PARLIAMENTARY.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XV, Issue 150, 24 June 1880, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

Wellington, Wednesday. The House met at 2 30. Over a dozen petitions were presented from Otago, praying for a reduction of the bottle license. Mr Macandrew asked if the whole of the Civil Service Commission evidence will be laid on the table ; also returns showing the nature and extent of contracts entered into with contractors with which the Middle Island Commissioner of Railways is alleged to be partner. Mr Oliver replied that evidence had not been received from the Commission. Mr Brown moved an adjournment of the House, and in doing so insisted that it was only right the evidence in question should be before the House. Mr Gisborne concurred that the report was most alarming, and one the country bad a right to insist upon knowing whether it was based on reliable data. Mr Macandrew said the reply was not satisfactory. If the report was correct, the South Island Eailway Commissioner should be at once dismissed. Mr Oliver said it was to be presumed that some portion of the evidence would be produced, but it might not be proper to produce the whole. The Eailway Commissioner had been instructed to report, and his statement would be laid on the table. Mr Speight said this was one of the first results of Government by Commission. Parliament was entitled to have every particle of the evidence produced. He knew reliable evidence had been omitted, and they had a right to know the value of evidence taken as a whole. Mr Keeves concurred. Mr Murray could well understand tbat it would be unfair in many instances to divulge the nature of the evidence given. A Committee should be appointed to inquire into and report as to whether or not the report was based on reliable evidence. Mr Turnbull thought the demand made for evidence was somewhat premature. Mr Hall said the whole subject would have to be gona into when the report was brought on for consideration, and the discussion at present -was premature. He apprehended all the evidence would be , forthcoming. he Commission was entitled to credit instead of being reflected upon as some members had attempted to do. The report contained many valuable suggestions, although he I would not be prepared to say the Govern-

ment would be prepared to adopt the whole of these suggestions. Mr De Latour complained that the report had been supplied to certain newspapers throughout the colony before it was brought before Parliament. He concurred in the opinion that the evidence should be produced. Mr Seddon condemned the action sought to be taken us an unjustifiable attempt to interfere with the Government in its first efforts towards the much needed retrenchment. If the evidence was demanded, the names of witnesses should be suppressed. Mr Stewart quoted Parliamentary precedents to show that it was not the practice to produce such evidence. It was a point left to the discretion of the Government themselves. Mr Hutchison did not see that any good end would be served by producing the evidence, and condemned the action as an attempt to iuterfere Avith the Government in making much needed retrenchment. Mr M'Leau coucurred. Mr Eolleston said he had no doubt that the evidence would be forthcoming, and the fullest opportunity giveu to the officers implicated to rebut the charges made. Sir George Grey said the fullest possible information should be given, as the report reflected not only on the professional', but also on the personal character of servants. Major Atkinson argued that the debate had proceeded on a false issue. No one knew whether or not the Commissioners had or had not furnished copy of evidence to the officers implicated by the report. They were bound to assume that the Commission had taken every precaution to get the report, based on reliable evidence. Evidently it was persons and not the service itselt that members were solicitous about. The motion for adjournment was negatived on the voices. Dr Wallis gave notice that he would ask the Government to state at what time copies of the report were furnished for transmission to the Auckland Herald, Chrialchurch Cress, and Otago Daily Times, on Friday evening, The debate on the no-confidence motion was resumed by Mr Thomson, and was interrupted by the 5 30 adjournment, Thursday. The debate was continued by Mr Thompson, who urged that the land in the railway districts should be taxed to make up the loss on the railways. He strongly condemned the local rating proposal, and advocated borrowing, say half a million a year, for some time for public works in order to avoid too sudden a reaction. Mr Turnbull thought it a pity that there was not a strong Government able to grapple with the difficulties. All parties were ready to support one doing so, for they must retrench, and, if that did not make both ends meet, they must submit to fresh taxation. He would not sanction the cruel step of dismissing all the single civil servants at once, as all parties were responsible for the men being in the service, and it would be unjust and greatly aggravate the public distress to dismiss a lot at once. All salaries down to £200 should, however, be reduced from ten per cent downwards. He condemned free educatiou. The children of the colony were at present nursed in a Government cradle, educated ac the Government expense in the Government schools, supported and fostered in a Government office, and ultimately buried in a Government coffin, It was time to put a stop to such a luxurious state of affairs. The debate was then adjourned, and the House rose at 10.30 In the Legislative Council the Moorhouse Recognition Bill was thrown out by 19 to 9.