LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 617, 2 July 1851, Page 2

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Thursday, June 26, 1851. The Council met at the usual hour Aft prayers the Building Societies Bill was re d second time. 1 MUNICIPAL elective franchise bill. The Attorney General of New Zealand j. moving the second reading of the bill, sa jj that it might be desirable that he shouldstate to the Council the reasons which had led ig its introduction. It might be within thei’r knowledge that by the Royal 1846, providing for the establishment of Municipal Corporations, it was prescribed that the franchise should not belong to. or be vested in, any person not able to read and to write in the English language. But that by the Suspending Act, 11 Vic., c. 5, th e Governor-in-Chief, with the consent of tbe General Legislative Council, was empowered to depart from such Instructions, in so far as tbe same might relate to the nature and extent of the elective franchise, and to make such other regulations with respect to such Municipal districts, or to any of them, or as to any particular case, as might seem desirable. The Council were also aware that it was intended immediately to establish mo. nicipalities in various parts of the colony; and the question had arisen, was it desirable to make any alteration in the franchise as fixed by the Royal Instructions. Now, io Nelson, and in other parts of New Zealand, there were naturalized foreigners who possessed property and intelligence, and who were otherwise qualified in every respect to exercise the power of voting at the electionof members for such Municipal districts, but who were not able to read and to write in the English language. Was it desirable that such persons should be denied any share io such political privilege? If not, then, as to them at least, such disability should be removed. It would probably be found, also, that in some cases that certain of the natives, in an advanced state of civilization, would also be found to reside in some of these Municipal districts, and should they, though having the other necessary qualification, be debarred from any participation, merely because they could not read and write in tbe English language?— more particularly when statesmen were agreed that the exercise of the elective franchise in a municipality was, if not a necessary, at least the best preparatory training for the exercise of other political powers. He thought, therefore, that tbe Council would agree with him as to the expediency of dispensing with such a qualification in the particular class of cases to which he had referred. But there were reasons which bethought would satisfy the Council that the qualification in question should be dispensed with altogether. They had virtually passed a bill which did not make Ji necessary at the election of members of ibe Provincial Councils that the voter should be able to read and write in the English I® o ' To continue sucli an inferior tribunal would be almost an absurdity. And when they called to mind t a by the bill to which he had already referee it had not beda provided that even a himself of the Provincial Council shorn possessed of the ability to read and to * rl in the English language, the absurdity become still more apparent of requiring ability in an elector for a Municipal C or P or ,| tion. And when he reminded the Cou that some of his hon. friends—mem ers the supreme legislature ofNewZealan 7', no later than yesterday admitted the di they found in understanding tbe Eng IS guage, he thought they would see then sity of immediately and entirely rem o ? 1 disability imposed upon the electors ° cipal districts by the Royal lu s t rUC present in force, The bill then be °

contained but a single clause, which enacted that every person within a Municipal district, otherwise qualified as by law required, should be deemed to be a burgess of such district, and entitled to vote at the election of members to serve therein, though he should not possess the ability of reading and writing in the English language. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cautley, and the bill read a second time. REGULATIONS FOR DEPASTURING CATTLE. The Colonial Treasurer moved that the Regulations for depasturing cattle in outside Hundreds be read and considered. In answer to some objections to the second clause

