LEGISLATION AFFECTING NEW ZEALAND.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume VIII, Issue 669, 31 December 1851, Page 3

LEGISLATION AFFECTING NEW ZEALAND.

[From the New Zealand Journal, August 9.J HOUSE OF COMMONS. Thursday, July 24. About five minutes before two a.m., of Friday—that is, when the House had sat till two hours after midnight, Mr. Hawes applied for leave io bring in a bill for the arrangement ol claims of the New Zealand Company on the Crown and for regulating the affairs of certa : n settlements established by the Company in New Zealand. Mr. Gladstone represented to the Speaker that this being a bill for granting public money, ought to be introduced in committee of the whole House. He further objected to the bill, as proposing to saddle a charge upon the revenues of a colony in a manner without precedent in our colonial legislation, and at variance with all our pledges in regard to the colony. Mr. Hawes thought it all turned on aquestion whether New Zealand were at this moment a Crown colony. He (Mr. Hawes) contended that the constitution of that colony being at present suspended, it stood in the position it did before it received that legislative constitution, and, therefore, should be regarded as a Crown colony. The Speaker was of opinion that the measure should be referred to a committee of the whole House. Leave was therefore refused. Mr. Hawes then gave notice that he would proceed (at the next meeting of the House) by Committee. Saturday, July 26. Mr. Hawes moved for leave to bring in a bill for regulating the affairs of certain settle-

ments in New Zealand, established by the New Zealand Company.—Agreed to, Monday, July 28. On the order of the day for the second reading of the New Zealand Settlements Bill, Mr. Adderley suggested that at that hour (quarter past one) it would be prudent to postpone the bill. Mr. Hawes hoped that the House would read the bill a second time that night, because such objections as had been offered could be very well taken in committee. Mr. Brotherton (seconded by Sir J. Walrasley) moved the adjournment of the House. It was understood that opposed orders were not to be taken after one o’clock in the morning. Mr. Gladstone did not think it unreasonable in the hon, gentleman to desire to take the second reading that evening. But the objection to the first two clauses was an objection to principle. These clauses proposed to give unbounded powers to the local officers in New Zealand, and the hon. gentleman had not attempted to show any grounds for passing such a bill without, in the meantime, having communicated with the settlers whose interests were to be affected. Mr. V. Smith considered that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hawes) had shown no cogent reason whatever for bringing on so important a bill at so late a period of the session. He was opposed altogether to this bit-by-bit legislation for New Zealand, seeing that next session they would have to take large measures for that colony into consideration. The Chancellor of the Exchequer thought the objections of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) to the two clauses were not unfair. He would, therefore, propose to postpone these clauses.

Mr. Adderley—Did the right hon. gentleman mean to withdraw these two clauses altogether, or merely to postpone the discussion of them ? These clauses constituted the only important portion of tne bill ; and no advantage was to be gained by merely throwing over the discussion to some future stage. Mr. Aglionby said that the company had no knowledge of, or connexion with, or interest in the bi!!. He hoped, however, the right hon. gentleman would not proceed with these clauses without further consideration. There were people in England who held large properties in Nelson, and who ought to have a a voice in the arrangement. They had laid out £lOO,OOO in that settlement, and yet they were treated as if they had no interest whatever in the colony.

The Honse divided— For the adjournment 3 Against 51—48 Mr. Adderley then moved the adjournment of the debate. Mr. Hawes hoped thehon. gentleman would not persistin an opposition to the second reading The Government bad no interest in the matter whether the clauses were struck out or not. Mr. Gladstone was not aware of any special necessity f>r pressing forward these clauses. Some reason at least should be given for them, for the subject was of serious importance. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said if hon. gentlemen would allow the bill to be read a second time, he would communicate with his noble friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies early in the morning, and state his views respecting these clauses tomor:ow. It would be a nitv if that r-srt of the bill to which there was do objection were retarded. Mr. Adderley observed that the proper time for the right hon. gentleman to make such statement was on the motion for the second reading. The House divided— For the adjournment of the debate 17 Against it.. 34—17 The bill was then read a second time. Thursday, July 31. The New Zealand Settlements Bill, as amended, was considered, and agreed to. The Canterbury Association Bill was read a second time. Mr. Anstey gave notice that he would, early next session, make a motion for the abolition of transportation to New Zealand and Australia. Friday, August- 1. On the motion that the New Zealand Settlements Bill be read a third time. Mr. V. Smith said he was aware it was idle to attempt to oppose any bill at the present period of the session ; but he still should object to the hot haste with which the bill had been got through its previous stages. It was read a second time on Monday night last, or rather on Tuesday morning, at two o’clock. However, on that occasion, the House bad the valuable assistance of a right bon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) at present absent. The object of passing the bill at the present period of the session had never been explained by

