seemed to him, for instance, possible, consistently with ihc- maintenance of a due Imperial control (and if possible, then it would be proper), to give some voice to the ministry in appointing and dismissing the officers of the Land Purchase department' He relied on his Excellency's good faith, and on his desire to meet the views of the Assembly, for a liberal interpretation of these terms; and as to the general principle jof reserving to the Governor an effectual voice in Native matters, he believed the members for the two northern provinces were to a man in favour of so doing. In conclusion.

he gave in ageneral adherence to the Ministry of the hon- member for Christchurch, reserving to himself a right to differ on details—especially on financial details. He believed, in matters of finance, :there was a general disposition to do justice to Taranaki, which could only be by treating her case as a special case. The hon. member appeared to him to possess that constructive ability of which the colony was in such need. There was no want of ability anddisposition to pull down. They had plenty of destructives, but they wanted a man who could build up. He honestly thought the hon. member the most statesmanlike man in the House. He believed that he could and would build up, and whilst he (Mr-LI.) continued in that belief, he would not leave him.

Mr.J. Cakgill spoke against, and Mr. Domett for the policy of the ministry, at some length ; then— Mr. Brittin rose and said it was not his intention to wade through the details of the policy of his hou. friend, the member for Christchurcli. His object in rising was to ask members to pause before they recorded their votes in opposition to the present Government: The house must remember that the hon. member the Superintendent of Wellington was not prepared to take office. Tne house must remember that the hon. member the Superintendent of Nelson was not prepared to take office. And should the hon. member for Wanganui, in conjunction with his temporary allies, succeed in dislodging the present Government, and should the hon. member be called upon to form a ministry, what would be the policy of that hon. member ? Why, that hon- member had publicly stated that he considered the jurisdiction of that house, and the functions of the General Executive ought to be limited to matters of a purely federal interest, and that the non-limhatiouof the powers of that house was the great blot upon the constitution. What did the hon. member come there for then? Did he come there to preserve the constitutional rights and privileges of that house ? No.- He came there to robit of its powers and prerogatives,, and to denude it of its legislative functions. He could never believe other than that the Home Government always intended that that house was to have a supreme overruling and controlling power over the Provincial Councils. And as a member of that house, lie should always look with a jealous eye to its privileges'and legislative powers- What'was the policy of his hon- friend the member for Christchurcli? Why, it was comprehensive and intelligible, pursuing thatbappy medium which would distribute the, legislative action of that house in such a manner, that the Provinces and their respective Councils would look upon it rather as a wholesome interposition, than an uncalled for interference- Such was the policy of his hon. friend, and he would support it, believing it to - 6 be in a perfect consonance with the Constirutiou Act, and best adapted to ..the welfare, of the Colony. What w..s the opposition to this policy ? W!sit a c'ountei policy ? No, —it was an opposition composed of the Wellington members and part of the 'Auckland members, banded together for the purpose of turning out the Ministry, in order that they might obtain their provincial wishes, or rather individual desires. The Auckland people did not care about the Wellington people,—and so far from the Wellington people caring about the Auckland people, why, if they got into power (said Mr. Brittin, pointing to the table) those blue books and the Speaker's chair would lie in Wellington within a month. Believing, then, the of his hon. friend the member for Christchutch to be destitute of any individual or provincial motives, and adapted to the general welfare of the Colony, he would support it. Mr. Hall said that, from the length to which the debate had already extended,'lie.-would not have troubled the house "with any remarks, did lie not feel deeply the responsibility of the vote he was about to give, and the necessity of assigning his reasons for it. He would therefore make a few observations upon portions of the policy proposed to the house by the hon. member for Christchurch- The relations agreed upon between his Excellency and his ministry, as stated by that hon. member, were not, to him, altogether satisfactory. He could not approve of the administration of native affairs being left entirely in the hands of the Governor. It was true that the military were supported from the Imperial Exchequer, and this might form a good reason for giving a veto in these matters 10 his Excellency, but not for retaining the whole administration in his own hands. W o uld\he outbreak of a native war affect only her Majesty's treasury ? W ou [ c l it, not also affect settlers in the Colony ? The hon- members for New Plymouth could answer that question. It was evident that property, peace, security, even the lives of the colonists and their families, might be sacrificed by the mismanagement of native affairs. That point had het'ii overlooked. Where the conseaequences to her Majesty's Exchequer might he counted by hundreds, those to the colonists might be counted by thousands. He thought, therefore, that the colonists might fairly ask for a larger share of .tli j managemement of native affairs than was now to be vouchsafed to them. At the same time he should be content to abide the proposed reference to the Home authorities- Several hon- members had