Sir George Grey said that objections of various kinds might exist to granting applications, such as the land might not belong to the Crown, or the Government might not consider it safe to allow the district to be occupied, on account of native disputes. If the ’ Commissioner decided wrongly the applicant J could always appeal to the Executive Council. J He considered the Commissioner would .in I some measure act as the adviser of the applicant, and would inform him of the objections which existed to his application, but it would be impossible in a regulation to prescribe the different modes in which objections to applications should be stated. The Colonial Secretary of New Zealand said the course pursued at Auckland was that the objections to granting an application were always placed before the Governor to state whether they were valid or not, which in fact constituted the appeal. A considerable discussion arose on the sixth clause as to what would be considered a sufficient amount of stock for a run. Captain Smith proposed as a limit the probable increase within five years. Mr. Cautley thought the run should carry eight or ten times the | original amount of stock placed on it. I Sir George Grey was unwilling to see these I words inserted in the clause; sufficient powers | should be given to the Commissioner and to I the Government, as the inhabitants of one i district might entertain different views from j those of another. He was not prepared to ■ say that five years was not too long a period, g He had received applications from stockholders ■ in the neighbouring colonies, and as soon as I these Regulations were promulgated a large I amount of stock would be sent down which I would produce a large amount of wool, and | add greatly to the wealth of the colony. g In answer to an observation by Mr. Cautley Sir George Grey said he had assisted in ~ the administration of these regulations for g many years in the neighbouring colonies, and j had never known any disputes arise or any j complaints from applicants of having been un- | fairly treated. In new districts persons would £ take care to keep as far apart as possible. | The Colonial Secretary of New Munster | objected to see the whole country monopolized i by a handful of persons ; in dealing with the I land they were virtually giving it over to them, j! He thought it would cause great dis.-aiisfac-jtion if it were understood the increase of stock j was to be calculated for a period of five years. J He considered it should be the object of Go's vernment to get not as many sheep but as | many persons as possible in the colony, and |that it was less desirable the country should | be occupied by a few large holders who would jderive large fortunes from their investments, | than by many persons with moderate means, j After some further observations by Captain |Smith, Mr. Cautley and Mr. Bell | Sir George Grey considered on an average |an allowance of three years increase to be faFr, S nt objected to fixing a maximum which it would be difficult to ascertain. He did not • think any improvement could be made in the gi® ause as it stood, and considered it would be Better for the central Government to indicate I' 1 ® course to be pursued, leaving the details j o be carried out by the Provincial Govern- |, en , who would have in many instances to decide on the merits of each case. the Council then divided on the amendment for allowing an increase of five years on " e ori S* na l stock in estimating the amount of ffl ° C,O kie run . There appeared for the IdivH d ! ment 3 ; against k 1 °" The Council I am de< °° a second amendment limiting the a ° Ui ? t t 0 tbree years 'ucrease. For the endment 3 ; against it 10. iM P \ anSWer , t<) an observation by an hon. I member on the next clause ® re y sa ‘ d it became a question Un or i^ eW Zea ' and was t 0 be occupied by ered tn IS'Fl S 'F ’ and k lbe ormer was considI to th* o desirable > some power should begiven ■Jshe p t„ rnment t 0 allow men as well as JCover n P T Py J he C ° Untr y- The Home i si oners be advised to seud °ut penIsettlem’pni T y deterrain e°n forming another |p°wersBimii Ut U i“ leSS lhe Governor had lhe Would 1 lo , l bo s e conferred Ly this clause hys be an eUnab , letOacl - There would al|be resi ra ; n ? P ? ea to Government, who would | tl ‘ ecl[ «f |mWiro™i„“'„ i " 8 imi,r ° pcrly bylhl!

In answer to a question by Mr. Dillon, referring to the clause as to the sale of any homestead bir George Grey said lhe right of pre-emp-tion was allowed in new districts, but it would be wrong to give to the holder of a run, by running a fence over the land, a right to extend the value of his improvements- over the whoie of that land. On the other hand, if he wanted only ten acres, he could have it. mr- i>- ii .t. i . ... . , .ui. uen iiiougiii it wouiti ue uetter to nave a fixed upset price ; if that were known it would practically have the same effect as selling by auction. It was a question much mooted by sheep farmers to know at what price they could buy their homesteads. It might sometimes happen they would find a difficulty in finding money for the purchase. Sir George Grey was of opinion that purchasers would always be able to obtain money without any difficulty on the security of the land. There was an objection to a fixed price, if the price was not fixed and the land was to fall in value, the price would be reduced. Some further discussion arose on the remaining clauses when the subject was postponed to Tuesday. PROVINCIAL COUNCILS BILL. The Council then went into committee on Provincial Councils Bill, when amendments were proposed to clauses 32 and 34, which were agreed to.

