PARLIAMENT.

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

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Friday, September 3. The Council met at two o’clock. MEMBERS OP THE LEGISLATURE AND LAND PURCHASES. The Hon. Mr. MENZIES moved, that seeing that allegations have been made, apparently on authority, that members of the Legislature, during the term of the present Parliament, have been or are interested in certain agreements or transactions with the Government involving payment of money, or the granting of present or prospective pecuniary advantage to such members, it is expedient to appoint a select committee to inquire into the circumstances, and, -whether the provisions of the Disqualification Act have been infringed. The committee to consist of the Hon. the Speaker, the Hon. Dr. Pollen, the Hon. Major 'Richmond, C. 8., the Hon. Mr. Acklaud, the Hon. Mr. G. R. Johnson, the Hon. Mr-. Waterhouse, and the mover, with power to call for persons and papers, and to report in seven days. The mover said he had made the motion in consequence of reports of something having taken place in another branch of the Legislature reflecting on members of the Council, and with a desire to allow those members an opportunity of defending themselves. The motion was agreed to. GOLDFIELDS ACT AMENDMENT BILL (NO. 1). The Hon. Mr. BONAR moved the second reading of this Billf and said the object of the measure was to provide a just and equitable law, regulating the use of streams on the goldfields. During the course of an able speech, in which he dwelt upon the importance of the goldmining interest, the hon. member stated that up to the present time £30,281,000 worth of gold had been exported. The mining population of the colony at present is 16,421. Nearly a million of money had been invested in plant by private speculators; and a sum of £300,000 had been spent by the General Government in constructing water-races, the whole of which, as well as the works constructed by private enterprise, would be perfectly useless, and the whole mining interest would be destroyed if some such Act as that before the Council were not passed. The Hon. Dr. PULLEN supported the second reading, but took exception to some of the clauses, which he trusted would be amended iu committee. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE did not wish to oppose the Bill, but would have preferred to see a measure affecting so many and complicated interests brought in on the responsibility of the Government. Looking at the provisions of the Bill he saw many difficulties, which he hoped would be overcome by the Goldfields Committee. The Hon. Mr. HOLMES opposed the Bill because it should have been brought in by the Government, and because it should have originated iu the Provincial Councils ; also because the Governor in Council would have unlimited power to pollute and divert streams to the prejudice of private interests. The Bill, if passed, would override all previous legislation on the subject of goldmiuing, and he moved that it be read that day six mouths. The Hon. Dr. MENZIES opposed the Bill. Goldmining was a subject which had been legislated upon for hundreds of years past, and Lombardy and other countries had passed laws, based upon the old Roman laws, in which every contingency was met. If the Government merely looked into the question, and placed those ancient laws in the hands of its legal advisers, they would be able to produce a Bill suited to the requirements of the mining interest in every respect. Referring to the provisions of the Bill, he said the few would be able to obtain rights at the expense of the majority. The Hon. Mr. MILLER urged that the matter should be postponed till next session, and that the Government should appoint a commission to report upon the subject of water right. Some further discussion took place, after which the second reading was carried on a division by a majority of five. OTAGO WASTE LANDS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The debate on this Bill was resumed by The Hon. Dr. POLLEN. In the course of his speech the hon. gentleman said he did not favor the holding out of special inducements to men of small capital to enter into occupation of land when they had no knowledge of the business of agriculture, and considered there should be a change iu the mode of settling the land. The provisions of the Bill referring to the manner in which priority of application was determined legalised a system of gambling iu lands of the worst and most pernicious kind. He should endeavor to improve the Bill in committee. The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY opposed the Bill. