PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4522, 17 September 1875, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Thursday, September 16. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at two o’clock. NATIVE AFFAIRS. The Hon. Mr. N GAT AT A moved that there be laid upon the table all documents, accounts, reports, or correspondence relating to the Te Aute College estate since 1862, so far as the same were not already printed in the Appendices to the Journals of this Mouse.— Carried. The Hon. Mr. NGATATA moved that there be laid upon the table a return of all lands which had at any time been granted to religious or charitable bodies for purposes connected with the welfare of the native race, and also a report from the Native Trustee of the extent to which the trusts or conditions of such grants have been observed.—Carried. The Hon. Mr. NGATATA moved that the Government be requested to give an instruction that the speeches o£ Maori members of the Council should be published in the U r afca Maori, The Hon. Dr. POLLEN thought the request was a reasonable one, and the motion was carried. WELLINGTON HARBOR RESERVES. The House went into committee on the Wellington Harbor Reserves Sales Bill, The Hon. Mr. PHARAZYN moved that the Chairman report progress. The Hon. Mr. HOLMES opposed the Bill, and stated the financial position with respect to the reserves, as follows :—Present bank overdraft, ,£IO,OOO ; due to Colonial Government on reclaimed land, £31,000 ; proposed reclamation, without interest, £120,000 ; new wharf, £50,000 ; making a total of £211,000, At 7 per cent., the interest on this amount would be £14,700 ; and this, he took it, Wellington was not in a position to bear. He thought the whole of the foreshore should be handed over to the Corporation, as had been done in Wanganui. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE pointed out that the last speaker was premature in hi* calculations, as the Bill for the wharf extern sion was not yet passed ; and as to the rate of percentage, he was over the mark. The percentage would only amount to some£lo,oCo per annum. The Hon. Mr. BONAR said it was absolutely necessary that a part of the reserve should be set aside for harbor purposes. As to the indebteiness of the Corporation, he said Mr. Holmes had understated the amount, which was £231,000. The Hon. Mr. HART said it was very desirable that if the Council passed this measure, and authorised the Corporation to enter into the contract, it should be made a condition that they should beforehand ascertain the total amount for which they would be liable in respect of the contract. He was led to believe that two years’ interest on the loan of £25,000 had to be included. Alter some further discussion, the question that progress be reported was put, and a division demanded by Mr. Phauazyn. The motion was carried by 14 to 8. HIGHWAY' BOARDS EMPOWERING BILL. The House then went into committee on the Highway Boards Empowering Act Amendment Bill. Progress was reported, and leave obtained to sit again next day, when the Hon. Mr. Robinson would bring up an amendment affecting the clause. The Council then adjourned. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday’, September 16. The Speaker took the chair at half-past two o’clock. A number of notices of motion were given, one by Mr. Taiaroa for leave to introduce a Bill to amend the Maori Representation Act. QUESTIONS. Mr ROLLKSTON inquired whether the Government had considered the advtsableness of giving representation to the New Zealand University. In putting the question, he said ho could conceive of nothing which would exhibit the progress of New Zealand as a nation in a higher degree than giving educational representation. It would be a step in advance of all the other colonies. The Hon. Mr. BOWEN said no doubt the matter was one fairly deserving of consideration, and if the University were in such a position as would justify its being allowed representation in the House, that representation would be good, but there were very great doubts as to whether the University had as yet attained such a position. (Hear, hear.) However, the Government would consider the matter, NEW BILLS. Leave having been given, Bills were introduced—By Mr. Pyke, to amend the Coroners Act, 1565. By Mr. Bowen : Anatomy Bill, Neglected Childrens Act, 1873, Amendment Bill, and the Friendly Societies Act Amendment Bill. By the Hon. Major Atkinson : Riddle Land Grant Bill. abolition bill. The House resolved itself into committee on this Bill. Clause I.—The short title of this Act shall be the Abolition of Provinces Act, 1875. Mr. STOUT, to test the feeling of the House, should move that the words “ the abolition” should be left out, and the word “two” inserted in lieu thereof. He wished to test the feeling of the House as to the desirableness of separating the two islands. Mr. ROLLESTON deprecated such a motion. Sir GEORGE GREY hoped there would be a discussion on the subject. The motion was rejected on the voices. Clause 2 was struck out, with the view of a new clause being inserted to give effect to the arrangement come to between the Opposition and the Government. Clause 3.—The Hon. Major ATKINSON moved that after the words “ Corporations Act, 1567, in tlie first section, the following words be inserted :—“ Or other person or body bavin" governance or coutrel of local affairs in any other city, town, or place.” Agieed to. Mr. STOUT moved that in the third section of the clause all the words following “ sea or river” to the end, be struck out, considering the action would be unfair. Agreed to. The clause as amended was passed. Clause i. —On such day, not later than ninety days from the commencement of this Act, as the Governor shall, by proclamation published in the New Zealand Gazette, appoint, the following provinces shall be abolished, viz,: —The provinces of Auckland, Hawke’s Bay, Taranaki, Wellington, Nelson, Marlborough, Westland, Canterbury, and Otago. In such proclamation a day shall be fixed for the