the hon. gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies. He (Mr. Smith) did not see the necessity for pressing the bill just now, particularly seeing that the entire question of the New Zealand colony would be before the House next session. He would not divide the House on the question at that moment, bat he should enter his protest against it. Mr, Hawes thought he had explained the matter fully on a previous occasion. The Government, as a Government, cared nothing about the bill, which was introduced entirely to benefit the settlers. It was technically true that the settlers knew nothing about the bill; but he held in his hand a letter front two gentlemen who had been long resident in the Nelson settlement, and which contained an assurance of their entire acquiescence in the clauses as they stood. He hoped, therefore, the House would read the bill a third time, as, by doing so, they would in no way interfere with any question to be hereafter discussed as regarded the settlement. He had already stated his inclination to withdraw the second clause; and, therefore, hoped the House would not dissent. The bill was then read a third time. The Canterbury Association Bill passed through committee, and the various clauses were agreed to. Monday, August 4. The Canterbury Association Bill was read a third time and passed. HOUSE OF LORDS. Monday, August 4. After some remarks from the Duke of Newcastle, and a brief explanation from Earl Grey, the New Zealand Settlements Bill was read a second time. Tuesday, August 5. The Canterbury Association Bill was read a second time ; the committee was negatived, and the bill ordered to be read a third time : to-morrow. On the motion of Ear! Grey, the House went in committee on the New Zealand Settlements Bill. The Duke of Newcastle stated that he was desirous of knowing from the noble lord fEarl Grey) whether the words inserted in the first clause, at the desire of certain colonists now in England, would fully meet the object for which they were introduced—whether the word price, the special contribution which, in certain settlements, were paid as specific rates per acre for purposes not strictly included in the value paid for the land, would equally with the price of the land, be secured from alteration at the discretion of the Secretary of State. He (the Duke of Newcastle) had no doubt of the intention of the noble lord, and was of opinion that the object of the colonists was fully met ; but the assurance of the noble lord would set at rest some anxiety on this subject. Whilst he was on his legs, he felt called upon* to express his great satisfaction at the withdrawal from the present bill of clauses which originally formed its main feature, but whichhe considered liable to such grave constitutional objection, that both in that House and the House of Commons the strongest objections must have been offered to them—more especially at so late a period of the session. Had those clauses remained in the bill it was bis intention to have brought under the consideration of the House the whole question of the present state of New Zealand, particularly in relation to the suspended constitution. He deeply regretted that the noble lord had not endeavoured in the course of the n resent session to arrive at some settlement of these involved and difficult subjects; and he the more regretted it because, as regards the constitution, the noble lord at the head' of the Government had distinctly promised in the last session some measure in the present, He called upon the noble lord to take this important snbiect into his immediate consideration, and he hoped he would at the verv commencement of next session lay bills on the table both for settling the question of the constitution and those delicate questions connected with the sale of land and the claims of the New Zealand Company, which, in his opinion, could best be considered in conjunction with one another. He felt it his duty to state that, though abstaining now from any discussion upon the general subject, he should consider it incumbent upon him to draw the attention of the Honse and the Government to it at the earliest possible period after the next meeting of Parliament, if be were not, as he hoped he should he, anticipated by the introduction of satisfactory measures by the noble lord. Earl Grey said that he had no doubt that the words referred to by the noble duke Were amply sufficient for the purpose, and that the power of dealing with the price of the lands, whether in regard to special purposes or the value of the land itself, was effectually—he feared only too effectually for the interests of the colonists —restricted. With reference to the clauses which had been withdrawn, he could nut agree with; the noble duke that it

was an advantage to the colony that they were no longer in the bill; on the contrary, he apprehended much inconvenience from their withdrawal ; though, as he had informed the New Zealand Company, they could not be pressed if they were opposed. The bill then went through committee ; was reported without amendments, and ordered to he read a third time next day.

Wednesday, August 6.

The New Zealand Settlements Bill and the Canterbury Association Bill were read a third time and passed.