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE defended the system of deferred payments, saying it was the best possible means of settling people on the lauds. It was probable, and he hoped it would he so, that in a short time the administration of the whole lands of the colony would be in the hands of the General Government, and he did hope that the views of the hon. the Premier would not he given effect to. He trusted the Bill would pass, for the passage of the BUI through the Council was not only important to Otago, but was watched anxiously by the whole community. The Hon. Colonel BRETT opposed the Bill. The Hon. Mr. HART expressed the opinion that a system of deferred payment was calculated to raise up a class subject to be brought under political influence to the injury of the whole of the colony. ■ He had seen such a result arise from the system of immigrants’ promissory notes, which iu some respects was analogous. However, he should vote for the second reading of the Bill reserving to himself the right of proposing amendment in committee. In reply, the Hon. Dr. MENZIES quoted from Victorian Hansard in opposition to the assertions of hon. members who had urged that the Victorian laud law, which was somewhat similar to Otago laud laws, had failed. The Bill was then read a second time, and At five o’clock the Council adjourned. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Friday, September 3. The Speaker took the chair at half-past two. NOTICES OP MOTION. A number of notices of motion were given. PAPERS. Sir DONALD McLEAN laid on the table correspondence relative to the oyster fisheries at Stewart’s Island, and other papers. WAIKATO LANDS. Sir GEORGE GREY moved, without notice, that a return he laid on the table, showing what lands in Waikato have during the last two years been purchased by the Government from Europeans, such return to specify the area and position of lands, prices paid, and the names of persons from whom such lands were obtained. Sir DONALD McLEAN said there would be no objection whatever. Sir GEORGE GREY said his object was afterwards to ascertain to what purpose these lands were to be applied. QUEEN OP BEAUTY MINE. In answer to Mr. Sheehan, the Native Minister said the report of the officer appointed to inquire into the petition of the Queen of Beauty shareholders, presented to the House last session, had been received on the 20th of last month, and was now under consideration. DR. HECTOR. In answer to Mr. Sheehan, the Hon. Mi-. Richardson stated that there would be no objection to lay on the table copies of all reports and correspondence in reference to the visit of Dr. Hector, during the recess, to various districts north of Auckland. SIR JULIUS VOGEL. Mr. STOUT asked the Government,—(l.) Under what authorty Sir Julius Vogel had entered into a contract with the New Zealand Shipping Company (Limited), for the conveyance of emigrants to New Zealand ? (2.) Whether such contract was made with the express sanction of the Cabinet ? (3.) Whether

the Government intended to ask this House to validate the contract so made 1 The Hon. Major ATKINSON replied that Sir Julius Vogel had entered into no new contract for the conveyance of immigrants, but the Agent-General had negotiations almost completed at a nominally advanced rate. A PETITION. In reply to Mr. Swanson, Sir D. McLEAN said the Government were prepared to give effect to the report of the Public Petitions Committee iu the case of the petition of David Davids. bills introduced. The following Bills were introduced, read a first time, and the second readings made orders of the day for Wednesday ;—A Bill to vest the Control of all Wharves and Quays in the Boroughs of Hokitika and Greymouth in the Councils of such Boroughs, and Public Libraries Powers Bill the abolition bill. The first order of the day was then called on. Adjourned debate on a resolution reported from a committee of the whole House (appropriation clauses of the Abolition of Provinces Bill). Mr. THOMPSON resumed the debate in a long speech opposed to the Bill. He contended that the £299,000 might as well be given to the provinces as to the provincial districts. He denied that the colony was not paying interest out of loans; the issuing of Treasury bills pointed to that. He did not believe the Government could make good their promises. It the deficiency on provincial railways was to be paid out of the local land fund, the Government would not be able to keep their promises iu respect to paying these large sums out of the Consolidated Revenue. With regn. J to the expenditure, members were not able to control it—could only follow it and not direct it. Unproductive works were being carried out from borrowed money. He instanced the new Government buildings and the Museum. Last year a sum of £2900 had been voted for Parliamentary furniture, which he presumed to mean the fittings of that Chamber, and the tower, or whatever it might be called, in which the Speaker reposed. (Laughter.) He thought that could scarcely be considered reproductive. Passing on to other matters, he said the number of civil