PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4476, 24 July 1875, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Friday, July 23. The Speaker took the chair at half-past two p.m. PETITIONS. Several petitions and papers were presented. NOTICES. Various notices were given, one being by Mr. McLean of his intention to move, on Tuesday, for leave of absence for Mr. Tolmie. NEW MEMBER. Mr. Ballance, member for Rangitikei, was introduced, and took the oath and his seat. QUESTION OP PRIVILEGE. In reply to Mr. Wakefield, Sir D. McLEAN said the Government had not authorised the statements in the public prints as to the details of the new constitution Bill. No Government could be answerable for what appeared in the papers. THE BANK ACCOUNT. Mr. PYKE asked the Colonial Treasurer whether he had any objection to inform the House (1) What amount of money is at present lying in the Bank of New Zealand and its agencies to the credit of the Government ? (2) What rate of interest is being paid by the Bank of New Zealand thereupon ? The Hon. Major ATKINSON replied that so soon as the address in reply • was disposed of, all information on the subject would be afforded, as the Financial Statement would then be brought down. RAILWAY -WORKS. Mr. WAKEFIELD interrogated the Minister for Public Works as to whether the Government had received information respecting the practicability of constructing a road or railway of the lowest watershed between the head of the Taupo Valley, Porirua Harbor, and any stream flowing into Cook Strait, near Pukema. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON replied that no information had reached the General Government yet. If the Government received the information, it would be laid before the House. Mr. O’NEILL asked .the Minister for Public Works what steps, if any, had been taken since last session towards the formation of a railway between the Waikato and the Thames districts. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON replied that no further action had been taken. Mr. McLEAN, without notice, asked the Colonial Treasurer whether the agreement between the Bank of New Zealand, mentioned on page 25 of the four million loan correspondence, was still in force ; what rate the Government drafts from England cost ; and at how many days’ sight are the drafts drawn. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said if the question were put in proper form he would answer it. BILLS INTRODUCED. By the Hon. Mr. Bowen ; A Bill to amend the Stamp Act.—By Mr. Bunny : A Bill to provide for the extension of the Queen’s Wharf, Wellington ; second reading, Thursday week. —By Mr. Pyke : A Bill to authorise the Municipal Council of Queenstown to raise money for the purpose of constructing waterworks ; Wednesday week.—By Mr. Merten : A Bill to amend the Goldfields Act, IS6G ; second reading fixed for Wednesday week. In introducing the Bill the hon. member stated that the object of it was to supply the want of a measure to afford compensation to pastoral tenants of the Crown who were deprived of their holdings for goldmining purposes. ORDERS OP THE DAY.—IMMIGRATION INDEMNITY BILL. The House proceeded to consider a resolution adopted in committee the previous day, and the Immigration Indemnity Bill was read a first time ; second reading made an order of the day for Tuesday. ADDRESS IN REPLY. The adjourned debate on the address in reply was resumed by Mr. MURRAY, who criticised the railway policy of the Government, and contended that the construction of cheap railways was not the best mode of introducing railways to the colony. With regard to the mail service contract, he could not see why the agency of Mr. Russell should have been necessary when they had an Agent-General and a PostmasterGeneral, Mr. Vogel, in England. He was dissatisfied with the arrangement made, believing it would he found very expensive, and was not pleased with the negotiations for a cable. He believed the £1,000,000 loan had been so negotiated that it would only yield 83 to 89 to the colony, and it was clear that the loan had either been grossly mismanaged, or the credit of New Zealand had vastly depreciated. In reference to the provincial question, he thought it should be deferred till the next Parliament ; and if the Government would promise not to pass the measure through its final stage this session, he would give them his support. (A laugh). Mr. McGILLYRAY urged the adoption of the address without more hair-splitting, and deprecated the condemnation of measures before they were submitted. Mr. THOMSON supported the adoption of the address, and felt he could do so without committing himself to expressing approval of all the matters mentioned. If he felt otherwise, he should not vote for its adoption. The perusal of the four million loan correspondence had created an uneasy impression' upon his mind, and lie did not believe in the measure of abolition. He animadverted strongly upon the indecent haste with which the late Premier had posted off to England after the close of last session, and expressed the opinion that the Government was well aware of the fact that he would not be back. He criticised the appointment to the office of the Minister of Justice, a gentleman who was unknown to the House and unknown to the country, and regretted that opposition was weakened by the conduct of certain gentlemen who had changed parties. He hoped that the Government would rigidly adhere to their programme, and not trim as they did last session, Mr. WILLIAMS should vote for the adoption of the address, and expressed his intention of supporting the Government on the abolition question now that they had extended thenproposals to the whole colony. Mr. PYKE was satisfied that the language of the reply was so couched that he could vote for it without feeling in any way fettered But on some of the questions he could not go with the Government. As to the Provincial question, he was satisfied that the present system was a curse and a nuisance to the community, but if it was proposed to abolish provincial institutions this session, the measure would not find a more uncompromising opponent than himself, because he considered the people should first have an opportunity of expressing an opinion. Again, he was not satisfied with the manner in which the public works of the colony had been carried out, and he considered the Californian mail service of no value to the colony. He did not believe in the stability