jeered at objections on personal grounds having been taken to the ministry at present formed. He must, nevertheless, repeat those objections- H e objected, not to the hon. member for Christchurch, nor to the hon-member for the. Hutt (Mr- Bell)—:o the talent and services of both of them he did ample justice. But he did think that it was a great mistake to include the acting Attorney General in the ministry. It was embodying a principle that would not be acceptable to the country, and would be the means of destroying the working of a ministry that otherwise might have worked satisfactorily. The offices of Speaker and Minister combined was to him a most objectionable feature- The position of Speaker of the Legislative Council, all would admit, should be filled by one of whose impartiality there could not be a doubt. It would now, however, be filled up by a gentleman who.se position was unavoidably that of an avowed partizan. With regard to the seat v>i' Government, he believed the hon. member'for Christchurch was quite right to leave it an open question- No ministry could well be constructed, the members of which would agree upon this point.With regard to the waste lands, the transfer of their, administration to the provinces was unavoidable. The question of the land revenue was one of great difficulty, the only way to get over which was boldly to face it, and to bring,to the consideration of the matter a spirit of conciliation and compromise. The members tor Auckland would, he was sure, admit the injustice of an arrangement "which took from the Middle Island the whole of its land revenue, created principally by the capital, the enterprise, and the industry of the Middle Island settlers, expending it either in paying the New Zealand Company's debt, or in making fresh purchases iv the Northern. Island. On the other hand lie was free to admit that the proposal to support the General Government exclusively from the customs' revenue, was one that would bear hardly on the Northern Island, which cot tributed the greater part of that revenue. It was a question which, so long as it .was unsettled would prove a serious obstacle to the harmonious working of responsible government. It was one which could only be satisfactorily disposed of by mutual concession. With regard to the New Zealand Company's debt, tie concurred in the desirability of a settlement upon the basis proposed by the Company. On the question of Land Scrip, he agreed that its application" might fairly be restricted as to time and locality. He would especially insist upon the latter, for the contract of the New Zealand Company, the basis of this scrip, could refer only to districis where the Company possessed land. Upon the question of relations between the General and Provincial Governments, he regretted that he could not agree with the hon. member for Christchurch. He could not <=cc thnt this question need be discussed on the basis of blind adherence to tiie Constitution Act, when the experience of the last three years must have suggested many valuable improvements in that Act. They owed loyalty to the givat principle it embodied, of the government of the people by the people themselves, but tiiay o.ved no adhereance to'the particular features of a measure which its framers themselves admitted to be only provisional. Sir John Pakington on the occasion of theAct being passed into law, s.iid that it was •*' a mere outline, which the colonists themselves mij;ht fill up as experience might suggest. " (The hon. member also quoted from the speech of Mr. Gladstone on the same occasion, to the same effect.) The lion. : gentleman deprecated the manifestations which had presented themselves, of undue jealousy of the Provincial Legislatures. Many peisons seemed forgetful of the difficulties under which these governments had been carried on—not the least of ■which was great uncertainty as to their powers and their financial resources. Nevertheless, it washy the Proviiici.il Governments that, for three years, the country had been actually governed. They iiad well performed that sacred duty—the political education of the people ; and had, he believed, contributed, within six months, more to the advancement of the colony than the old government had in six years. The past conduct of tnese governments entitled them to our gratitude, and argued \vull for the benefits which under a better system they would be the means of conferring on the people of New Zealand. -Of the hou member's policy, the word 'municipal' was the keystone, although now he would seek to escape iruin it. Tho hon. member for Christchurch would now use it iv an expanded sense, according to a aeliniiivu by Blackstone. In his opening speech it was y-kvii ">:l a restricted sense. His hon. colleague (Mr. lleh) iouk it according to its jicceptation by Sir lioSievi i'-'el. The variety of interpretation which would im \-.nt upon this word munieip:il, would be a fruitful st.urco of uncertainty and confusion. The subj-.vt.- tor legislation mis;lit be divided into threj ciasv.^— on the one side"subjects for the Gener.il Ass.-.no.iy exclusively to legislate upon ; on the other, si::>.;'-vs of an undoubtedly municipal charact-.-r; and r>.-!^>i the two, what mi'«ht be termed adybattw-ie On the flatter the Constitution .\cc :ilhj«.... tu:l powers to the Provincial Councils; awl hi1 i""|*'dered that, when any provhical bills «ur- lu'iow the General Executive, the point for n to coi.Maee was whether the subject was one with "hid pio\u_-