servants should be decreased, and under that proposal it was evident to him that the number would be increased, which iu itself, was a step in the wrong direction. According to this year's estimates, there were in all (and he thought some members w-ould he astonished to learn it) 5256 civil servants of the General Government. Then, if the provinces were to be abolished, all provincial officers would become General Government servants, and with such a staff of officials, the Government might be said to be in a position to set at defiance any opposition. It would have been far more to the credit of the colony had they said abolition was necessary because of the necessities of the colony. Mr. McGLASHAN briefly combatted the arguments of the last speaker, who, he said, when quoting figures, had quoted himself into a fog. He pointed out that many of the Colonial Government servants alluded to by the hon. gentleman, were members of the Armed Constabulary, np-country postoffiee clerks, and others; and even so, the fact that they were down on the estimates was an evidence that they were necessary. He maintained that Provincial Councils did nothing but foster jealousies and heart burnings, and if for nothing hut this, he would abolish them from the face of the earth. As to the great amount of Ordinances passed by the Provincial Council of Otago as alluded to by the honorable member for Port Chalmers, he contended that those Ordinances could be passed equally as well by municipal councils. As to the Appropriation Ordinance of the Otago Provincial Council, £400,000 over the estimated revenue had been voted, and that sum would not have appeared but for the log rolling propensities of the Council, in which they were aided and abetted by the Executive. He then referred to the Dog Ordinance. In referring to the land laws of the colony he pointed to a large book which he called a pocket volume of the land laws of the colony. If a man acquainted with the laws of one province entered another the land laws of that other province were entirely strange to him. Therefore he maintained that the land laws of the colony should be solidified and made more uniform. He referred to tbe speech of the member for Port Chalmers, and as to the resolution passed last session in the Otago Provincial Council with respect to abolition, and which had been quoted by the hon. member in his speech, he endeavored to show that the Council were not unanimous for delay, as had been stated by Mr. Macandrew. Provincialism caused a wa te of power in legislation; its abolition was desirable, and he should record his vote in favor of the Bill before the House. Mr. READER WOOD said the House was thin, and the debate had become somewhat wearisome. It was understood that the question of finance was to be considered, and he should address himself to that question, as it was one of great importance. But before doing so he referred to the criticism by Sir Donald McLean of Sir George Grey’s address, which he characterised as unjust, uncalled for, and far from being home out by the actual circumstances of the case. He then referred to the speech of Mr. Stafford, with regard to this being a supreme Legislature. The debate on the part of the Government and its supporters had taken a peculiar turn. They, debated not on the Bill before the House, but upon an abstract proposition as to whether or not the provinces should be abolished. Abolition was not one of the main principles of the Bill. What the House should have addressed itself to was two questions ; one, localisation of land fund ; the other, an extreme centralising system of centralisation. The present Bill in no respect carried out the terms of the resolution carried out last session, namely, that provincialism should be substituted by a cheap and effective system of local self-government. As to the feeling of the country, he denied that it was in favor of this Bill. He would point to Auckland, and ask what it was that induced the people there to send petitions to the member for Auckland City West to oppose the Bill. They recognised that it interfered with the principle of local selfgovernment. The people of Auckland said they would not be governed from Wellington to have the revenue first taken there and then given back or not, as it might please that central Legislature. Let them pass their Bill or not, Auckland would not have it. If they passed it, the consequence. would be that at the next election Auckland’s members would be sent down to Wellington pledged to vote for separation. The present system of finance was oppressive to Auckland. The compact of 1856 was unjust to Auckland. It was manifestly unfair that Auckland, which had no land revenue in comparison with the South, should be compelled to pay so much from her Customs. Mr. Wood then proceeded to propound a scheme by which Auckland, being separated, the Provincial