of the Pacific Mail Company, for in Harper’s paper, one of the most respectable journals in New York, he saw that the company was alleged to be managed by a set of gamblers, one of whom had appropriated to his own use a large sum of the company’s funds. Respecting the four million loan, he thought tho arrangements made satisfactory, though he believed the Government would have been discreet not to have laid the papers upon the table of the House, for the recriminations contained therein affected seriously the credit of the colony. Mr. BUNNY noticed the silence of the Government, and proceeded to criticise the paragraphs of the speech, premising his remarks by expressing the hope that during the important session just commenced no sinister motives would be attributed, and that each side would give the other credit for sincerity. (Hear, hear.) He did not believe the question of constitutional reform the mbst important question—the people, whatever the form of the government, would progress by the sheer strength of their good sense—but of more importance was the proper administration of the government and the wise management of the finances. From what he had seen, he believed the public works policy was most wretchedly administered, and adverted to the conduct of the Government in respect to the stoppage of the capitation allowance, and also to the bad

management of the Masterton line. And who ■were the railways managed by?—not the Goemment, they knew nothing about it, hut by Mr. Passmore, who had been imported from TWGnd to learn his business. A cartload of these gentlemen—sucking engineers and station managers—had been imported recently, and the Masterton line instead of yielding a profit cost £ISOO a year to support it In f " to the four million loan, he regret.ed tl at the correspondence laid upon the table had been written, and, being written, had ever been published, and that the House had been called upon to wash the dirty linen of the colony. With regard to the abolition question, he was totally opposed to it, as he could foresee the evil result ; hut if the people after the matter had been thoroughly discussed, decided m far or ofabolitiou. he would not raise an object on to it The people, when they found the bad effect, would have to thank themselves font The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS said it was not out of discourtesy that the Government had declined to take up the debate, but they preferred to wait till the measures were before the House, instead of wasting the time. Ihe sooner the present discussion was brought to an end, and the House proceeded to the regular business, the better. Mr MONTGOMERY considered the adjournment of the debate justified by the correspondence which had since been laid on the table The wrangles of the gentlemen entrusted with the money operations were disoraceful, and it was intolerable that the Treasurer should ga Home and say the Government were in a mess, and must get out of it in the best way it could. In regard to the manner in which the loan had been raised, he considered credit was due to the Treasurer, who had shown great capacity. However good the conventional Bill might be, he hoped it •would not pass this session. should always vote against the measure if it was intended to have one Constitution for the North and the South. If a change were to he made, he shoula like them to consider also the desirableness of a change in the Upper House, and not allow that Chamber to be filled with nominees of a Government. He thought the session would be a Ion" one, for leaving on one side other questions, that of finance would require looking into more closely than had been done during the past few years. Mr. McGLASHAN advocated the cessation of the discussion on the great subjects of the session till the Bills were brought down, but with regard to the provincial question, at most it was a question of time. The feeling against provincialism was increasing every day, and if the question was postponed till next session, the majority in favor of abolition would be largely increased. But he could not see why they should defer the matter and prolong the misery of those provinces which were struggling for eX Mr. n WARD and Mr. Wales supported the motion, and the latter gentleman said if an amendment had been proposed he could have understood the debate, but as it was he could not. If they were to fight let them commence at once and settle the matter, if not, let them go on with the business of the country. He should express no opinion as to the measure of abolition just yet, but his impression was that the country should have a voice in the matter. Mr. BRANDON expressed dissatisfaction with the mail service negotiation, the public works policy, and other matters. Mr. DIGNAN could not vote for the Government. In reference to the question of abolition he expressed the opinion that the people should be consulted before the proposed changes were carried into effect. He considered the provincial system was never in a better or more satisfactory condition, in Auckland at any rate, than at present. Sir GEORGE GREY rose amidst enthusiastic cheering, and said it was with a sense of great responsibility that he proceeded to address the House, for a more momentous period than the present in the history of the country had never existed. There were matters contained in the address which it was proposed they should adopt, which demanded then - most serious consideration, because affecting the welfare of the whole of New Zealand—(hear, hear) —and those matters demanded earnest consideration before any other measures were brought before the House—before they started pu the raomeutnous course they were about to enter. He had demanded, therefore, as a right, that they should obtain time to consider, and in demanding that right to look into the address before they adopted it, they had simplyperformed thenduty to their constituents and the people of the country generally. He gathered from the address, or the proposed address, now that he had perused it, that the Government intended to pass a new Constitution, under which the people of New Zealand were in future to be governed, and he also understood that the Government intended to introduce a new Representation Act during the present session. He gathered that from the speech, but he wished to be under no mistake, and desired the Government to say distinctly whether that was their intention.