coming 1 into operation thereof, and the day as fixed is hereafter referred - to as the date of the abolition of the said provinces. The Hon. Major ATKINSON moved that all wo.ds to “The provinces’’ be struck out, and the following words inserted “The second section of the Constitution Act is hereby repealed,” and the following woids be added! after the word “ Otago,’ -'shall be and are hereby abolished.” Mr. REID objected strongly. Sir GEORGE G REY said the second clause of the Constitution Act had been for some time, and was now, inoperative. He intended, to move that the word “ Auckland” be struck out, for as he had not been a party to the negotiations, lie reserved to himself the right of'taking exception to the provisions of the Bill, especially as he intended to test the legality of the proceedings of the Government in this respect, for he believed they were doing an absolutely unlawful act. He went on to say that the Minister for Justice had intimated that the Government had sent to England for an opinion. The Government might have received an adverse opinion for all the House know. Plenty of time had elapsed for the arrival of the opinion, and hon. members should have had it placed before them. Several other members made objections, and Major ATKINSON complained of unfair proceedings on the part of the Opposition. Mr. STOUT denied that they were acting unfairly. He was inclined to support the Treasurer’s amendment, and allow the people to see that the House actually took upon itself to repeal Imperial legislation. Mr. Cothbehtsos and Mr, W. Kelly said the House had that power. A long discussion ensued. The original amendment having been carried. The further amendment proposed by Sir George Grey, to leave out the word “ Auckland,” was rejected on the voices. Mr, STOUT proposed an amendment that the word “ Otago ” should be left out. The amendment was declared lost on the voices. On a division the amendment was lost by 53 to 11. The following voted for the amendment :—-Messrs. Stout, Thomson, Reid, J. C. Brown, Swanson, Sir George Grey, Macaudrew, Dignan, Sheehan, Murray, and Brandon. The paragraph naming the day for bringing the Act into operation was omitted. My. READER WOOD proposed an amendment that the clause constituting provincial districts diould be omitted. Mr. O’CONOR moved the amendment to the clause ot which he had given notice, providing for the creation of new provincial districts.

After discussion, Mr. O’Conor obtained leave to withdraw his amendment.

Mr. CUTHBERT2QN proposed an amendby which Southland CMuld be constituted a separate provincial district, taking in the municipality of Queenstown. Mr. MAC ANDREW would support the amendment if Mr. Cuthhertson would include Dunedin. (Laughter.) Mr. CUTHBERTSON withdrew his amendment, at the suggestion of the Speaker, and Mr. STOUT said he would not press the amendment of which he had given notice with regard to Southland. Clause 6, providing that the laws, as far as applicable, should remain in force in districts comprised within abolished provinces, till altered, was allowed to stand part of the Bill. Clause 7 was passed—Superintendents and Provincial Councils of abolished provinces to cease to hold office and to be dissolved repectively. Mr. STOUT proposed to amend clause 8, providing that Superintendents’ powers should be vested in the Governor, by providing that the land should be administered by a Board. Mr. WOOD suggested that the Government should eliminate all provisions for new machinery in the Bill, because the next Parliament would be sure to hold different opinions as to what was desirable.