Council of the colony of Auckland would have £IOO,OOO for public works. At this point, it being half-past five, Mr. Wood signified his intention of continuing his speech at half-past seven. At half-past seven, Mr. WOOD proceeded to remark that the Government had always acknowledged that Auckland was unduly pressed upon by the financial policy of the colony. In 1870 Mr. Vogel proposed that a sum should be borrowed to place Auckland in the possesion of a land fund, hut it had not yet a land fund, and the prognostication of Mr. T. B. Gillies had been realised in that respect. He pointed out that the cause of this difference was that in the North Island the natives held possession of the principle portion of the land, and knowing the value of it, would not part with any but the worst. This year another attempt to give the province a laud fund was to be made by handing over tbe confiscated lands, but he was surprised that the Government should hold forth the hope that a sum of £45,000 would be ohtained as a land fund. Even if it was realised by sales of land, still tbe cost of surveys would have to be deducted, so that nothing like £45,000 would be available as a land fund. But he contended that sum would never be realised, and he would ask if, during the past few years, the Colonial Government could make nothing out of the confiscated lands

how was it possible for them to get £45,000 per annum in future ? He then read a return showing that barely anything had been gained by the Government under its management of the confiscated lauds, and asserted that the House was being hoodwinked by the G jvernxnent. He then approached the financial ( statement, and said there was not the slightest confidence could ever be placed in these financial statements which had been put before the House. He referred to the speech of Mr. Gillies in 1873, in which that gentleman reviewed the finances of the colony, and which was worthy of notice now ; also to statements made in the legislative Council by Mr. Sewell and Mr. Waterhouse, and Dr. PoUen, the former of whom agreed with Mr. Gillies that the debt would he sixteen or seventeen millions before borrowing was done with ; whilst the latter, on the strength of Mr Vowel's statements, said no such debt would be Incurred, but that the total indebtedness would be fourteen millions ; and when that amount had accrued there would be 760 miles of railway open. What was the fact ? The indebtedness of the colony was now seventeen millions, and they had but 336 miles of railway. (Cheers.) If this was a specimen of financial statements, what was the use of them. With regard to the present statement, it had been impossible to understand it while was being delivered ; and anyone who read it, except he was an expert in the finances of the colony, could not make header tail of it. Fiist he would look at the loan account, and see what amount of money the colony had ; next, the revenue and expenditure of the colony ; next, the land revenue. In regard to the first of these heads, he said everything connected with the great public works scheme had gone. All had been either spent or was covered by liabilities except £661,000. Of that sum about £120,000 remained on account of land purchases, and could not he voted for anything else. Other sums applicable only for defence purposes, brought the sum down to somewhere about £400,000, and that was all the House had to rro upon. Then knowing how much in excess of the estimates public works had already cost, he would ask what sensible man would say the House ought to appropriate one shilling of that £400,000 ? Who knew whether the whole of that amount would not be absorbed before the works at present in hand were finished. Practically, all the money was gone, and certainly they could not go into the London money market to borrow again, for at least two yeais, and at the end of that time assuredly they would not be able to go into a market to borrow. That was a plain and simple statement of the land fund. Then for the revenue. The revenue did not swell the expenditure by a quarter of _ a million, and that quarter of a million was taken from the land fund. That was a pleasing process —robbing Peter to pay Paul. Paul might be mightily pleased, but poor wretched Peter would view the matter in a different light. (A laugh.) Then for the land fund. The land fund of the whole colony as estimated by the various Provincial Governments, who should he able to form the most correct estimate, was £762,000 for the year. It was not proposed to bring the Abolition of Provinces Act into operation before the Ist November next, so that the appropriations by the General Government would only cover a period of eight months, therefore in making calculations it would he necessary to make deductions accordingly, which would reduce it to £451,516. This was to be disposed of in three ways. First, there was