PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4494, 14 August 1875, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

legislative council. Friday, August 13. The Council assembled at the usual hour. PRAYERS. The Hon. the Speaker having taken his seat, prayers were read. STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE. The Standing Orders Committee presented then - report to the Council. LEAVE OP ABSENCE. The Hon. Mr. BONAE moved that leave of absence be granted to the Hon. Mr. Buckley for one week. The Council granted the leave as prayed. JOINT COMMITTEE ON BILLS. The Hon. Captain BAILLIE moved that the petitions of 515 residents in the Caversham district, and of Alexander O. Begg and four others, be referred to the Joint Committee on Bills. The Council granted the prayer of the petition. NEW ZEALAND PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH BILL. The Council ordered that the New Zealand Presbyterian Church Bill be recommitted on Tuesday next. WELLINGTON CORPORATION LOAN BILL. The second reading of the Wellington Corporation Loan Bill, for enabling the Corpora, tion to raise money for the purpose of building municipal offices, was ordered for Tuesday next.

MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE’S SISTER BILL, 1875. The Council ordered the second reading of this Bill for Friday, the 27th August. COMMITTEE. The Council went into committee on the following Bills : The Anatomy Bill, the Queenstown Waterworks Bill, the Presbyterian Church of Otago Bill, the Protection of Animals Act Amendment Bill, the Immigration Expenditure Indemnity Bill, the University of Otago Site Bill, and the University of Otago Site Exchange Bill. BILLS PASSED. The Council passed the following Bills : The Queenstown Waterworks Bill, the Immigration Expenditure Indemnity Bill, the University of Otago Site Bill, and the University of Otago Site Exchange Bill. On the motion of the Hon. Dr. Pollen, the Council adjourned to the usual hour on Tuesday next. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Friday, August 13. The House met at 2.30. Petitions having been presented and notices given, Ministers laid on the table certain returns and correspondence, the latter relating to the dismissal of Colonel McDonald and the appointment of Mr. Brissenden as laud agent in Auckland. QUESTIONS. Mr. BEEVES asked, —Whether, under the provisions of the Act for the abolition of provinces, the Timaru and Gladstone Board of Works will continue in possession of its present privilege, whereby 25 per cent, of the gross amount of land revenue raised within the district is secured to it by an Act of the General Assembly ; and, if so, whether the road boards included in the Timaru and Gladstone Board of Works will receive the same grants in aid of rates out of the general land fund of the provincial distinct, as are promised to other road boards ?

The Hon Major ATKINSON replied in the affirmative.

In answer to Mr. Swanson, the Hon. Sir D. McLean said the Government proposed to bring forward the Representation Bill as soon as some of the present business had been disposed of. — ln answer to Mr. Swanson, enquiring for the papers relating to the Rowe and Scholefield enquiry, Sir D. McLean promised to lay the papers upen the table.—ln answer to a similar question from Mr. Rollesion respecting a return provided for under the 65th section of the Constitution Act, the return was laid upon the table.—ln answer to Mr. Cuthbertson, the Hon. Major Atkinson said delay had been occasioned in the erection of barracks at the quarantine station, Bluff, owing to indecision as to which would be the best site, but that having been settled, the vvorlc would be proceeded wiilx at once. —In answer to Mr. Sheehan, who put a question respecting the Auckland and Riverhead railway, the Hon. Mr. Richardson said the hon. member need not be afraid there would be a want of funds to complete this railway.—ln answer to the same interrogator, it was stated that there had been an enquiry instituted into the circumstances set forth in the petition of of McDonald and others, shareholders in the Queen of Beauty claim. out the report had not yet arrived at Wellington,—ln reply to Mr. O’Conor, who asked whether the Government intend proceeding with the railway and other works at the Bailer in order to render productive the coal field : if so, what is the reason of the delay which has taken place in those works, the Hon. Mr. Richardson said it was the intention of the Government to proceed with the railway, delay having taken place owing to the want of energy on the part of the engineer who had been in the district previous to this year. The prosecution of the work depended upon the money vote of the House.—ln reply to Mr. W. Kelly, the Hon. Mr. Reynolds said the steamer Rangatira delivered the mails weekly at Gisborne when possible. 'confiscated lands. Sir GEORGE GREY asked for leave to introduce a Bill to enact that all orders in council in relation to the confiscated lands which may hereafter be issued by the Governor, or which may have been issued since the 20th day of July last, shall be null and void. Sir DONALD McLEAN said it must be clear to the House that the Government could only regard such a motion as a want of confidence motion.