Sir DONALD McLEAN said it was the intention of the Government so to do. Sir GEORGE GREY took that to be a distinct affirmation on the part of the Government that they considered the present Parliament did not represent the people of New Zealand. (Cheers from the Opposition benches.) That was the only inference to be drawn, and yet they sought to force upon the people a Constitution made by those who did not represent the inhabitants of New Zealand. Could it be possible that Ministers would force the measure upon the people with a House so constituted—a House which did not represent the people? (Cheers.) He pointed out that a more monstrous proposition had never been made. It was conceded that the inhabitants were not fairly represented. He challenged them to commit such a flagrant injustice. Before this measure was passed they must have each district equally represented ; they would have no pocket boroughs —(cheers) —they would not have three members for one district, with but one for another district of equal size, and some with none at all. (Cheers.) He maintained they must give each district its proper share, and act justly and fairly towards the people of New Zealand, and allow theih to return representatives proportionate to the population. In such circumstances as nowobtainedit would be monstrous to meddle with the Constitution that the people of New Zealand enjoyed. What was the result of this unequal representation?—that the gentlemen who occupied the Government benches did not represent the people of the country. The hon. member for Timaru had told them that it was impossible for the House to get a better Government, He understood him to say so. Mr. STAFFORD said it would be impossible for him to get a Government who would more thoroughly express his views. Sir GEORGE GREY : More thoroughly to express his views. Was this what the Parliament had come to? The hon. member for Timaru told them that the whole object of the people should be to return men to give expression to his views and opinions. Was this to be the whole object of Parliamentary government? (Cheers.) What had they come to ? (Renewed cheering.) Was this for what they had triedfor years ? Was this for what they had struggled to return Governments and Parliaments ? —to represent the views of one man. (Cheers.) He said it was not so, and he said that the gentlemen who occupied the Treasury benches did not in any way represent the inhabitants of the colony. Take the Premier, for example. He was placed in the Upper House by the nomination of the Ministry of which he was now the head, and it was done to serve a purpose, and such was the nature of the changes taking place that it was difficult to foretell what would be the next move. Perhaps they might have the hon. member for Timaru next to adorn the Ministry, and he would confess he should be glad to see such a change. But to return to the Premier. Who would pretend that a person so nominated could possibly represent the people, not being required to be a wealthy man, as in the Upper House at Home, not being required to give any pledge to assure the people that he would endeavor to hand down to posterity those institutions on the .sustenance of which depended the welfare of the country. What interest could such a person have in the country?