Mr. REID said the lands of the colony should be dealt with by cast-iron rules. Considerable discussion arose on the paragraphs included in the Bth clause of the Bill, which provided that the Governor could delegate to such persons as he might think fit the duties or functions previously performed by Superintendents. In speaking to the question the Hon. Major Atkinson said the Government proposed to abolish what he looked upon as the worst form of centralism of which they had had experience, and they proposed to let the government which was to supersede that be developed by degrees. Sir GEORGE GREY rose and rebuked the Hon. Major Atkinson for insulting provincial institutions. He might say, in answer to that hon. gentleman, that had the inquiry he had hoped for been brought forward he could, with the aid of other gentlemen, have exposed what he believed to be the worst form of central government that had ever prevailed within the British Empire. This central Government had permitted such acts to be performed in reference to the public lands of the colony as surpassed every idea of propriety. He declared that he had never heard of acts so unbecoming which the influence of Government had been used to bring about as had been allowed by the central Government of this colony that Government which uttered such unworthy aspersions with respect to Provincial Governments. He would give the House one instance of the unworthy actions to which he had alluded. A claim was set forward by certain prospectors on a goldfield, to which those men believed they were entitled, and while negotiations for the opening of the field were pending, the prospectors went to the General Government agent and tendered him a share in a claim which was known to be worthL'2ooo. He replied that as he was a Government agent he could not accept it himself, but this douceur was given to his clerk. He (Sir George) had called attention to the fact, and demanded the explanation which he naturally supposed could be given. The matter wib referred to the agent, who admitted the facts, but his (Sir George’s) letter was not answered, and he was unaware of the facts of the case until he saw the papers on the table of the House. The aspersions made by the Colonial Treasurer upon the Provincial Governments could have none of the blackness about them of acts such as those to which he had just alluded. As long as such aspersions were made there should be found one voice in the colony to refute them. With respect to those doubtful transactions, many men in Hew Zealand had told him that they feared to come forward in such cases because the powerpossessedby the Government was despotic. No one could doubt such was the case. Why, the funds placed at their disposal (considering the smallness of the population) for the purpose of dealing with their fellow-men were greater than that permitted in any other country, and those powers had been wrongfully exercised by the Government occupying those benches. He spoke with feelings of emotion because of the aspersions on provincialism to which he had listened, and with a determination to see that a stop was put to such a shocking system as had prevailed. That powerful influence of the Government was exercised in that House and out of it. He recognised it in many directions. A Voice : No.

Sir GEORGE GREY : Who saya no '! Eet him come forward and speak out. I challenge him to speak up now in the face of all New Zealand.

Mr. KATENE here rose to say that he had said no.

Sir GEORGE GREY : It was not him. The “no” which he heard was an English “no.” (Laughter.) He was glad to see, however, that no English member had had the hardihood to stand up and say no. If anyone chose to deny what he had stated, he would simply refer them to the records of the country. He had only given them one instance, but could cite many other cases which he had himself brought under the notice of the Government, and with respect to which he had received no explanation. He then referred to the £4OOO advanced to Sir Julius Vogel, to show the extravagance that existed in public departments. Mr. KATENE then entered into an explanation as to why he had said no. It was because Sir George Grey had said this was a bad Government, and as ho was a member of

the Government, and was actuated by strictly honorable feelings, he objected to any such allusion.

The Hon. Mr. BOWEN said the present was no time for entering upon matters which had been introduced by the bon. member for Auckland City West. He might say that the Government on the proper occasion would be prepared to enter upon the discussion of any question such as that raised by Sir George Grey, and that they would endeavor to throw as much light as was possible on any question brought before the House. With respect to what had fallen from the hon. member for Parnell, he might say that the Government did not look upon it as likely that this House or committee would produce a perfect thing, or that the next Parliament would reach perfection in their efforts ; but be thought they ought to take care that until they were able to perfect their scheme they should have no hiatus which would create inconvenience to the public. Now, among the many powers which were vested in Superintendents there were some functions which must necessarily be vested in someone, in order that the business of the conntrv might be carried on. As bis hon. colleague, the Colonial Treasurer) had just now stated, the Government did not propose to substitute anything in the place of provincialism that session, but they did hope that by degrees a proper system of local self-government would be introduced. But there must be some powers which must in the meantime be vested in somebody, and that must be in some executive body responsible to that House. Therefore, he thought it was necessary that they should provide for the present powers and functions of Superintendents being vested in the Governor, with the understanding that, so far as possible, they should be delegated to local bodies.