Sir GEORGE GREY said the other day he had understood the Hon. the Native Minister that the confiscated laud was to be placed upon the same footing as the other waste lands of the country, also that the Government had committed certain illegal transactions with the confiscated lands, and by the issue of orders in council it was wished to render those transactions lawful. To that he (Sir George Grey) objected. He considered that too much of this kind of legislation was already in existence in the colony. When it was admitted that unlawful transactions had been committed, it was fair that an inquiry should take place before an impartial tribunal into the circumstances, so that the matters might be set right by the House, and the country satisfied. He objected to private arrangements being made in private rooms, by which any individual might bestow upon himself or others valuable property by a breach: of the law, the same gentleman who committed the illegal act then being able to advise the Governor to that which was contrary to law. He believed sincerely, and unless he was thoroughly convinced such was the case, he would not say so, that many unlawful transactions had been committed by the present Government with respect to the lands of this colony. Many persons now in possession of land were not in a position to demand any title, and many persons had obtained titles wrongfully; and therefore, as a new Parliament was about to be returned, a full and open inquisition should be made by that Parliament into all these unlawful transactions. The new Parliament wouldgivethe persons titles to which they were entitled if their claims were fairly made out—a new Legislature would always lean to the side of liberality—and would also examine rigidly these unlawful transactions which within his knowledge had been of enormous magnitude. He asserted that the Government, without the knowledge or consent of the House or the country, had acquired means of dealing with the public lands of which the House and the country did not approve, and had withdrawn the circumstances of transactions from the notice of the public. They made what laws they pleased, and when, by their own admission, they had broken those laws, they proposed legislation to rectify the abuses of which they had been guilty. They

had led the House absolutely to pass lav.-:; enabling the Government to legislate by proclamation for individual persons and not for the public good. He would give an illustration : In one of the laws of the colony the Government were authorised to set aside certain lands as.the waste lands of the colony, and that law had been affirmed by another law passed on the 30th September, 1873, but by a clause in an Act passed on the 31st August, 1874, and of which he was satisfied the House had had no knowledge whatever, they, in point of fact, had enabled themselves to dispose of large quantities of laud in the various provinces without the knowledge or consent of the provincial authorities. By this means the General Government in September last issued a proclamation respecting a block of land in Auckland of considerable magnitude and extent, which had been taken out of the hands of the provincial authorities and conveyed to two or three' individuals. In fact, they had placed certain land within the reach of certain persons, whilst the rest of the people were unable to get it upon the same terms. This kind of thing was not to be tolerated. What was wanted was one general fair land law for all the provinces, not one land law for the rich and another law for the poor—not one law for the supporters of the Government and another law for the opponents of the Government. (Cheers, and tokens of dissent.) Let all be treated alike fairly and justly ; but he contended this had not been the case. Orders in Council had given confiscated land to persons, while other persons were unable to get land on the same terms. Unjust and unlawful acts had been committed, and he desired to prevent those acts being •ompleted by the House till the fullest enquiry had taken place, and a rale laid down under which the confiscated lands should be dealt with as the other lands of the colony. Let the House wait until a new Parliament had been elected, until an unprejudiced, fair, •and just inquiry could be held, and the matter settled properly, and with due regard to the best interests of the country. With this view he had thought it desirable to apply to the House for leave to introduce the Bill, which was just and fair in principle, and could inflict no injury upon any one. Sir DONALD McLEAN said, as the House well knew, confiscated land was not as yet under the ordinary land laws of the colony, but, as the House also knew, the Government had a few days ago stated that it was intended to bring down a measure to meet the circumstances of the case. He took exception to the statement made by the hon. member for Auckland City West, that private arrangements were made by the Government in private rooms with private individuals ; the assertion was not borne out by facts. All selections had been made publicly, the transactions would bear the inspection of anyone, and nothing had been done without the fullest consideration of Parliament. He advised the hon. gentleman to wait for another Parliament for an inquiry, but let the inquiry be made now. The Government had never acted illegally in anything, and they ; could prove to the country that they had taken every care in everything they had to do with, j and they were willing to afford every information as to what had taken place. They desired > that the confiscated lands should be adminis- ] tered as the ordinary waste lands of the colony, 1 and they desired to pass an Act for that purpose, i doing away with the special powers which were 1 at one time necessary for the government of 1 the colony. He repeated that the Govern- 1 ment courted the fullest inquiry into all their 1 acts. If the jhou. member could state any t single case of mal-administration, the Govern- 1 ment would give every assistance to investi- 1 gate it. I

