PARLIAMENT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue III, 4 August 1891, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. FRIDAY, JULY 81. The House met at 2.80 p.m. Mr Duthe moved the adoption of the report of the Select Committee on the Wellington Electric Lighting Bill, disagreeing with the amendments proposed by Mr Kennedy Maodonald. Mr Fish moved the adjournment of the debate till Tuesday which was agreed to. The Minister of Defence said the Government recognised the absolute' necessity of ameudments being made in the licensing law with regard to Sunday 4 trading, but there was no chance of it being carried out this session. They had, however, given instructions to have the present law maintained, as it should be, in the : interests of the general public. Th Minister for lands moved the second reading of the Selectors' Lands Revaluation Continuance and Amendment Bill. It was desired, he said, to continue the Act of 1889, which expired on the Ist of January last, to enable selectors on the'goldfields to get their holdings re duced in value. A clause was also inserted to provide against trumpery cases being brought before the Land Boards, by it being necessary to pay a deposit before revaluation, which was to be forfeited if tbe case was not worthy of attention. The Bill was read a second time on the voices, and referred to the Waste Lands Committee. The Hon. Mr Cadman moved the second reading of the Counties ,Act Amendment Bill. It was, he said, the most radical introduction in which was the one man-one- vote system, and when they examined the; plural system of vetting he thought thepropasal would meet with the consent of tl^e House. If they should eventually agree to perpetuate plural voting he hoped they would not, allow 1 a person to have more than two votes. The Act also allowed subsidies to be ' made to fire brigades, and in regard to .loans, absent voters were not reckoned, and a majority of three fifths was sufficient to. carry the proposal .of a. . loan. . Readjustment of representation every three years was also provided for. Mr R. Thompson thought the Bill was a. very dangerous one, and said it was a pity the hon. member Had tried to introduce the one-man-one -vote system* . " t v The Hon. Mr Bryce argued in favour of plural votes in local selfgovernmenjb, thinking that ihe larger a man's interest in the payment of rates, the more voice he should have in their expenditure. The Bill might be useful enough in other respects, but he thought the Minister knew very well this proposed new system was dangerous, and so far as his (the speaker's) experience went, it was exceedingly unsound, and he was very sure it would come out unsatisfactorily in practice. : Mr Houston, said he should not be doing his duty if he did not enter his protest against the proposed - nbw system of " one-man-one-vote," which would be greatly against the interests of local bodies. ! ' ■ ' \Th» Minister for Public Works said that under the plural system of voting the ; -whole pf country revenues fw.ere expended in the vicinity of the i large properties; whose owners, at present had' command of the local bodies. The owner of a large property would by his plurality of votes ■be enabled to override the opposing wishes of those whose- interests were - etjual te'his own. Legislation should prevent such a state of things, 1 and npt assist it, and this was a step in the right direction. I Mr Bucklarid expressed his opinion that the last speaker knew nothing

whatever of the subject, and said he must have derived his knowledge from towns, and nqfcfrom the country districts. The latter were remarkably well represented, the old system had worked very satisfactorily, and he should oppose any change being made. . . ... ■ ..-,... .-™ Colonel Fraser opposed the one-man-one-vote system, and lie. also objected to the creation of new counties, thinking ttfat the present districts were too many and too Small. Mr Taylor supported the Bill. Mr Ehodes would vote against one-man-one-vote; Mr Buchanan opposed the Bill, and Mr W. 0. Smith spoke strongly in favour of it. Mr Fish could not support the system of one man one vote in counties and municipalitiess although it might act all right in regard to general elections. Mr Macintosh supported the Bill although he did not see the necessity for one man having only one vote, thinking that the number >os. votes should be limited, say, to three, in;-; stead of five. . ■..;.. _• : Mr Valentine said this was the first measure the Governmnt had introduced this session which had been condemned by their supporters from start to finish^ ' '. .. : ; . ■■. ' Mr Meredith said he thought the present arrangement : of voting hail given general satisfaction in country districts.' The Bill apparently was. an experiment, but.if, tjie Govern- ( ment wanted to make- eixpißtuncfnte they should do so with a town district, say Wellington, or Dunedin, or Auckland. He could not, as it stood, support the second reading of the Hill. .■..--. „,...• Mr Hogg would support the Bill. They had had too much of- this plural voting, of this class legislation, and he hoped members who had been returned under the new system would not forget the people to whom they owed their seat in that House. . ; • Mr Duthie said there was no call from any part of the country for the Bill, or for any ohange in. t^e, voting system. He hoped such an expert* > nient would not be tried m; felling,- > ton, and he was sure no one wantgd } anything; of the sort. „ , ; f , : ■ , •- , , : . , , Messrs 0. H: Mills and Carnorpss j ■supported the Bill, with: some modifications. .-■.:■<.'/. •:'.•• .».'! »■: The debate was continued fey Messrs Moore, Blake, Buick, Harkness, W. Kelly; Lawry, Jv Kelly,; and; > W. Hutchison. : ; Sir George Grey, expressed his entire concurrence with the principle of ■" one man one vote,"; but at that late hour of ;the night (Ig.SOJJie had,,, no hope of bringing .members to. his way of thinking. It would probably take a year, or two wore to do that. He should give his vote in, support of the Bill. . . .., The Hon Mir Bolleston said the Bill was a very poor one indeed. One or two clauses were very bad, some were useful, and there were a good many ot no 1 particular account. With regard to the one-mari-one-yote clause there was not a member sitting on the Government Benches who believed in it one little bit. It was simply a gallery clause, and was not worth the attention it, had received. The Bill; as it stood!; was a discredit, arid ahowfid Jihat Ministers -did not really understand the wants of the oountry. ■ • The' Native Minister, keenly, saidf he was rather pleased with they* criticisms on jthe. .JjJill,,, seeing that almqst the only clause, object , .to >•, was the one relating to the change „ rin the voting, fystem. T^e ',disous- ' sion,woui4 altfio,ugh. e^ery- f . one ; wpuJ4hot, perhaps ? ajj onqe^oe .'■ i satisfied./ He pointed out ''fss "" of the plural vote, .sayin^t^at.ni'aiiy of ihe -counties. jve^e absolutely' .* up because "the" votes .'of the lajge' .'l 'landowners enabled them to reject any applicaiiOEjs- for loans' l tb il! 6iredb ! improvements in the district. If the * Bill' rectified • several' techfiica'Mlies^ I i' and if.it were .thrown , put . ti > /QnJd . put looal ' ' bodies ■ t6 l gimt' • moon-^ venience and expense.- He hoped the second reading wduld be pressed, apd as to the "one-inab^one^roteHuil clause he was quite in the; hands of the House when in Committee. The second reading of the Bill was agreed to on the voices, /i I L ■>: . ,-; The House rose at 1.20.