cial legislature hail a right to deal; and, unless \n exceptional cases, not whether the way in which thcv had legislated was good or bad. lhe hoii. member for Christchurch certainly did not say, ' don't legislate on these debateablo subjects;' but he said, '"when I get your bills I will send them round to the different provinces, and, when I get the answers, the General Assmbly will take them as the ground work of fresh legislation. What would be the practical result cf that course? Did the hon. member think that the Provincial Councils had nothing better to do than debate and agree upon measures which would never become law ; but serve as mere suesiestions for the General Government. This would be converting them to mere debating clubs. The provincial Legislatures had experienced difficulty Jenough in ascertaining whether many subjects" were actually within their jurisdiction ; the hon. member would now add to these difficulties. Hitheito, the-e bodies had only to be guideii by the ; law as laid down in the Constitution Act; now they j would have the additional consideration, what might i "be the hon. membei's opinion. He (Mr. Hal!) : would take the very measure that had been so often referred to—the Auckland Registration Act. The hon. member for Christchurch would send that bill round to the different provinces. Jn course of time he would receive contradictory opinions, and how these contradictory opinions could be made the basis of legislation for the whole colony was more than he could understand- Then, again, it was possible that the General Assembly might not meet oftener then once in two years ; and was necessary legislation to be deferred for that interval ? If it was really considered that the thirteen subjects excepted from the jurisdiction of the Provincial Councils were not enough let it he so decided. Let registration and oiher subjects be included, instead of saving, you mar legislate, but your leeisiation will probably go lor nothing; and those subjects upon which it was agreed that legislation should.be uniform, should be taken np by the General Government without trailing for suggestions from the Provincial Councils. He did not go the length of proposing abdication b}- the General Assembly of any of its legislative powers. He would maintain its authority unimpaired ; but -would advocate a practical division of the subjects for legislation, by the Genera! Assembly laying down a rule as to the particular subjects -which it wou!d deal with, and as to those which it would abstain from interfering with and leave to the Provincial Councils. A practically concurrent jurisdiction must lead, in the words of Mr. Gladstone, to " uncertainty, conflict, and confusion." Yfith regard to Executive matters, it was proposed, with the view of relieving the Provinces, to place a large number of depaTtmeuts on the general estimates. But it was evident that if this course would lessen the expenditure of the Proviuces, it would, by swelling the general estimates to an inordinate extent, reduce the Provincial revenue in an equal and probably in a greater ratio. It was said this system would havo the eifect of harmonising the work of the government in the Provinces; but, if anything was productive of want of harmony, it would be the fact of two distinct si-is of officers, side by side, in each Province. Then the Superintendent wa* to have.au increase of nominal power, and to be pluc'ed in the nattering position of being the representative of the Governor. But what •would be his aetnal position ? The Superintendent would have no real power—he would be a mere post-office—a medium through which the orders of the ColoniufSecretary ■would'be transmitted lo the various departments. Cases Tvoaldsoofl arise in.which thiTSuperiiitendentand the people ■who ejected him felt strongh" on one side, and the orders from the general government were to the contrary. Did hon. memliers expect that under such circumstances these orders would be carried but? The Superintendent would Tefuse to do so, and he would have good grounds for his refusal; he was not responsible to the general government, but to the people who elected him. If he bslieved these orders to be for the welfare of the country, lie would carry them out; if not, he would refuse to obey them. It had bien said thai such a system would break down in six months ; if actually attempted, he (Jlr. H.) believed it wou'd not last sis weeks ; and on their next assembling they ■would have their table covered with angry correspondence between, the Superintendents and the General Government. There was only one mode in which snch a system could ■work, and that was by altering the position of the Superintendents, aid making them nomkaed by the Governor instead of elected by the people. He felt sum the hon. member for Christchurch wokld be candid enough to admit that that was the tendency of his system. Were they pre]>aiud for such an alteration? What would the Superintendents say to it—-would they consent to hold their office en such terms instead of on their present far prouder tenure —that of a free and intelligent people? What would the peojla say to a proposal to deprive them of the right of electing their Superintendents? Would hon. gentlemen dare 10 go to tin; hnsuugs with surh a proposal ? He (Mr. H,) had, previous to his election, anticipated this division of the General Assembly into panics favourable to the centralization of power, ami the localization of power: he had then declared himself in favour of the latter principle, and should give his vote accordingly. While, however, he sboiiJd advocate, as he always had done, those principles of local si-if-govcrnment which he believed to be at lhe root of the gtmcesg of English Institutions, he would offer nothiug like a 'factious opposition to auy government, but -would, n oases where he was not compelled conscientious-ly to differ from tiirm, give them a c/ieerful aud wjliingsupport.