a charge for payment of interest and sinking fund, on loans and other items, amounting to £245,890; secondly,the cost of services and general administration of the waste lands of the provinces, and other charges, £262,000 odd; thirdly, contributions to road boards, £333,000 odd, making in all a total of £558,401, to meet which there was a revenue of £451,516, showing a deficiency of £101,885. This would be reduced by the issue of Treasury bills to the amount of £58,700, to a net deficiency of £43,185 —a deficiency never contemplated by the framers of the Bill, who apparently had always supposed there would be a residue. This residue was to have been divided into two parts—first, the construction of public works. These public works included railways, harbor works, &c., the cost of which was estimated at £1,600,000, to meet which there was absolutely not a shilling either from the land fund or the general revenue. (A laugh.) An hon. Member : Then where were the provinces to get the works from ? Mr. WOOD was not talking about the provinces now. (A laugh.) He was talking about the interests of the whole colony—(oh f) but he would say this, that the provinces had entered into engagements for many of these works, and if the colony took over the provinces it would have also to take over its liabilities and engagements, whereas it had not money to meet those engagements with. The colony was in a state of bankruptcy. (Opposition cheers, and laughter from Ministerialists.) He averred deliberately—and was prepared to prove it before any committee the Government might appoint —that the colony had entered into engagements which it could not meet. He had endeavored for a long time past to find out the Government side of the question, and although in some respects he had been supplied with what he asked for, here were many things he did not want. He did not expect to see as a return of revenue from land, such items as goldfields duty or railway receipts ; yet, this was what he had been furnished with. However, he wished to make some few remarks on it. The Provincial Government of Canterbury estimated its revenue for the year at—from sales of land, £120,000 ; pastoral leases, £44,000 ; total, £164,000. What did the Colonial Treasurer estimate the land fund of the same province for eight months at ?—£461,758. (Loud laughter from the Government.) Well, he read the words of the return, which were very plain. In Otago, the Provincial Government estimated the laud revenue for the whole year at £230,000 ; the Colonial Treasurer for eight months estimated it at £271,821 ! It was impossible to find words which one could use in the House to characterise estimates like this. (Ministerialists: Hear, hear.) Yet it was upon such estimates as these the House was asked to vote millions or hundreds of thousands of pounds for public works—(Ministerialists : Hear, hear) —it was upon these estimates that the Government was going to bring in a Bill to establish road boards. Por the year the land revenue of Otago was £232,000. The expenditure was—interest on provincial debt, £94,000; the same on railways, £5462 ; expenditure as per estimates, including grants to education hoards, £148,896 ; contribution to road boards, £IO,OOO ; giving a total, £257,000 odd. To meet this' there was only a revenue of £232,000. In Canterbury there was a revenue of £164,000, and an estimated expenditure of £173,000 ; so that there was another deficit there, giving for the two provinces a deficiency between £20,000 and £30,000. He might go further, and show the House similar discrepancies in other places, if he were not afraid of troubling the House too much. (No ! no !) Now, as to the question of ordinary finances. He was aware that there was a strong disposition on the part of mem-, hers of the House to object to other members referring to the finances of their own districts, but he thought the objection unfounded, and for this reason : that many members might be able to give information with regard to the finances of their ova particular districts which ■ would prove valuable to the House when considering the finances of the colony. Now, he was going to refer to the subject of Auckland finances, although perhaps he should not have done so had he not been attacked in a most unwarrantable manner on what he had said when addressing the House on the second -reading of the Abolition Bill. He had then had occasion to enter into a defence of Auckland against the charges which had been brought against it of being scandalous. He had not attacked anybody himself, hut had merely stated that the province owed no one anything, and that it had a balance at the bank. That had been taken up by the hon. member for Franklin, who, of course, with that candor and nice regard for facts that characterised all the followers of the Government had misquoted his words, saying, “The hon. member for Parnell has told the House that Auckland has plenty of money.” He