Mr. ROLLESTON thought the remarks of Sir George were justified by the insult cast at provincial institutions by the Hon. the Colonial Treasurer. He knew, moreover, of his own knowledge, that much of what he had said with respect to the land transactions The Hon. Major ATKINSON explained that his remark (which had elicited the foregoing extraordinary discussion) was a perfectly natural one. They were now considering a Bill for the abolition of provinces, and he had simply expressed the opinion which he in common with many others held, that Provincial Governments were the worst form of centralism in New Zealand. He denied that the Government had thrown any obstacles in the way of inquiries. They would be at all times ready to meet the bon. gentleman (Sir George Grey), and if he would not introduce those foreign matters into the ordinary business of the House, it would enable them to be considered much sooner ; but the hon. gentleman seemed ever ready to drag in the question of land transactions whenever he could seize the opportunity.

Mr. TAKAMOANA said the abolition of provinces was directed against the Maori race.

Mr. WI PARATA defended the Government, and entered into a statement of the manner in which native lauds were bought by the General Government.

Mr. TAIAROA rose to a point of order. The debate was not on the native lauds question. The CHAIRMAN ruled that Mr. Wi Parata could proceed, and he did so. Sir GEORGE GREY replied. He said the Colonial Treasurer appeared to think the remark he made on Provincial Government was trifling, and one upon which it was unnecessary for him (Sir George) to comment. He would observe, however, that the hon. gentleman spoke as a Minister, and the whole tendency of his observations throughout the session had been to lower provincial administration in the eyes of the country. Continually had his remarks been of the most offensive character, which had stung him to the quick. Particularly had he adopted this offensive style of speech when alluding to the Province of Auckland, the position of which he had characterised as being a public scandal. Now, his position was this, that not only did the General Government speak with impunity of the provincial administration, but, as was known by many honorable members of that House, the Press of the colony was to a great extent under Government control. At this Ministers and others laughed. Sir GEORGE GREY : Hon. members might laugh, but he could give reasons for what he said. He would fearlessly assert that such was the case. It was he who was placed in an unfair position by the Government. And with reference to this provincial question, if he ventured to speak upon it, remarks of a kind were made which ought not to be made —were made on utterances he had given forth in that House. For instance, one hon. gentleman had characterised his utterances as disloyal. He maintained that no more loyal man existed in the country than himself. Then, one of the hangers-on of the Government, who was also connected with one of the Government papers. (Criesof Name.) He meant the hon. member for Nelson, Mr. Lnckie, who did not hesitate to have inserted in his paper most offensive language regarding his (the speaker’s) loyalty. The CHAIRMAN interrupted Sir George Grey, to say that he was not in order in speaking of any member as a hanger-on of the Government.

Sir GEORGE GREY : Then I apologise sir. If I could find a word which would more fittingly describe the gentleman, I would adopt it. However, that hon. gentleman did not hesitate to allow to be printed in his paper remarks accusing me of almost traitorous conduct, and by that means circulated it throughout the colony and the world. Mr. LUCKIE rose to a point of order. The hon. member for Auckland City West had repeated the offensive expression. The CHARMAN understood the hon. gentleman to withdraw it.

Mr. LUCKIE : He lias since repeated it. The CHAIRMAN : I did not hear him. Sir GEORG U GREY continued. The only chance, therefore, he had of meeting the attacks made by the Government on provincial administration was to speak in plain terms regarding the administration of the General Government ; and he contended that one of the great objects in getting rid of provincial institutions was that the systems to which he had alluded might be maintained. He firmly believed that such was the case, and that when provincialism was abolished inquiry into all those doubtful transactions would be to a great extent prevented. He was quite justified therefore in bringing his views before the country, in order to remove the unfavorable impression regarding provincial administration which the Colonial Treasurer was endeavoring to create. He wished also that future historians might be able to convey a correct impression of the sta'e of the country when these efforts were being made to destroy the representative institution of the people. Mr. LUCKIE said he was quite disinclined to import anything like a personal discussion into the debate, but he could not pass over the observations made by the hon. member for Auckland City West with respect to himself. It was true that the hon. member had made assertions in that House, which, had they come from any other member, would be put down ; and he had said that with respect to him (Mr. Luckie) which should not have come from one who had received no small services at his hands. The statement was totally untrue. Sir George Grey had charged him with having caused to be printed a statement in which he was accused of disloyalty. He was perfectly unaware of ever having written or caused to be written anything of the kind. Sir GEORGE GREY begged to state that he had no intention of wounding the feelings of the hon, gentleman. In the course of debate he had used the word “hanger-on.” By this he meant nothing offensive ; he meant simply one of those members who were constantly with the Government, and who were running in and out of the Ministers’ rooms, and who appeared in a general way to be great friends of the Government. With regard to the other statement as to what had appeared in the lion, gentleman’s paper, ho had simply to say that offensive language had been used regarding himself, which implied that he was a perfect traitor. If, however, he had said ought to pain the hon. gentleman, he should be happy to apologise.