The Hon. Mr. FITZHERBERT said of course ail the acts of the Government had been fair and above board—they courted investigation, challenged their enemies; they were innocent men, and everything in that way. There was a misimpression, and hon. members had no right to state these vague generalities. AH that might be so, but he (Mr. Fitzherbert) had been struck by this fact : the first moment a proposal was made to introduce a Bill, the Government objected, because they were going to introduce a Bill to place all the confiscated land under the land laws of the provinces. He thought he had heard that before. Two years ago the then Premier or Colonial Treasurer (Mr. Vogel)—he was not sure which he was at that time—had given the same promise. Not only were they then told that the lands were to be made subject to the land laws of the province, but they were further told they were to have a proportion of the proceeds of the sales of these lands after a charge of £15,000 had been deducted. He did not know what might have Been the fortune of some of the other provinces, but as for the province with which he had the honor to be connected, that had seen but little of the money. He had applied for a redemption of the promise in respect to the province of 'Wellington some months after receiving that assurance, but little had come of it. He found that the land sales of the province amounted to upwards of £20,000. His memory served him that it was considerably upwards of £20,000, and on applying for a proportionate share what did he get ?—£s3, and from that day to the present they had not had another sixpence. But now, when a proposal is made to inquire into this matter, they were met in a manner rather strange, considering that everyone was really innocent. The Government shrank from the inquiry—(no, no) —promising that they were going to bring in a Bill He attached very little importance to their protestations. If they really meant it, let the Government bring in their Bill, and also let the hon. member bring in his Bill. Bet the House hear what he had to say, let him be cross-examined on the various clauses of his Bill, and let the House judge whether he had hold of what was known as a “mare’s nest.” (A laugh.) He (Mr. Fitzherbert) did not suppose the Bill would go much farther. But for the Government, in limine , to objeetto an investigation—(no,no)—beingmade, they being innocent, knowing nothing about the transactions referred to beyond the vague reference that had been made, was passing strange. He had heard of transactions of magnitude, and what he had heard must also be known to others. Whether he was aware of the same case as that referred to in the vague generalities which had been given utterance to, he did not know. But he knew that not many months ago there had been remarks about large purchases of land, of which it had been said no one would have courage to bring them before the House ; but it seemed some one had brought them before the House now, and the House now did not want vague generalities, which did no credit to him who spoke or to those who listened. If there was nothing in the rumors, let them be controverted ; but if there was any truth in the rumors, let it be sifted, and let the country dnow all about it, but don’t refuse, in limine, an investigation. Coming to the question of the distribution of the land, he should let the provinces in the North Island have possession of those vast estates which properly belonged to them. The administration of the land of the Northern provinces had hitherto been smuggled by the General Government into its administration, and no man in the House knew anything about it. A vast number of private persons had become possessed of land, in larger or smaller quantities, in the Northern Island, whilst the public estate administered by the provinces had become starved because of the poverty of the land fund. At the same time great purchases of land, which might have been published in the Gazette, although he had not noticed them, had been made. He had seen notices of the sales by public auction, with the names of purchasers, amounts paid, &c., but had not seen introduced private sales which had been alleged to have taken place. It was of urgent importance that these matters should be cleared up, and he trusted the motion would be agreed to. The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD said hon. members must bo aware of the exceptional reasons why confiscated lands had been administered by orders in council, the Government becoming responsible for the orders in council issued. The fact was that this mode of dealing with them had been fixed by an Act of the General Assembly, because at the time it was considered desirable to allow

the Government the power of granting this laud to natives who had been dispossessed, the object being to conciliate them. It would have been impossible at that time to have put those lands under the land laws of the provinces, even if they had had an equitable claim to them, but that there was an equitable claim to them he always had denied and always would deny. It might be a wise, proper, and expedient policy now to place them under the general laud laws, but he would refuse to agree with the hon. member for the Hutt that they had an equitable right to _ the lands, for he had always held the opinion that if there was anything which was purely colonial property it was these very lands. (Hear, hear.) He recalled to the minds of hon. members the circumstances under which the land became confiscated, and also the fact that not one of the provinces had been charged a share of the expenses of the raising of the three million loan connected with the acquisition of these lands. It was met entirely from the funds of the General Government and the Southern portions of the island, and was a kind of a gift to the Northern provinces. He was at that time at the head of the Government, and was remonstrated with by gentlemen in the Southern Island against the course he pursued, but he maintained then and maintained still that the course he followed was politic. But he also held that Auckland had no claim to these lands. Coming to the motion which had been made, he said that the hon. member for Auckland City West had preferred a very serious charge against the Government; in fact, it was a want of confidence motion, and so directly expressed that the Government had no alternative but to test the feelings of the House as to the subject. No gentlemen could submit to the observations made in the introduction of the Bill, and the Ministry must test the House as to the amount of support it was willing to give the Government in its acts. In looking at the position the hon. member for the Hutt occupied in relation to the hon. member for Auckland City West —continually correcting and . assisting him —it seemed to him (Mr. Stafford) that the hon. member for the Hutt was something