never liked to disturb hon. members when speaking, hut had felt bound to get up and remark, “ I did not say we had plenty of money ; but I said ‘we have a balance,’ and added ‘of £3000.’ ” The hon. member had not made any further comments on what he (Mr. Wood) had said, but remarked he would turn him over to the tender mercies of that great lion—the Colonial Treasurer. (A laugh.) When the Colonial Treasurer began to speak, he (Mr. Wood) was mangled accordingly, and told that the £3OOO balance had been brought about by a gift from the General Government of £6OOO ; in fact, an instance of their eleemosynary charity. The fact was, this £6OOO was the just right of the province, for by an agreement entered into by the late Superintendent, it was agreed that a sum of £4OOO advanced to the province of Auckland as soon as the Appropriation Act was passed, and the £6OOO should he paid three months afterwards, and a similar sum at a subsequent period. That agreement was and affirmed by this House, and the Provincial Government of Auckland had as much right to that £6OOO as any province had to is capitation allowance. Yet they were told it was given to them. So long as the late Superintendent (Mr. Williamson) was alive, the money was paid ; hut the moment the present Superintendent came into ofhee, not another penny could be got. When they applied for the money all sorts of excuses were manufactured, and they were politely told for one thing that there were not five quarters in the year. However, they got the £6OOO five weeks after it was due, and then it was said it was given to them.. The Hon. Major ATKINSON ; Hear, hear ! Mr. WOOD, sarcastically ; “ Hear, hear,” is it ? The Hon. Major ATKINSON : Hear, hear. Mr. WOOD ;It is “hear, hear.” This was the lie that was fixed upon him by the hon. member for Franklin. That hon. member had sanctimoniously tinned up the whites of his eyes, and, with a Chadbaud expression, and in a Wesleyan parson whining tone, threw out an iuuendo which he knew to be false. (Sensation, and cries of order.) The SPEAKER ; The hon. member must be aware that expressions such as those could not be allowed in the House. Mr. WoOD ; Then such expressions should not be allowed to be made by other members ; and if any one in that House made use of expressions towards him such as the hou. member for Franklin had done, he would return them. It was not true in any way that he had sold himself to the Superintendent of Auckland for £l5O for six months, a sum less by £7 10s. than that which hon. members of that House received from the Colonial Government. That was an inuendo which had been thrown out against him, which he would not stand. And the him. member had added with a sanctimonious voice, “ Lead us not into temptation. ’ Think of a man being tempted to sell himself for £l5O for six months ! What a terrible end he must come to. But when that hon. member came into that House mocking purity he said’ nothing about the fact that he had been negotiating in a private room with Ministers for the purchase of land for thousands and thousands of pounds, on which he was only to cover expenses, only to get a few insignificant shillings. (Cheers and laughter.) If he might be allowed, he would quote Scripture to the hon. member, and say to him, “Take first the beam out of thine own eye, then shalt thou see clearly to take the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” He had been accused of selling himself for six months for £l5O, but he could sell himself for a much larger sum than that. He had been offered office by Mr. Stafford in 1872, but declined. He bad been offered office by Mr Williamson, but he declined ; and he would ask how many members were there in that House who would have done that ? He had accepted office under Sir George Grey, because three days before the meeting of the Provincial Connell that gentleman had told him he had not an Executive officer to meet the Council with. He offered his services immediately, and Sir George Grey should have them as long as he wanted them, provided he had sufficient leisure, whether he received anything for it or not. He saw how the land lay. He knew that Sir George Grey would never be a nominated Superintendent, and if he (Mr. Wood) had chosen to come there and laud Ministers, he might have been Superintendent, and instead of getting £l5O for six months, might have got £6OO or £7OO a-year for a long while perhaps. (Cheers.) It might be that such insinuations respecting a member who was less known or had less modesty than he had might have done some injury, but he would be scatheless. He then entered into an explanation respecting the balance of £3OOO, and said that, as a fact, at the time he spoke, there was a credit balance of £4376, instead of a debit balance, as had been stated in error by the bank clerk.