Mr. LITCKIE wished the hon. gentleman to make a specific charge, in order that it might be obvious what he meant. He (Mr. Luckie) could not be held responsible for everything which appeared in a paper three or four hundred miles distant.

The CHAIRMAN ruled that Sir George Grey had given ample apology, and it must therefore be accepted by the House. Mr. T. L. SHEPHERD supported the clause. Mr. GIBBS very much regretted that the hon. member for Auckland City West should be continuously making charges against the Government, without endeavoring to prove them. He seemed to think it was proper to cast aside all the feelings wh'ch usually guided men—he deemed his opponents guilty before they were tried. Mr. WAKEFIELD spoke in the same strain, and said if the investigation into the land transactions proved that the officer had been guilty of misconduct, and the Government had shielded the officer, he (Mr. Wakefield) would assist in.condemning the Government ; but until the charges were proved, it was unfair to keep nagging at the Ministry. Mr. REID opposed the omission of the provisions which it was proposed to leave out. Mr. PYKB thought that if these clauses were agreed to they would place a daugerous weapon iu the hands of the Opposition for use during the forthcoming election. The amendment was agreed to, and the section struck out.

Mr. MACANDREW then proposed an amendment, which has been already published. He said that the wisdom of such a proviso must commend itself to all members, but especicially those from Otago, for it was absolutely necessary that the present machinery in force should be preserved. Everyone admitted the educational system of Otago was a good one, and everyone must see that it was desix-able to continue it.

The Hon. Mr. BOWEN said the hon. member must see the proviso was unnecessary, because there would be no change in the system until next session, and this was one of those matters which must then be with. There was no wish to effect a change in the administration of education in Otago, but to introduce such a clause as this would but encumber the Bill, and the Government could not consent to it. No doubt the next Parliament would make the best arrangements. Mr. FITZHERBERT supported the amendment, and said it was natural that the hon. member for Port Chalmers, who had built up so perfect a system, should desire to prevent it being swept away amid the confusion that would follow.

The Hon. Major ATKINSON said if the Government conceded this they might as well carry the principle further, and add provisos confirming the present system in Wellington and other provinces, and also to confirm in office Superintendents and Provincial Councils. This Bill did not come into operation till after next session, and next session the Government would be prepared to deal with education. Mr. MACANDREW said the proviso would not come into operation till the Act did, and therefore there could be no harm done. It was well to secure to Otago its educational institutions, and he was sure the people of Otago would never be satisfied if the management of education were taken out of the hands of the people. If this were adopted the people would know exactly what was to be the law of education.

Mr. T. L. SHEPHERD should support the amendment, because it would make the measure popular. Mr. STOUT said when the Government announced their intention of introducing two Bills, one of these dealing with education, he had charged them with a change of front, and he now charged them with having again changed front. They now really came down and said they had no intention of dealing with the education question this session. What faith could there be placed in the solemn declarations of the Government. It was clear to his mind that the Government had never intended to do more than centralise all power in Wellington. They were very good at demolishing, but had not yet risen to a contemplation of building up.

Mr, R.OLLESTON asked the Government to accept the amendment, and moreover make it general. Mr. REID could not see why there should be any objection to the clause, for it embodied the very views which the Government had professed to hold. If Otago supporters of the Government rejected the proposal, they would do it at the peril of their seats. Education would be more efficiently and economically administered locally than from a common centre.

Mr. WOOD supported the amendment. Mr. McLEAN hoped the Government would accept the suggestion of the hon. member for Avon (Mr. Rolleston.) Sir F. D. BELL urged the Government to accept the proposition, for if there were many things to abolish there were many institutions to preserve. From the first he had been of opinion that the principal work of the session should be to clear away political difficulties, so that the future might be devoted to the building up process. He failed to see how the Government could object to the proposition.

Mr. J. E. BROWN supported the amend ment.

