New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4527, 23 September 1875, Page 2

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23.

The progress made in committee on the Abolition of Provinces Bill has been, so far, satisfactory. The Government has shown every disposition to meet any reasonable proposal for amendment, in a fair and candid spirit, and any unnecessary delay that has taken place is not to be attributed to the Executive. Of course, it is not to be expected, that Ministers will assent to every proposal to modify or alter the character of their measure ; but fair latitude is given for discussion and the consideration of amendments. There is absolutely no finality about any portion of the Abolition Bill excepting those sections doing away with the provincial form of government, wherefore it would be a matter for regret if the Bill, as originally drafted, should undergo any material change in conir mittee. The Government had clearly denned objects in view ; and the principle of provincial abolition once affirmed, it is better, in the interests of the public, that no material alteration should be made irr the Bill.

Having said this in general terms, we' come to the part taken on Tuesday night especially, by leaders of the Opposition, to hamper the Government on the details'of the Bill. Sir George Grey's amendment, to the effect that the Gold Duty Act should be repealed, was out of place. While sympathising with him to the full in his desire to have the gold duty abolished, for the simple reason that it is a special tax upon one industrial class, we altogether object to repealing a revenue Act by a side-wind. If it is to be repealed, let it be done at the right time and in a proper manner. The Abolition of Provinces Bill deals with revenue in so far as it allocates one branch of the colonial revenue, namely, territorial revenue, to certain specified objects ; it does not impose any fresh tax or burden, therefore it should not be made the vehicle for reducing the ■ revenue in the way proposed. Sir George Grey, however, failed to recognise this well-understood principle in legislation, and in consequence occupied a great deal of time profitlessly. "We say " profltlessly," because from the very nature of the case, the principles of taxation underlying the question raised by him, could not be fully discussed. We do not, however, say for a moment that it is either politic or expedient to continue the gold duty ; at the same time, until that fact is made plain, which has yet to be done, this source of revenue should not be interfered with. It is a different proposal altogether to treat goldfield revenue as ordinary land revenue, for the purposes of the Act. The amendment proposed by Mr. O'Conor, and accepted by Ministers, has this effect. The balance of revenue, however, which will come under this proviso, will not be large, otherwise it might seriously interfere with the Consolidated Fund. Of course, Ministers took time to consider th<i : proposal, and what they did was done with their' eyes open. For our own part, we think the proviso was unnecessary. If the goldfields receive the balance of their special revenue, after providing for local administration, they could do very well without a subsidy from Consolidated Revenue, which is raised over the whole population. The objections taken to the 16th clause were of a different character. The amendments proposed by Mr. Reeves and Mr. Montgomery went to the point, but they were inadmissible, and wo aro glad the Government resisted them. If those amendments had been incorporated in the Bill, any subsequent improvement in the matter of colonial finance, clearly pointed to by the measure before the House, would have been most difficult of accomplishment, if not impossible. The land fund is by law liable for interest on the money spent on public works; it is part of the security of the public creditor, and such it should remain. To make away with it in the way proposed, would have been an evasion of the law which would not have been creditable to the General Assembly ; and on this point we desire to bo very explicit, because if anyone takes the trouble to refer back to Sir Julius Vogel's letter in Fraser on New Zealand finance, and his subsequent letter to the London Economist on the Budget, it will be seen that the land fund occupies aprominent place in the argument, as a guarantee for the public works debt of the colony. Now, it is quite evident that New Zealand cannot afford to depart from this system of finance on light

grounds. The Colonial Treasurer did not fail; in his duty in this' 1 matter, and the thanks of the country are due: to him for his firmness. Whether the land fund should" be relieved of its liability under the Public Works and Immigration Acts is another question. Major Atkinson held out some hope on the subject; but such a proposal could only form part of a general scheme for altering the existing system of colonial and this is not before the Assembly. When it is so will be the proper time to discuss it. Meanwhile, we suspect that our engagements to the public creditor will stand in the way. The amendment by Mr. Reader Wood, to the effect that tho territorial revenue should be annually appropriated by Parliament, is open to a similar objection to that which we ui-ged against Sir George Grey's amendment on gold duty. As an abstract proposition nothing could be fairer ; but to apply it to the Abolition of Provinces Bill would defeat one of the leading principles of that measure. We refer, of course, to the localisation of the land fund. Nothing can be clearer, as a principle of Parliamentary Government than this, that Parliament should appropriate the revenue by annual vote ; but the Bill before the House is intended to continue the system of provincial appropriations, for local purposes, on the provincial form of government being abolished. It follows, therefore, that to apply the other principle, namely, that of annual appropriations by Parliament, one main object of the Bill would be lost. However proper, therefore, such a proposal may be, it is not expedient under existing circumstances. Let the Government measure have a fair chance of success, and if it be found, in practice, not to satisfy the requirements of the country, it will be changed to suit them. Mr. Reader Wood's amendment was therefore ill-timed, and a majority voted against it, which, if it had been submitted opportunely, might have been found supporting it. We have refrained from saying a word on the extraordinary statements made by Sir George Grey and Mr. Wood touching colonial finance, and certain returns laid before Parliament. But we cannot quite overlook them. Sir George has undertaken' to prove his assertion as to the manufacture of balances, and until that proof is forthcoming we suspend judgment; but Mr. Wood's accusation is of a different character. It touches the honor of the Administration, and should either be withdrawn or substantiated. If Major Atkinson used forcible language in reply, he was manifestly provoked into doing so. It is matter of regret that this occurrence took place. In future, we trust the House will confine itself strictly to the business in hand, and not give occasion for uncomplimentary criticism by the public out of doors.