. like a Newfoundland dog—(the Speaker : - “ Order”) —to the hon, member for Auck. land City West. He did not think there was anything unparliamentary in the remark ; the same phrase had been used by Bord Fortescue in the House of Commons, and he had not been checked. However, to proceed. He would point out that upon this occasion the two hon. members did not agree, for the proposition made by the hon. member for Auckland City West was not what the hon. member for the Hutt wished to lead the House to suppose. The hon. member for the Hutt sought to lead the House to believe that the object was to obtain a searching inquiry by the House, but it was nothing of the land that was wanted. He had listened to the hon. member for Auckland City West very attentively, as he always did. First of all the hon. member had insulted the present House by stating that a new Parliament would act fairly, and insinuating that the present Parliament would not. (No, no; cheers.) Twice in the course of his speech he expressed a wish not to refer the question to the present House, but to a new Parliament, which would be a fair and impartial tribunal. (Cheers.) The hon. member for the Hutt had said something the same thing. He had alleged, for a second time during this session, that members had now the courage of their opinions and had insinuated that it had not been so in previous Parliaments. He (Mr. Stafford) had been a member of that House continuously for a number of years, aud he denied that such had ever been actually the position of the House. Members had always remonstrated freely—effectually or ineffectually—against the acts of the Government. The hon. member for the Hutt had ouce spoken for three days. No man had ever been afraid to speak, and remonstrances if founded upon right had always been effectual. The House had never been composed of such dastards and cravens as the hon. member for the Hutt would have the House believe. The right of criticism and remonstrance had always been taken advantage of, and the fullest expression of any grievance had always been heard. He trusted the House had heard the last of this nonsense. He had felt very great gratification at seeing in the House so distinguished a gentleman as the representative of Auckland City West. He considered that gentleman, holding the position he did, had set a great example to all in coming forward to take part in public affairs at a time of a great political crisis, and the people ought to be thankful to him for bringing into the councils of the State his ability, experience, and eloquence ; but at the same time he (Mr. Stafford) refused to say that the present Parliament was composed of cravens, or that any Parliament elected by the people had ever been debarred from the expression of their views, and he hoped such an assertion would not again be made by the hon. member for the Hutt. Referring to the merits of the motion, he must say he knew nothing whatever about the case mentioned, though certainly some vague rumors had been heard of. If there had been such transactions, let there be an inquiry, and he would give his support ; but as for a Bill of this sort, the effect of it should be considered before it was proposed. There had been orders in council, and these had all the force of law, and if this Bill was passed he conceived there would be large claims for compensation. The House had no right whatever to destroy what was law, and there could he no doubt these orders in council were as legal as any land laws ever passed by the House. Whether the transactions were right or wrong the House could not interfere, as the power had been given by a general Act of the Assembly. If there had been any impropriety, if the orders in council had not been faithfully carried out, or if any action had been taken with regard to confiscated lands, that was a fair subject for an investigation, and there was not the least doubt the Ministry would not resist it. If an inquiry had been moved for, as suggested by the Native Minister, he (Mr. Stafford) would have supported the motion ; hut the hon. member had said the House was not a sufficiently impartial body to conduct such an inquiry. Instead of being earnest for an investigation, the hon. member for Auckland City West had brought unworthy accusations against the Government, imputing that they were corrupt. Such insinuations could not be brooked by any Government at any time, and were not creditable to those who made them, particularly at this time, the eve of a general election, when it would go forth to the constituencies that the Government had used the land laws of the colony for corrupt purposes, and without giving them the opportunity of refutation. He imagined no Government would place themselves in so false a position. If an inquiry were held and the charges proved, then the Government would fail at the hustings; but let no such grave charge be made till the matter was investigated. He should support the Government with the greatest pleasure, but if the hon. member would take another course—ask for a commission, or a select committee, or any other impartial tribunal —he should have his (Mr. Stafford’s) most earnest support. (Cheers.) Mr. SHEEHAN said the public mind had been lately disturbed greatly by rumors recently circulated, and the Government should not oppose a measure calculated to bring about au inquiry. The Government were refusing inquiry, and this was an attempt to influence the elections.

The Hon. Major ATKINSON said there was no desire on the part of the Opposition for an inquiry, but there was a desire to condemn the Government before an inquiry. (Cheers.) If the Government had not made a party question of this matter, the other side would instantly have turned round and said they were afraid to meet the Opposition. It was an attempt to steal a march on the Government, and the Government would not submit to such a declaration as that contained on the face of the Bill, and would stand by the aye or no of the House. They courted every inquiry, and were prepared to bring in a Bill on the subject, but they were not prepared to state the nature of the Bill until this motion was disposed of. Ho appealed to the House to support the Government, because the motion was not asking