The Hon. Major ATKINSON expressed willingness on behalf of the Government to accept the clause if made general. He again asserted that theGovernmenthadueverintended to deal with education this session. With reference to the remarks of the hon. member for Caversham (Mr. Stout), he desired to say that the hon. member had not acted fairly. The whole position of things was changed, and what was a good and reasonable proposition some days ago it was perfectly reasonable to withdraw now.

Mr. CURTIS supported the general clause. Mr. C REIGHTON said he much regretted the action of the Government, for it seemed that most of the benefits supposed to be derived from abolition of the provinces would now be lost. It would have been far better had the Government considered its position with regard to amendments of which notice had been given, before coming into the House. Certainly, all hope of a national scheme of education was at an end. Perhaps the best thing to do now was to determine how many of the clauses of the Bill were necessary to secure abolition of the provinces, carry those, and abandon the remainder. (No.) That was the best thing to do after the course the Governmenthad pursued that evening—acourae which m ist be unsatisfactory to their party. He had given them a loyal support throughout the session, hut must express disappointment at their conduct to-night, in giving way on a question which involved such a large principle. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said if the doctrine of the hon. member for Eden was to be accepted, ho did not see the use of the House going into committee. The Government had taken up a decided position, hut for all that, it was the duty of the House to determine what should be done. Both friends and foes all round the House had spoken in favor of the acceptance of this motion if made general, and had the Government not accepted it they would have placed themselves in a false position. The House hero adjourned for twenty minutes. PERSONAL EXPLANATION. On resuming, a personal explanation was made by Mr. Luckie, in which he said the telegram referred to by the hon. member for Auckland City West had not been sent by him (Mr. Luckie) but by the Press Agency. THE ABOLITION BILL. The Hon. Major ATKINSON then proposed that the clause should be passed as already amended, and a new clause would be prepared so os to meet the requirements of the case. Mr. STOUT objected to this, and Mr. Pyke called for a division, which resulted in Major Atkinson’s motion being carried, the numbers being—Ayes, 40 J noes, 5. Mr. WOOL proposed that after the words “performed by,”inclause 5, the remaining words of the sentence be excised, for the purpose of the addition of the following words—“ Collector of Customs at the principal port of the provincial district.”

.After a few words from Mr. Stafford and the Hon. Major Atkinson, The amendment was negatived, and the clause passed as printed. Clause 10. —All lands, tenements, goods, chattels, moneys, and things in action, and all real and personal property whatever, and all rights and interests therein, which immediately before the date of the abolition hereunder of any province were vested in or belonged to the Superintendent of any province, as such Superintendent, shall on the date of the abolition thereof vest in her Majesty the Queen. All revenues and moneys, and all securities for such moneys, which on the date of the abolition of any province may be the property of, or invested on behalf of, such province, shall on the date of the abolition thereof vest in her Majesty the Queen. Provided that if at the date of the abolition of any province any moneys or revenues of such province shall have been specifically set apart, and shall be available for the purposes of public works within such province, or any district thereof, such moneys or revenues shall bo applicable to such purposes accordingly. The Hon. Major ATKINSON moved that at the end of the first section concluding with the words, “ her Majesty the Queen,” shall be added the following words “ And for the same purposes and object, and subject to the same powers and conditions, as are now vested in the Superintendents.” Mr. STOUT urged that the clause should he postponed till after the new clause in respect to education, because the two were so intimately interwoven. Mr. DIGNAN supported the suggestion, because punctuation was wanted. As it was now punctuated, the clause dealt with .the private as well as the public property of Superintendents. (A laugh.) Mr. STOUT said the clause, if passed as amended, would be bad sense and worse grammar. The words “except as hereinafter provided” were placed at the beginning of the clause. After a few remarks from the Hon. Major Atkinson, Mr. REID proceeded to remark upon the clause, and in referring to three new clauses, 28, 29, and 30, which had been circulated during the evening, said the Government were attempting to force upon the Opposition an illiberal interpretation of the arrangement come to between the Opposition and the Government. Those new clauses bound the Opposition t» agree to the Provincial Councils not meeting again, and to no new contracts being entered upon, but, as he understood it, no such arrangement had been made, and he should object to it. Mr. SHEEHAN, said he had understood the arrangement to be this—That the Opposition merely withdrew factious opposition, and in return the Government conceded that the Act should not be brought into operation until after the close of the next session. All other questions were left open. If any other arrangement had been come to, the leaders of the Opposition had not communicated it to their followers, and he should not accept such an arrangement unless told that he was bound to it.