Sir George Grey laid before the Council a letter he had received from the Resident Agent of the Canterbury Association, applying to have that settlement proclaimed a separate Province, and stated the purport of his answer, which he promised to submit to the Council at their next meeting. (Both Mr. Godley s letter and his Excellency’s reply were published in Saturday’s Spectator.) Sir George Grey said, before the report on this bill was brought up, he wished to make a few observations, as his intentions were much misunderstood, and from the remarks that had fallen from the Lieutenant-Governor a prejudice had been unjustly raised against the bill. A kind of complaint had been made that he had not done any thing, but he had never received any representation on the subject of representative institutions from the Lieute-nant-Governor of New Munster and his Executive Council ; no plan had been traced out and submitted for his consideration ; he (Sir George) was here a Government officer with but limited powers. Persons were often in the habit of saying the Governor ought to do so and so, but he should remind them he had no power left to proclaim New Provinces; authority had been given to him to proclaim two provinces, and there'his authority ceased. The Queen had positively instructed him to proclaim two provinces, and to appoint certain officers, and since this mistake had been fallen into, he had, so long ago as October 1549, written home in these words. (His Excellency here read extracts from his despatch to Lord Grey, published in our last number. He then continued). From these extracts it would be seen that, nearly two years ago, he had made preparations for making these Provincial Councils large municipalities, and he thought it right that this should be known in order that his objects should not be misunderstood. It was supposed by some persons that this measure was something less liberal than would be leceived from home, but he had no wish to press this specific measure, or any other measure on the colonists. He had recommended to Ministers, at the same time that constitutions were granted to the Australian colonies, to introduce the same or a similar meastire into New Zealand. Owing to some delay in its transmission, that despatch which was sent by him in November 1849, instead of arriving in February, before the commencement of the Parliamentary session, did not reach England till April, and lie therefore found that Representative Institutions had not been introduced. He then remembered a delay of several years had Occurred in introducing a Constitution in Australia from similar causes; and in proposing the immediate introduction of this measure he had been induced to do so from a desire to prevent similar delays, in the case of New Zealand. He had no desire to force what he believed to be a real benefit on an unwilling people. He had to the best of his ability prepared the present measure. The Council might, if they thought proper, withhold their assent to it at this present stage or at the third reading. If the bill was not passed he should feel sorrow, because he believed it would be a great benefit to the country, he should also feel sorrow that he had not been allowed to introduce Representative Institutions in New Zealand, but this would be a sorrow of a personal kind. He had no wish to force this measure on tlie Colony at the present time, but from recent events in England he felt certain that nothing would be done this Session, and if it were rejected perhaps a delay might occur of two, three of eVen more years in the introduction of Representa- ’ live Institutions. '

lhe Attorney General of New Zealand then brought up the report of the Committee on this bill, which was adopted. Sir George Grey laid on the table the draft of Crown Lands Amendment and Extension Bill. Sundry notices of motion were given and the Council then adjourned.

Friday, June 27. MARRIAGE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE. lhe Colonial Secretary of New Munster presented a memorial from the Piimitive Methodists of Wellington, proving the extension to their body of the‘privileges granted by the Marriage Ordinance to other religious bodies in the colony. The Colonial Treasurer, in moving the second reading of the Marriage Amendment Ordinance, said that since the first reading of this bill he had taken care to inform himself of the precise difference- between the Marriage Ordinance of this colony and the law relating to marriages in England, and he found that this difference was very material so far as regarded the interference of the legislature in cases of this sort. The English Act, saving the rights of the Church of England, founded the legality of the marriage on the validity of registration, which was not the case in this colony. For this reason he objected to the principle of the. Ordinance, and objected to this amendment of it, but if the Ordinance were to stand he thought this amendment would improve it. 1 he Attorney-General of New Zealand had great pleasure in seconding the motion; and in doing so begged to be allowed to say a few words in explanation of the circumstances which had led to the bill being introduced into the present Council. About four years ago, an ordinance was passed for regulating marriages in the colony of New Zealand, having simply for its object the prevention of hasty and clandestine marriages by persons under age, without the consent of their parents or guardians. It was found that the solemnization of marriage, according to the usages of the Churches of England and Rome, and of Che persons of the Jewish persuasion, and of the people called Quakers, had for many years been conducted under a system