for an inquiry, but it was asking the House to condemn the Government without an inquiry. (Cheers.) Mr. READER WOOD deprecated strong language, and said he could not recollect a single precedent of refusing to grant leave to introduce a Bill being construed into a vote of want of confidence. It seemed to him that every unacceptable question was treated as a vote of want of confidence, gagging the members, and preventing all inquiry. (No, no.) This was the first step in the inquiry—(no, no) —for the second reading would afford every opportunity for explanations. Then, it was said the member for Auckland City West was charged with insulting the House because he asked for inquiry. He wished the present Parliament to make the inquiry, and left it to the next Parliament to decide, because there would not be time this session. This Parliament has more I'esembled the old Parliament of Prance, which, under Richelieu, with regret registered his decrees, than any English Parliament. (Cheer's, and noes.) Mr. CUTHBERTSON regretted the remarks which had been made, particularly those made by the hon. member for Auckland City West, which had distinctly accused the present Parliament of prejudice, (No, no, and cheers.) The Government could not possibly accept the motion, which was an ingenuous attack on the Government, and an attempt to spread abroad a report that there had been illegality of action and the House was either afraid or refused to investigate. There was no distinct charge, but all was inuendo, and was exceedingly irregular. Mr. T. L. Shephekd and Mr. Luckie opposed the motion. Mr. REEVES said many of the words which had been spoken had been uttered with the idea of throwing dust in the eyes of the House. He was sorry to hear the hon. member for Timaru say he was unaware of any charges beyond a vague rumor, when he must have known of a distinct charge made last session in the Upper House. He would make the charge again, that there might be no mistake. It was to this eflfect, that the Government had, in contravention of the regulations that they themselves had made, sold a most valuable piece of land, consisting of 80,000 acres, to Thomas Russell and others for 2s. 6d. an acre—for although the price was said to be 55., there had been the express stipulation that one-half that amount should go for the purpose of making roads, and in fact draining the land. That was a charge which demanded inquiry. But when it was made, what had been the answer ? The present Premier and then Colonial Secretary admitted that the sale had been contrary to law, but stated that in spite of that fact the Government would confirm their act and give a title to the land. The transaction had not only been illegal, but it had been unwise, and a wanton waste of the public estate. The House had been told that

when it agreed to pledge the credit of the colony, and submit to taxation in order to raise a three million loan, the greater part of that would be returned out of the proceeds of the confiscated land. In this they had been disappointed, though there still remained a little laud ; but unhappily to say, this was now being parted with. For this block at

least 255. or 30s. per acre could have been obtained. These circumstances demanded the most earnest inquiry, for not only was the capacity of the Government at stake, but also its honor, yet how did the Government meet the attempt at inquiry ? By resisting it at the first step. (No, no ; hear, hear.) There was an evident attempt to burke discussion, and if the Bill was not allowed to be introduced, the refusal would reflect very poorly upon the Government and their supporters. (Cheers.)

Mr. BUCKBAND, referring to the statement of the last speaker, said the circumstances were not as had been stated. The land was perfectly beyond the reach of speculators—speculators would not look at it, for it was swamp and almost worthless. The gentlemen referred to then came forward and offered the Government price of ss. per acre, but a subsidy of 2s. fid. per acre was given to them conditionally on their making roads and bridges, which would make the adjacent laud valuable, and so recoup to the country far more than the half-crown per acre. If the hon. member for Auckland City West came into that House and gave lacks, he must expect buffets, and perhaps he would find these buffets were rather hard. With reference to the hon. member for Parnell, it was clear he did not represent his own feelings, and his constituents would tell him to do so.

Mr. ANDREW said it was a very unusual course to pursue to oppose a Bill on its first reading, but it was particularly unfortunate in this case. He would not be in order if he said the hon. member for the Hutt acted as a Newfoundland dog to the member for Auckland City West, but it seemed that whenever the hon. member for Auckland City West made a slip the hon. member for the Hutt was ready to pick him up. After referring to the position of the Governor in this matter, he said he must vote against the motion. Mr. MONTGOMERY understood the object of the motion to be to gain inquiry, but as the members of the House had taken it to be a question on the result of which the existence of the Government should be staked, he suggested the hon, member who lead the Opposition should withdraw the motion.

Mr. J. E. BROWN considered the speeches of the Opposition members showed the motion to be intended os a vote of want of confidence in the Government, and an insult to the House. (No.) Sir GEORGE GREY explained that the only object of the motion was to prevent au Act being passed—which, according to the Native Minister, it was intended to pass—to give titles to persona for land of which they had become possessed illegally; in fact, to render lawful an illegal act of the Government.

Mr. BROWN did not understand the hon. member, and questioned whether he understood himself. He read the resolution, aud asserted that any steps the House were taking would lay the House open to claims for compensation. The hon. member had said he asked for au inquiry by the next Parliament which could only lie impartial if made by the next Parliament. If the hon. member wished for au inquiry, let him state the case in which he wanted one. The Government courted investigation, aud had challenged the hon. member, which challenge the hon. member had not taken up. Mr. BUNNY complimented the House upon the energy with which it had entered into the discussion. It was true there had been no opposition lately, but it was owing to the desertion of the party by the hon. member for Timaru. But it was different now. , Another Joseph had arisen ; another leader had come forward, and they would rally around him and form an opposition which would do a great deal for the country yet. If it was not a proper time now to table a want of confidence motion, with his knowledge of Parliamentary tactics he would say it might bo necessary before the session was out to table such a motion. The present discussion would do good, for the matter could not now rest until a full and complete inquiry had been made. The Government could not rest under the imputation which had been cast upon them, aud he hoped the hon. member for Auckland City West would move for a select committee, and that the Government would not proceed in the issue of titles till the result of the inquiry was known.