There was no provision by which he might he impeached before his peers and. might be tried for mal-administration. There was no guarantee that to-morrow he might not retire from his office into some sinecure. Ho said that such a nomination to a House so constituted did not give a true representation to New Zealand for its Premier. (Cheers.) Ho was merely the representative of an absolute Minister now in London, whose return to this colony no man could vouch for. Then there was the hon. member for Taranaki, for whom he had a great regard, who might he an able Minister. Doubtless he was a gallant man ; hut he in no way fairly represented New Zealand. Then there was the appointment of the hon. member for Kaiapoi. For weeks he had wavered whether he would he a lord or whether he would take his seat iu the House of Commons —(a laugh)—and though he was a member of the Executive Council, and occupied the position of a Minister of the Crown, yet he did not represent the people, and it was the same with all the Ministers of the Crown. The Upper House did not represent the people. Powers had been placed iu its hands, but the people had never been consulted, and the House of Representatives, constituted as it was, did not represent the people. The Government was nominated iu England by a body, and he believed for political reasons. With such representation as this, he said this was no time to impose a Constitution on the people of New Zealand that was utterly abhorrent to them. The Parliament was just about to expire, and at present did not, as admitted by Ministers iu the address before the House, properly represent the people of New Zealand, and it would he faithless to its trust, faithless to the people, faithless to the country, if it imposed this Constitution upon them. If this Parliament did proceed to impose Jhis Constitution upon the people, he would "assert that it was not done by the people themselves, or their representatives. It would be done by an external body, by the Parliament of Great Britain without the' washes of the people being consulted. The people would have no choice, if the House forced such a Constitution upon them, and most unfairly, unjustly, and improperly their rights w-ould be denied them. It was one of the most wicked attempts that had ever been made to rob the people of their rights. The speaker then went on to refer to the alleged influence at Home of a banking institution, and said this measure was proposed at the instance of that institution, that additional security might he given for the money required to sustain the policy of the Government, and passed on to suggest that the Assembly should pass such an Act as would delegate to the people the duty of choosing under what Constitution they would be governed. Let a new basis of representation he fixed, and let Ministeis lay before the country their proposals, and, whatever the country chose, he and his party would assist to carry out the people’s expressed wishes. If they would not accept his suggestion, and would persist, they would find that there were men who would not submit to it ; and he firmly believed they would be right in resisting such an unlawful proceeding. It would be unlawful according to constitutional law and statute law. Anyone w-ho read the speeches of eminent British statesmen would find this doctrine laid down as a maxim of constitutional law ; that powers once granted to the people could not he taken away from them except by that Legislature which granted the powers. Then as to statutory law ; the Act upon which the Government were proceeding was never intended to he wrested so as to be applied to the purposes it was proposed to be applied. Parliament had been deceived into passing the Act, and at the time it waspassed into lawit was never intended to use it for the purposes of robbing the people of the representative institutions which they now enjoyed. Had that been of the Bill passing through in a few days, weeks of anxious consideration would have been devoted to it. The term “ abolishing the provinces,” as used in that Act, never contemplated interfering with representative institutions. The present Chief Justice had laid this clown distinctly. He had told them that there were five provinces in New Zealand the boundaries of which had been fixed by proclamation, and the meaning of the term “abolition of the provinces,” mentioned in that Act, simply meant the altering of those boundaries. This he had illustrated by instancing the case of Canterbury and Westland. The moment the Westland province had been proclaimed, the province of Canterbury, previously in existence, had been abolished ; but it had not, however, been deprived of its representative institutions. If great and manifest privileges were "ranted iu specific terms to the people, general words of obscure meaning could not take such rights from them. The hon. member for Timaru had used the word “revolutionary.” He thanked him for that word, for it was evident that the Government intended a lawless proceeding, though the attempt partook more of the nature of a coup d’etat ; but whether it would be successful remained to be seen. He was Superintendent of the province of Auckland, and there were certain rights belonging by law to that office, which rights he would not allow the office to be deprived of. While there was a court in New Zealand, or a judicial committee in Great Britain, he would maintain those rights, and he would he upheld, not only in the present time, but by the shouts posterity would raise in all time to come. He appealed to those around him not to surrender those rights; he appealed to the hon member for Timaru, whom he had known under many circumstances, and whom he had never known to make propositions to sacrifice right or justice to expediency, to lend his aid to obtain for the people of New Zealand a fair and just consideration of the Constitution it was proposed to impose, before he forced it upon them. He appealed to the Native Minister to give the country time to consider what form of government it would have ; he appealed to the Colonial Treasurer, who had done the country good service, not to go down to posterity with a bad name -(a' laugh)—-he appealed to the Minister for Public Works not to inflict upon the country a condition of which he knew nothing ; he appealed to_ every member of the Government not to kick away the ladder by which they had risen, and prevent their