A Membeb : There is the mystery explained then. Mr. WOOD : Yes, but it shows there have been no lies. When gentlemen attempted to take advantage of an opponent and fix a stigma on his name, they should be sure they were right. When the hon. member for Auckland City West addressed the House on the second reading of the Bill, he told the Colonial Treasurer that there was no real surplus, but a manufactured surplus. In reply, the Colonial Treasurer had said he should like to know how to manufacture a surplus, and challenged the hon. member to prove that he had manufactured a surplus. He (Mr. Wood) could tell how it was done it was by borrowing money. Scarcely any members of that House in their private life would sit upon couches paid for by other-people’s money, but they would come there and sit upon these horrid benches which were bought with other people’s money, even that wretched tawdry mixture of a church and dancing saloon—(a laugh)—in which they met, had to be paid for out of other people’s money. The Ministerial residences were paid for, mended, and patched with other people’s money. In fact, travelling expenses were paid for out of other people’s money, and everything was charged on loans. After some further remarks, he expressed his opinion that an amendmeut should be made, and, if no one else did it, he should move, that the land fund shall be appropriated annually by the Parliament of the colony in such a manner and for such purposes as it may think lit. Mr. SHEPHERD drew attention to an inaccuracy in the calculations of the last speaker of some £28,000, having overlooked the fact that the Otago railways paid a great deal more than working expenses. Mr. BROWN moved, that the Government having intimated their intention of introducing a Bill constituting hoards of works in place of Provincial Councils, and as the same would have an important effect on the present discussion, it is expedient to adjourn this debate until the new Bill is before the House. Mr. STOUT spoke in favor of the amendment, and said the cardinal principle of the Abolition Bill was that the Assembly should vote the surplus revenue, and if boards of works were to vote that sum, the cardinal principal of the Bill was gone. The boards would be virtually Provincial Councils, and they were asking the provinces to borrow under a different name, and to give them eighteen bodies instead of eight. It was not for°the sake of talking against time that the amendment was moved. It was a perfectly reasonable amendment. It simply asked for delay until the third Bill was forthcoming. Let the Bill be drafted between this and Tuesday, when it could be brought down. He would not argue the financial question, inasmuch as the statement of the Treasurer regarding this new Bill had completely taken away the old ground of argument. The Government should enable the House to see what would be the financial effect of this new system, of which they knew nothing more at the present than that the hon. member for Dunedin purposed bringing down a Bill constituting certain boards of works, which it was presumed would perform the functions of existing Provincial Councils. If the Government did not acquiesce in the adjournment they would be asking that House to proceed with a debate, the main aspect of which had been changed by the new Bill pro-

posed to he introduced by, the Government. And he thought withal that the Government were to be highly commended for taking this last step. It was to their credit. In effect, they said, “After all that has been said, our ideas of abolition have become so completely muddled, that we deem it advisable to abandon it for the present.” Another phase of the question which had not yet been touched upon was this : the Opposition were not fighting for place or power. They did not desire to” turn out the Ministry, because there were many men on the Government Benches whom they thought a great deal of. It was not, therefore, a personal question, it was simply one of principle. All they asked now was that the new Bill should be brought down, in order that there might he full and intelligible discussion of it. How could a member be expected to vote on a question when he was not aware as to what he was voting for ? In conclusion, he affirmed the opinion that nobody hut the hon. member for Dunedin knew what really was in this Bill, and he hoped that it would be produced, that the House might make its acquaintance. Mr. TAKAMOANA spoke against the Bill. The Hon. KATENE supported the measure. Mr. SHEEHAN defended Mr. Wood from the charge levelled at him by Mr. T. L. Shejiherd of having spoken to his constituents. The House adjourned for the customary interval at 10.35. On resuming, after a pause, Mr. Macandkew called attention to the state of the House. The hells having been rung, a quorum was soon in attendance. Mi-. BEID explained the conduct of the authorities with regard to the sale of the Moa Flat block which had been brought up against them by speakers in favor of abolition. The Hou. Mr. FITZHERBERT spoke in support of Mr. Brown’s amendment. Mr. WHITE moved the adjournment of the House. The motion was negatived on the voices. Mr. WHITE then addressed himself to the main question at a little length. Mr. MURRAY moved the adjournment of the debate. The motion was negatived on the voices. Mr. MURRAY supported Mr. Broun’s amendment. During Mr Mueeav’s speech, Mr Stout (it beiug then one o’clock) raised a point of order that the House could not sit on Saturday without provision being made for so doing. The Speaker at once decided that Mr Muneay could proceed, and he did. The question was then put, when, on a division, there appeared for Mr. Brown’s amendment, 15 ; against it, 37. Major ATKINSON said, that at this late hour he would not reply, but would take an early opportunity of doing so on Tuesday. The original motion was then put and carried, and the Bill ordered to be committed on Tuesday. The House then adjourned.