Mr. THOMSON, after supporting tho reasons which had induced the hon. member for Auckland City West to ask for leave to introduce the Bill, thought it would have been better to have proposed a motion for a committee.

Mr. MERVYN defended the course of the Government, and trusted tho motion would not be allowed to be withdrawn.

Mr. J. SHEPHARD opposed tho motion,

Sir DUNABD McBEAN hero intimated the intention of the Government to carry on the debate during the evening sitting, in place of that on the Abolition Bill.

Mr. KOLLESTON had no wish to go with a vote of want of confidence in an indirect way, but at the same time thought the House should express a decided opinion on the facts which had been brought before the House by the hon. member for Selwyn, and ho trusted the Government would announce that they

intended to appoint a commission of inquiry into the matter, for it was evident there was a prima facie case for further inquiry. Mr. G. McLEAN said the Opposition had disclaimed any intention of moving a vote of want of confidence, but no sensible man could hold that opinion. He had travelled about a great deal in the Waikato district, and admitted that there was an uneasy feeling

abroad. After a few remarks from Mr. White, the House adjourned till 7.30 p.m.

On resuming, Sir DONALD McLEAN moved that the adjourned discussion on the Abolition of Provinces Bill be postponed, in order that the House might proceed with the adjourned debate on the motion of Sir George Grey. Mr. ROLLESTON, in stating his opinion that the question raised by the member for City West was one of vital importance to the colony, and demanding the most searching inquiry, said the Government had taken the motion in a sense not intended by the hou. member, and by resisting were endeavoring to steal a political march. The Hon. Mr. EITZHERBERT took exception to Ministers intercepting the ordinary course of business without favoring the House with some reason for so doing. He said also that the Government perverted Sir George Grey’s motion into a want of confidence one, and this he (Mr. Eitzherbert) denounced. Mr. WHITE said the abolition resolutions were of such large importance to the country that it behoved the House to resort to every means to facilitate the discussion thereon, and with this view- he would move, as an amendment to the motion of the member for City West, that the Bill be referred to a committee of the whole House—that is, he would move it on receiving permission. The SPEAKER was of opinion that there were no circumstances in the present case to justify such a course. Mr. WHITE then moved that leave be given to introduce the Bill that day six months. Mr. REID opposed the amendment, and

gave his reasons for doing so. A wrong interpretation had been put on the motion of Sir George Grey, and the hon member for Timaru was responsible for that, as he had contracted the question into one of party. The hon. member for Timaru had stated that this must of necessity be a Government question. (No, no, and hear.) His first impression of its being a Government question was formed from

the remarks of that hon. member. Mr. Reid referred further to the remarks of Mr. Stafford, and stated that Sir George Grey was quite able to hold his own with any member in that House, the hon. member for Timaru included. He then proceeded to show that the Bill might have been brought in and read a first time in the usual course but for the Opposition, who had acknowledged that certain Acts performed by them were legal, whereas they would now, in all probability, have an evening wasted. Mr. Reid went on to refer to remarks made by different members during the discussion preceding the adjournment, and finally said he should support the Bill, though he did not think it would pass, and perhaps it was not desirable that it should, but the object of the motion would be gained if the Bill were

read a first time, as the matter would be well ventilated, and the people would no doubt demand an enquiry into the manner in which the disposal of laud had been conducted by the Government. In reply to Mr, Reid,

Sir DONALD McLEAN stated that the block of land alluded to in the Waikato district, had been open for six or seven years.

Mr. MAY could not but consider the Bill an absolute indication of want of confidence in the Government, and said that the transaction with regard to the Waikatoswamp was an absolute gain to the colony. He would vote against the introduction of the Bill either now or six months hence.

Messrs. Gibbs, McGlashan, and Fyke supported the Government. Mr. REEVES said the hon. member for Wakatipu had stated that the motion interfered with the executive functions of the GovernrU'ent. What were they ? The executive functions were founded on an imperfect Act, which left the whole power of dealing with these lands in the hands of the Government.

The SPEAKER ruled Mr. Reeves out of order. They were now discussing the amendment.

Mr. REEVES would venture to affirm that the executive action of the Government was limited by another branch of the Legislature. Being again called to order, Mr. Reeves said as the only point of what he had to say had reference to the above subject, he should take another opportunity of offering some remarks thereon.

Mr. WHITE said that he had been gagged in the discussion of this question, and that he had not been well treated.

Mr. W. KELLY pointed out that the land which had formed a subject for some portion of the discussion, was only third class laud, and had been open for sale, without finding a purchaser. at os. an acre since 1865. There was land of the same description in the district he (Mr. Kelly) represented, and he would be only too glad to sec that land taken up by a company.