children and children’s children from rising even higher than themselves. For himself he should resist it to the death. (Cheers.) Sir DONALD McLEAN opened his address by stating that the intention of the Government was to extend the powers of the people to a degree which they had never possessed before. That was the object which the Government had in view, and he could only say that whilst it was the determination of the Government to carry into effect those measures which they believed to be for the good of the country, they were supported by law, by the evidence of facts, and by the general feeling of the people both outside and inside of that House. It was all very well for the hon. gentlemen to speak of appealing to the people ; hut had they (the Government) not appealed to the people ? [A voice; “No.”] They had appealed to the people ever since the year 1858, and the result was, during the passage of the following years, that the feeling in favor of the abolition of the system of Provincial Government had became most powerful from eud to cud of the colony. That was the fixed and firm determination of the Government, and from which course while it existed it would not swerve in the slightest degree. He had travelled through the various out districts of the country, and thought no one who had done so could fail to see the vast centralising power of the provincial institutions, and to acknowledge that the time had come when a constitutional change was necessary, and when the people should he given greater powers and larger freedom than they had Mtherto enjoyed. At present the interior pojwons of the country, which wore the very backbone and sinew of the colony, were suffering, and required to he settled by a system of local self government. Ho would allude to the province of which his honorable friend (Sir George) was Superintendent, and ask him what had been done there for the outlying districts—the greater part of the provincial revenue had been expended within the large centres of population. With regard to another remark of his honorable friend, he denied the possibility of the proposed change

being contrary to the desire of the people of New Zealand. Everywhere the people were paying increased attention to local affairs. They (the Government) were there as the representatives of the people, and he held that they had a right to decide on any measure which, after careful consideration, they deemed to be conducive to the welfare of the country at large ; and that they had determined to do, whatever the Opposition might say to the contrary. The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD devoted the first part of an able address to replying to Sir George Grey’s allusions to him as the hon. member for Timaru, and said that Sir George Grey had put a false interpretation on his action. He then proceeded to reiterate his reasons for supporting the Government, and ho considered that on the Ministerial benches there were gentlemen as well qualified to conduct ’ and administer the affairs of New Zealand as those of any colony of its ago. -As a precedent to the course which the Government at present proposed with regard to constitutional changes, and as opposing the argument of Sir George, the speaker next referred to the fact of representative institutions having hoeu taken away from Jamaica by the Imperial Parliament in consequence of their having got into such a complete mess as to render a prolongation of their existence detrimental to the interest of the country. With regard to the people being slighted in the imposition of legislation, he asked the lion, member whether he had not slighted the people when he sat down, without advice, (in a small cottage dignified by the name of “Government House”) and framed the Constitution under which the country was for the future to be governed ; and how did he, as her Majesty’s representative, give effect to it? He, unwittingly no doubt, jmt a deadly stamp upon provincialism at that time. As he (Mr. Stafford) read it, the form of constitution meant that certain local and isolated centres of population should have a form of self-government without being subject to interference from any other governing body. The country was parcelled off into six small fishing villages. Both Hawke’s Bay and Taranaki Jiad been totally ignored, for the latter formed no part in the recommendation sent Home. Ho felt confident, however, of the reply when ho asked those people of Taranaki if they would prefer to be tied to the city of Auckland. Ha would ask whether they were likely to derive any strength from such a bondage. In the face of all this his honorable friend had got up and in effect had said that that House was not competent to give an opinion as to the most desirable Constitution. Thirty years ago, when the hon. member had the administration of the Constitution Act, no provision whatever had been made for districts which were entitled to Government. Otago was at that time peopled by some *2BOO inhabitants ; yet to this 2800 persons did lie surrender the greater part of the South ■ Island. Mr. Stafford went on to say that Sir George Grey at that time was deficient in knowledge of the geography of the country —being so absolutely witliout material information that the districts were given false positions, and false names were given to places. With regard to the people not being able to exercise a proper freedom, the onus prohandi lay with Sir George. Sir GEORGE GREY explained that he did not draw up the Constitution, and was compelled to divide the colony into provinces. Mr. STAFFORD continued to criticise the address, and said Sir George was particularly unfortunate in imputing that that House was oblivious of the wishes of the people, as also in saying that it was in the power of certain persons to influence the appointment of the Governors of the colony. Sir GEORGE GREY said he had been misunderstood. He did not allude to a gentleman who had been governing this colony, hut to a director of the Bank of New Zealand, who had formerly occupied a position in the present Ministry. Mr. STAFFORD continued, saying that the power to consider large questions such as that under discussion was the right of that Assembly. He characterised the arguments of Sir George as illogical. He would defer the question to the people, yet that House represented the people, who entrusted it with the Government of the colony. As to what Sir