Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4511, 4 September 1875, Page 2

The debate on the resolution from Committee of Supply, approving of the appropriation clauses of the Abolition of Provinces Bill, was continued yesterday, and was still proceeding when we penned these lines early this morning. It had taken a rather personal and unpleasant turn. As we understood the position it was this : an arrangement had been made by the “ whips” on each side that a certain order of debate should be observed, after which Major Atkinson was to reply, when the division would he taken on the main question. But during the course of last night’s debate this arrangement was intercepted by Mr. J. C. Brown, member for Tuapeka, who moved an amendment, to the effect that the debate be adjourned until the House was put in possession of the two new Bills mentioned by the Colonial Treasurer on Thursday last, as forming part of the Government scheme. The amendment was supported by Mr. Stout, Mr. Pitzheebert, Mr. Sheehan, and other speakers as a reasonable request, on the ground that it was unfair to ask the House to proceed with the Abolition Bill, the principle of which was to he changed ;by the proposed measures, until these were in its possession. The Government held that this amendment was a breach of the party compact above-mentioned, and neither replied themselves nor put up any of their supporters to speak on their behalf. The consequence was that the argument was all on the one side, and charges were freely made, which may occasion a good deal of recriminatory remarks on a subsequent occasion, and which undoubtedly must leave a feeling of rankling bitterness behind. Now, we cannot but regret that such a course of procedure was adopted. Surely it is possible to debate a great constitutional question without preferring personal accusations, or imputing unworthy motives; but it is at the same time somewhat difficult to understand why the freedom of private members should be interfered with by arrangements to which they are not themselves consenting

parties. We speak generally, and not with reference to this _ particular case. We can easily conceive circumstances in which party tactics might assume the form of party tyranny, and so stifle a free and full expression of opinion in the Legislature. In this instance nothing of the kind occurred. There was the fullest and freest expression of opinion ; —too free and too full, in our judgment; but as we have already said, it was altogether on one side. On the amendment being disposed of, the intercepted debate would proceed to its issue, and during that stage of the business it is reasonable to suppose that a general balance would be struck. We notice this matter now, because we foresee that it is but the precursor of many such scenes, and with the view of bespeaking moderation of tone and general forbearance. Recrimination can do no manner of good. If principles are at stake let them be contended for in a manly and becoming spirit. On the other hand, it is just as well to remember that the Assembly is now in session since the 20th July, and that little or no progress has been made with the real work of legislation for the country. There are Bills before the Assembly of far greater relative value than the Abolition of Provinces Bill, and the country will have cause for gi’eat dissatisfaction if these are sacrificed to that admittedly tentative measure. In addition to the Debtor and Creditor Bill and others of the same class, there is the Stamp Act, which should become law in some shape this session. Then we have the Electoral Bills, which require the most careful consideration, and which stand a chance of either being rushed through at the last moment or of not becoming law at all. The financial condition of the colony is a matter which should not be overlooked, and we deprecate the notion that the passing allusions to finance on the appropriation clauses of the Abolition Bill are at all the kind of criticism, which this subject deserves. We think we have made our meaning sufficiently plain therefore to most minds. While it is the business of the Government to carry their Constitutional Bill in a shape to satisfy the country generally, it is a mistake to postpone all other business at this stage of the session for its sake. A little repose, and the reflection that accompanies repose, would not be out of place just now. Members would resume the consideration of the Bill in a much better frame of mind than that in which they are at present. Since writing the foregoing, a division was taken on the amendment, which was negatived by a majority of 37 to 15, exclusive of pairs. The main question was affirmed on the voices.