which, as to England, was deemed by Parliament to afford sufficient safeguard's against such secret marriages, and therefore it had not been thought necessary by the Colonial Legislature to interfere with the ancient usages of those several communities • and the representatives of those communities in New Zealand were accordingly left, by the ordinance referred to, to continue in the use of them. But for all other religious denominations who had no such established or recognized usages, one uniform system of marriage by licenses to be granted by registrars had been prescribed. And no other object was contemplated by the meastire in question than that due publicity should be given of all intended marriages. At the time of its enactment, no material objection was raised to it by the religious denominations whom it more

immediately affected; but when the ordinance had been for some time in operation, and during the last session of the General Legislative Council, memorials were addressed to the Legislature from the Wesleyan Body, and by the Presbyterians, complaining that the power of granting marriage licenses had been denied to their ministers, while it had been granted to lhe ministers of the Churches of England and of Rome, and that an invidious distinction had been thereby created. As the Government had no desire whatever, in framing that ordinance, to make any such distinction, but simply to devise the best general, system of preventing secret marriages, he (the Attor-ney-General) had taken the opportunity of unequivocally disclaiming any such intention; and further, speaking for himself, he had said then, and he said now, that believing the true value of a church to consist not in its bricks and mortar, its tithe and its church-rate, but in the power of its moral and spiritual influence for good, that he believed it to be beyond the power of this Council, or of any legislature in the world, to confer any “invidious distinction,” worthy of the name, Upon any chtirch whatever. And so far was he then, and was he now, as a member of the Church of England, from desiring to aggrandize the church to which he himself belonged, by monopolizing the wealth and honor of the State, that, if he were wicked enough to desire to destroy the spiritual vitality of any religious community, he would ally it closely with the State—he would bestow worldly honors on its dignitaries—provide rich sinecures for its ministers —and confer invidious distinctions on its members. But although he was by no means unfavourable to the prayer of the memorialists, he was, for a reason which appeared to him to be a valid one, opposed to the introduction at that particular time, of a bill to amend the ordinance complained of. For he could not but think that it was, oil every account, most objectionable to introduce, in

the middle of a session, a measure of any importance, the provisions of which had not been previously published—of which the public had no knowledge—and of which they had had no opportunity of forming an opinion, orof representing their views upon it to the Legislature. Pie had, however, on the occasion in question, sketched out the outlines of a measure, for giving effect to the wishes of the memorialists, which at some more fitting opportunity might be prepared for the consideration of the Council ; and he had pledged himself, that if he should be a member of any Council into which such a bill should be introduced, to give it his support. No sooner at an end than, at the instance oi His iLxcellency, he (the Attorney-General) prepared the draft of a bill for giving to the Wesleyan Body and to the Presbyterians, the same power of granting marriage licenses which the Churches of England and Rome had long possessed under their own ecclesiastical laws. Publicity was immediately given to the bill in the Government Gazette; and during the period which had elapsed since its publication, no objection had been made, so far as he was aware, to the provisions it contained. That bill was then before the Council, and in fulfilment of his pledge, he (the Attorney-General) cheerfully and willingly gave it his support, and had great pleasure in supporting the motion for its second reading.