Mr. ROLLESTON said there seemed to be some misapprehension as to the nature of the agreement come to, which was that the Government were to take steps to protect the colonial chest by having the power to review contracts entered into. This he thought to be a very necessary provision. Mr. STOUT' had understood there was no other agreement than that which had been stated by the Hon. the Native Minister, and he should decline to ho hound to such an agreement even if it had been entered into. The Opposition might just as well have walked off home.

Sir DONALD McLEAN said that all the propositions of the Government had been agreed to with the exception' of that with reference to the Provincial Councils not meeting again, to which the Opposition leaders had not been disposed to agree. It had been agreed that all payments after a certain period were to be reviewed by the General Government. That was distinctly understood between the parties, and so explicit did it seem, that it was not considered desirable to put it in writing. The clause as amended was then passed. Clause 11.—All contracts existing immediately before the date of the abolition hereunder of any province, and all actions, suits, proceedings, and things begun and not completed at the date of the abolition hereunder of any province, of, by, or against the Superintendent of such abolished province as such, shall belong and attach to and be enforced by and against her Majesty the Queen. On this clause being moved. The Hon. Mr. FITZHERBERT proceeded to give his ideas on the question of compromise. There had been four proposals submitted by the Government. With regard to the first, there was no doubt about the arrangement. The Act was not to come into force until after the cud of next session. In consideration of this concession, the members of the Opposition bound themselves as a party not to offer factious opposition, and to this they would faithfully adhere. With regard to propositions 3 and 4, it was distinctly understood that they were left open questions, especially that referring to the calling together of the Provincial Councils. While the members of the Opposition knew that the Government could not interfere with the operation of the present Appropriation Acts, they at the same time thought that under tbe circumstances—abolition having been decided upon—it was but right that the Government should see that no contracts were entered into except there was sufficient money in the provincial treasury to meet the outlay, or unless, at least, there was a probability of there being money within a short time. These, however*, were considered matters of detail, the main question being the withdrawal of factious opposition, on the Government engaging not to bring the Act into operation until the conclusion of next session. For himself, he would at once say that he thought the Government had done right in taking proper care that there should be no undue expenditure undertaken by the provinces which might embarrass the colony at a future time. That was exactly the position, and he thought it would be a great pity if these negotiations should be rendered nugatory by any misunderstanding. The Hon, Major ATKINSON concurred generally with what the last speaker had said, but added it was distinctly understood that the leaders of the Opposition had bound their party to give effect to all the propositions made by the Government, excepting that relating to the meeting of the Provincial Councils. Mr. Stout and Mr. Reid reiterated their intention of declining to be bound to such an arrangement, and would prefer to revert to the same position as they occupied last week ; and the former moved that progress be reported. Mr. ROLLESTON intimated his approval of and intention to support the arrangement come to, Mr. MONTGOMERY recognised that it was the bounden duty of the Government to protect the revenue. It would not be creditable to the House to split on a question like this. Mr. REID said the proposal had been made at the instance of a single member of the Government, to gratify personal feeling, and to prevent a railway being carried out in Otago. Ho referred to the Minister for Public Works. The Hon, Mr. RICHARDSON said ho had been referred to, and would state a few of the facts. Ho had been told by several members of the House that large contracts were about being entered into with Otago. He at onco acquainted his colleagues of the fact, remembering the arrangement which had been come to, and then sought his Honor the Superintendent of Otago, to ascertain as to how far the rumor was correct, and with the intention of reminding him of the nature of the arrangement. He mot the hon. member for Taieri, and told him what had been said, and what ho considered to bo the postion of affairs. That was the only action which had been taken, and he should have acted in the same manner in regard to any province or any district. (Hear, hear.) Mr. STOUT said he only wished to bo

satisfied of this—that he was not hound to vote for any particular clause. Mr. FITZEERBERT said present appropriations could not be affected by the Bill. It could only apply to future appropriations, and in this respect all must be at one. Sir DONALD McLEAN said the Government did not wish to place any member in a false position, and of course if the hon. member desired to vote against any clause he could do so. The motion to report progress was withdrawn, and, the clause having been passed, progress was reported and leave obtained to sit again. At 12.30 the House adjourned.