George had said regarding an appeal to the Imperial Parliament, lie looked upon it as futile and ridiculous. In conclusion, he asked the hon. gentleman to wait for a few days until the Government had clearly expressed their views. The Hon. Mr. FITZHEEBERT, in a speech which caused much amusement, reviewed the addresses of Sir Donald McLean and Mr. Stafford. Imprimis, he expressed satisfaction at the increased freedom of speech which had obtained in the Assembly, which was owing to the presence amongst them of Sir George Grey. Sir Donald McLean had said “ We have determined to pass this Bill,” and that bare declaration constituted his argument. He (Sir Donald) knew no better ; he was very good in his own department, hut was very much wanting when he entered into general politics. With regard to Mr. Stafford’s speech, the principal point in it was a reference to Jamaica. It was absurd to refer to Jamaica regarding Constitutional rights. Had he ever been in Jamaica ? He looked upon such an argument (into which their dark skinned brethren had been dragged) as being of a very different color to that brought forward by the hon. member for Auckland City West. He saw nothing in what Sir George had said to call forth strictures from Mr. Stafford. It was right that they should speak of the danger which they conscientiously believed to he ahead of them , aud he was glad to see a disposition to give free and honest expression to opinions—a change in the nature of their proceedings, which was owing to the advent of Sir George Grey, who had come amongst them and put pluck into them. They would not have dared to say a word had ho not been there. They (the occupants of the Government benches) had about as much to do with the Government of New Zealand as he (Mr. Fitzherbort) had. They had their masters. The hon. member for Timaru was making those gentlemen do his work, and his position was a very discreditable one. The member for Timaru was the Government of New Zealand. Mr. Fitzherhert then referred to the speech of Sir George Grey in detail. The Hon. Mr. BOWEN expressed astonishment that Sir George should have intimated that as Superintendent of Auckland ho defied that house, and that he did not give a snap of his fingers for them. He took it that Sir George did not occupy a constitutional position. The Government would lay certain papers on the table, and would be prepared to say why they did so. They intended, in virtue of their position, to lead the House, aud would stand or fall by what they said. With regard to the hon. member for Timaru having expressed his adherence to the Government, he might state that the declaration of that gentleman was as unexpected by the Government as it was by tile House. Ho did not consider the debate a waste of time, inasmuch as it had effected a definition of parties. Mr. ROLLESTON concurred iu the latter remarks of the Minister of J ustieo as to the advantage of the discussion. The address was strictly according to precedent, and he could not discover anything in it which should raise objection, or which would pledge members to any particular course in adopting it. He thought that on one subject it might with most propriety be said that instead of Mr. Thomas Russell representing the Colonial Government it was the Colonial Government that represented Mr. Thomas Russell. He declined to think that this debate had been unnecessary. If the new light that had been thrown upon matters by the papers laid upon the table since the adjournment were only the precursor of further light, it would not be unprofitable to adjourn still further. He was glad ii. respect to the reconstruction of the Ministry ■ to geo the anomalous position under which the late Premier carried on business without consultation with his colleagues changed, but ho should have been glad to have heard something from Ministers in explanation of that anomalous position. The country could not hut feel that the conflict between Sir Julius Yogol and the Crown agents would he most detrimental to the interests of the country at large. There would be a further feeling very wide spread that the country had not been governed by those who were really responsible to them. to his own views in connection with the Ministry,

he would have been glad to have heard that the technical change in the Ministry had involved a change of policy. He was pained by what Mr, Stafford had said —it was impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Ministry was guided by a member who would take a seat in the Cabinet. d.here were interests, he thought, of greater importance than the one which had been made the chief subject of the debate. In his mind, he would be glad to see that question disposed of, and the House addressing itself to the great question of the public accounts. Coming from the isolated district which Sir* Donald McLean did, he was no judge of the present question. He (the speaker) came from the second province in the colony, and from the experience of that province, he feared that under that worst form of centralisation which it was proposed to put in the place of provincial institutions, the great centres of population would be neglected for outlying districts. He reprehended the system which he saw creeping up of gentlemen joining a Ministry with the views of the chief of which they had previously been at variance. He expressly declined to associate himself with that part of the address which expressed satisfaction with the financial condition of the colony. Mr. WAKEFIELD spoke at some length, and principally urged that a readjustment of the incidence of taxation was of _ more importance than the abolition of provincialism. The motion for the address in reply was then put, and carried on the voices, and a committee appointed to prepare the address. After a short adjournment, the address in reply was brought back from the committee by the mover (Mr. Ingles), read and agreed to. On the motion of the Hon. Major Atkinson the name of Mr. White was added to the Waste Lands Committee, in place of that of the Hon. Mr. Stafford. Sir DONALD McLBAN informed the House that it was the intention of ment next week to bring down the Financial Statement, as well as the other measures referred to that evening. On Tuesday next the Government would be able to name the day upon which the Financial Statement and the Government measures would be brought down. The House adjourned at 11.35 to Tuesday next.