Sir George Grey wished to explain to the Council a mistake into which the Colonial Treasurer had fallen in contrasting this measure with the law of England; The main feature of the English marriage law rests on registration, the New Zealand bill also rests on registration as proof of the validity of marriage. The Government then had to decide who were to be the registrars, and who were to keep the records of marriages. There was a strong feeling in the great mass of British subjects in favor of being married by clergymen, and probably no better plan could be adopted than to make those celebrating marriages the keepers of the registries which afforded the proof of lhe validity of those marriages. The Government simply maintained the marriages should be registered, and in effect said to a congregation, having chosen that minister for your convenience we will appoint him registrar. All the Government required was, that in some part of the ceremony the parties to be married should declare, in the presence of the registrar, that no lawful impediment existed to their marriage, and should use certain words. The Government only required those words to be used, and that the marriage should be regis- ; tered, and offered that tho minister of the congregation should be the registrar. The Colonial Secretary of New Munster wished to point out the great difficulty on the part of Government of deciding who are Ministers of congregations. Possibly when the Marriage Ordinance was introduced Government should have taken upon itself the duty of enforcing the civil part of the contiact, leaving the different bodies to manage the religious part. At that time rhe privileges allowed to the Churches of England and Rome were those they enjoyed in England, but since the bill had come into operation he should take it, as a matter of fact, the Ministers, as well as their congregations, would prefer that these privileges should be continued. He considered his Excellency’s argument good to a certain extent, but it was hardly sufficient to. justify the present principle, but as that principle was now adopted/ he considered the best course would be to extend it and make the measure as liberal as possible. On the motion of the Colonial Treasurer Council went into committee on this bill. The title and preamble having been read an amendment was proposed on the first clause by the Colonial Treasurer.

Sir George Grey observed that clergymen having the power to issue licenses who were under arecognised head in the colony, if they performedtheir functions improperly were accountable to that head, and he considered it would not be expedient to vest this power in clergymen not having a recognised head. The members of the Church of Scotland agreed it would not be proper to give this power to any clergyman without a recognised head to prevent his exercising this power improperly. The consideration of preamble and three first clauses after some further discussion was then deferred. Clauses 4 to 8 read and agreed to. „ The Colonial Treasurer proposed to strike out the ninth clause, he wished to afford every facility consistent with regularity of proceeding, but he thought this clause would, in its operation, be productive of dangerous consequences. The Colonial Secretary of New Munster objected to striking out the clause. Mr. Bel! and Mr. Dillon were also opposed to the Colonial Treasurer’s amendment, and considered this lhe only uselul clause in the bilh Sir George Giey exposed a fallacy of the the Colonial Secretary of New Munster, in

his objection to the principle of the bill, and said that as no principle was applicable without some change to the varied circumstances of life, the very objecli .n urged proved the applicability of tlie principle. In a young colony like this, congregations would in many parts of the country be often small, and the objects of the bill, if carried out, were so simple as to prove its utility. . , Tbe Colonial Treasurer thought if this were the only clause in the bill it would be very useful, but as the bill at present stood, it would be better omitted ; he considered tbe danger to be not in granting the privilege, but in taking it away, should circumstances afterwards render such a course necessary; as persons living in the interior of the country who were informed of the appointment of ah individual as officiating Minister might not be made acquainted with the subsequent withdrawal of his appointment. Sir George Grey said they had been told this was the only useful clause in the bill, but be would remind the Council that under the existing law he might appoint Deputy Registrars, and the Colonial Secretary had written to Ministers of different denominations offering, on the part of Government to appoint them; in reply to bis offer some Ministers had consented to be named, others had indignantly refused. It would shew great ignorance of the prejudices of human nature to force persons to accept an office against their inclination; if they wished to be liberal they should not enforce their liberal measures in a tyrannical manner. As soon as objections were raised to the Ordinance, he might appoint registrars but he could not compel them to serve. He (Sir George) had offered to create the Ministers Deputy Registrars. Tbe Council might, if they pleased, pass an Act compelling him to play the tyrant, but in that case they must also enact penalties, as banishment or imprisonment, on clergymen who should refuse to serve.

The Colonial Treasurer’s amendment was not seconded, and after the consideration of the remaining clauses of the bill the Committee adjourned. MUNICIPAL ELECTIVE FRANCHISE BILL. , On the motion of the Attorney General of New Zealand the Council went into Committee or. the Municipal Elective Franchise Bill: the several clauses having been considered the Committee adjourned, and their report was brought up and adopted. Sir George Grey laid on the table a letter from Mr. Tollemache relating to the claims to compensation by the absentees ; also, a copy of a Correspondence between the British Government and the East India Company on the subject of Steam Communication to the Australian Colonies. Several notices of motion were given and the Council then adjourned.