Mr, TAIABOA questioned the right of the House to dispose of confiscated lauds, but not being clear on the matter at issue, would not vote on either side. Sir GEORGE GREY said he would commence his reply by making one remark, which was tliis, that if the Government had complied with the resolutions passed by the other branch of the Legislature on the 9th of July, this difficulty would never have arisen. It was unanimously resolved by that other branch that the Government should give up the practice of selling these confiscated lauds by order in council, and in future dispose of them by Acta of the General Assembly ; and they ought to have taken that course. Having said so much, he would proceed to point out the issue. The other night a statement had been made in that House which disclosed to him something he had not previously known. It had been stated by the Minister of Public Works that a block of some 80,000 acres of land, situated in the Waikato district, had been disposed of by the Government without lawful powers, and he had then gone on to say that they intended to make their unlawful action lawful by passing an order of the Governor in Council specially to meet the case. He (Sir George Grey) confessed that he was shocked to hear such a statement. Ho contended that it was the bounden duty of the Government, if they had committed a breach of the law. to have come to that House and to have asked for an inquiry into the transaction, with a view to the House enacting a law itself which would have made their transaction lawful. The truth was, that the law under which they should have acted said that lands should be disposed of in terms provided by orders in council, but they had no order in council to justify them in selling as they did. If they had issued that order, the public would have had due notice of the transaction, but the bargain was made in secret, and they had told them that they proceeded to confirm it by an order in council, made in a chamber, virtually by themselves. That was the statement made to the House.

Sir DONALD MoLEAN : I never said that the order was made secretly in a chamber ; and as to the legality of the question the hon. gentleman is stretching the matter.

Sir GEORGE GREY said lie was not desirous of stretching anything. The point he questioned was the proceeding of the Government. He did not question the conduct of the gentlemen who took advantage of that proceeding. He did not know them. He knew that there were in Auckland some great capitalists who, having got possession of large areas of laud, spent all their income in improving it—who disbursed all they had in rendering it more valuable. Ho never envied such gentlemen, ho could honor the men who had shown such patriotic feelings and acted so nobly towards their country. But he protested against land of great value being given away by the tyrannical act of a despotic Government, who had admitted that such act was unlawful, and that they purposed making it legal by a subsequent law. That was what he stood against, and all he asked was that

nothing should be conducted secretly. H had no idea of any attempt to get up a vote c censure against the Government, no idea of party motion. He stood up in defence of th inhabitants of New Zealand against a tyranni cal and improper act, and thought every voic ought to have been raised against it. H cared not if he was compelled to stand alon in the position he had taken up. He wa doing his duty to the country and the empire He regretted, however, that he had been ii some respects misinterpreted. The hon. mem her for Timarn had pnt an interpretation o] his remarks which he had not intended then to bear. He had been made to doubt the im partiality of the members of that House What he had said was true, and in no wai insulting to the members of that House. He wai the last man to be guilty of that. He had statec this, that the Governmenthad committed, withi t his own knowledge, a number of illegal Act: with regard to the lands of the country, ant he had gone on to say that they had left c large number of persona without titles to theii lauds; that this ought not to be; and he had saic that the Parliament who would soon take the place of the present one, would be able tc enter into that question impartially, and enact a law by which full and ample justice would be done those who had legal rights. He felt that the present Parliament could not enter into this question. It was impossible that the gentlemen who sat on those (Government) benches, who had allowed these illegal transactions to take place—it was impossible that they could deal with such a question in an impartial spirit. They might desire to do so, but human nature was human nature, and they could not do it. He (Sir George Grey) felt that placed in their position he w-ould not be able to act impartially himself. But their immediate followers would be able to deal with the question as it deserved to be dealt with. Before

he sat down he wished to ask this question: would the Government undertake that no stops should be taken to render those transactions legal until full inquiry was made. If they would say that, his object would be attained, and he would be perfectly willing to withdraw the motion before the House. The Hou. Mr. BOWEN ; The Government will be prepared to answer the hon. member when the present motion is disposed of. Sir GEORGE GREY now knew his position. He saw on the Government benches a gentleman who occupied his seat thei-e in the sacred name of Justice, and he (Sir George Grey) would say that it was no just act, first to do what way wrong to the public at large, and then to try by an order in council to make the wrong right. In the name of Justice he denounced that proceeding. If he had to stand up alone in this cause, he would maintain that he was doing his duty to his fellow-citizens, and he would not allow, so far as he was concerned, this to be pressed into a party motion. It was for the good of the people he had acted—to prevent an unjust act being completed by another act of injustice—and if an attempt was made to force him to a division on the question, he would walk out of the House. He would state upon his honor that he had never contemplated to introduce the present as a want of confidence motion. It was true he had not consulted those who acted with him, but he had determined to prevent the completion of a great wrong. His complaint was not against the men who had the land, but against the double and illegal action of the Ministry. He only desired to prevent what he believed to be a great wrong being done in the name of Justice. The SPEAKER then put the motion, and a division was called for, Sir George leaving the House.

On the question being put, the Speaker declared that the noes had it. Mr. ANDREW called for a division, on which the Opposition rose and left the House. Mr. Andrew went with the ayes in order to force a division. The numbers were—Ayes, 3 ; Noes, 42. The following is the division list : Noes.—Atkinson, Ballance, Bowen, Brown (J. C.), Bryce, Buckland, Carrington, Creighton, Curtis, Gibbs, Ingles, Jackson, Johnston, Katene, Kelly, Kenny, Luckie, May, McGillivray, McGlashan, McLean (Sir Donald), McLean (G,), Mervyn, Munro, Ormond, Parata. Parker (C.), Parker (G. B.), Pearce, Pyke, Reynolds, Richardson, Richmond, Shepherd (J.). Shepherd (T. L.). Stafford, Steward, Tribe, Wales, Webb, Williams, Wilson. Ayes.—Andrew, Bluett, Swanson. ANALYSIS OF DIVISION. Division list—Noes ~ .. .. .. 42 Andrew and Bluett voted in opposition, to make a division .. .. ~ .. 2 Cuthbertson, shut out .. .. .. .. 1 Brown, J. K. Wakefield colony; absent .. ..4 O'Neill } Vogel, in England 1 Seats vacant.. .. .. .. .. 2 Cracroft Wilson, paired 1 03 Lett the House (this includes Taiaroa, 1 O’Conor, and Harrison) ) Speaker 1 rs As soon as the House resumed, Sir DONALD McLEAN announced, amidst cheering, that the Government would move for a select committee to inquire into the whole question which had been under discussion, and guaranteed that no orders in council in connection with the confiscated land should be issued until after the committee should have reported. Mr. CUTHBERTSON made a personal explanation. He was in the library when the division bell rang, and had made all possible haste to get into the House, but was prevented by the rush of Opposition members in the lobby. THE ABOLITION QUESTION. The debate on the abolition question was resumed by Mr. T. L. SHEPHERD, who pointed out that many of the powers now possessed by the Provincial Councils had been given them by the Parliament of New Zealand since the passing of the Constitution Act, and that therefore there was nothing extraordinary in Parliament taking upon itself to do away with Provincial Councils. He also spoke in favor of the consolidation of the administration of waste lands in the colony, instead of as at present having those lands differently administered in nine different provinces. It was owing to the provincial administration of waste lands that large territorial holdings had grown into existence, and the people had been deprived of their right to land for settlement. His experience of Provincial Councils showed him that too many of the members would have been better employed in their ordinary avocations of loading drays, chopping wood, and milking cows. The House adjourned for twenty minutes. Mr. BRANDON thought the whole gist of Mr. Shepherd’s speech was that he had tried to do n great deal in the Provincial Council of Otago, and had accomplished nothing. |He could not think that iinpecuuiosity on the part of the provinces could be cited as a good ground for abolishing them. Let the provinces go on as they have done, and cast aside all such nonsense as constantly nagging at them. Major JACKSON would vote for the measure in all its stages, and would endeavor to got it passed through all its stages this session, because he thought the measure would do the greatest good for the colony and the district he represented. There was no benefit to be gained by delay, but the contrary. He did not think it was motives of gain that animated the provincialists, but motives of ambition, to which however good it would not do to sacrifice the colony. Mr. ROLLESTON moved the adjournment of the debate, which was carried on the voices,

The pursuit of knowledge must be under difficulties in Granville county, N.C., where, says a corsespondent of the New York Tribune, “One of the School Commissioners is a colored man, and has a rather singular way of distinguishing the color of the children who may be entitled to school privileges. Being unable to read or write, he makes a straight mark for the white children, and for the negroes he makes a cross. We have three School Commissioners in this township, all negroes, and neither of them able to read or write,” If yon write poetry, prithee don’t print it. If you write poetry, have it all of a sort.. Don’t be like Dr. Watts on Monday, and like Tom Moore, or Dr. Maginn, on 'Tuesday. You must write poetry. Then keep it locked up. Think of it as something to be ashamed of—that is always the safest. Bead it by yourself, to yourself at midnight in the secrecv of your bed-chamber. Whisper to yourself, “ How beautiful !” Compare yourself favorably with Milton, Byron, and the American poet laureate Smith, but don’t print. Mk. Auijam’ calls the “ femall sect” butterflies, and continues—“l hev gin up all ideer of wimen folkse. Aingllls in petticuts is all very well to look at and for fellers to talk of, but, bless ’em, they’re slippery as eels, and when ye lish for ’em and get a bite, ye rind yerself at the rong end of the string ; they’ve cotched you. The Queen of Shcber, the Sleepin’ Beauty, Pompey’s Pillar, and Lot’s wife, with a steam-hammer and a bucket of glue to help ’em, couldn’t flx me,”