PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4539, 7 October 1875, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wednesday, October 6. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at 2 o’clock. THE POSTAL CONTRACT. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE inquired if the Government would ask the Council to ratify the mail contract via San Francisco, and thus give members of that branch of the Legislature an opportunity of expressing an opinion ? The Hon. Hr. POLLEN said if such a course were usual, the Government would do so with the greatest pleasure. NEW BILLS. The Hon. Dr. MEN ZIES introduced a Bill intituled an Act to Amend the New Presbyterian Church Act, 1875. He explained that the sole object of the Bill was to supply a few words which had been by inadvertence omitted from the Act passed earlier in the session. The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY introduced a Bill intituled a Bill to Regulate Fencing in the Province of Canterbury. ORDERS OV THE DAT. The Licensing Act Amendment Bill, Invercargill Municipal Council Empowering and Waterworks Loan Bill, Imbecile Passengers Act 1873 Amendment Bill, and Anatomy Bill, were all read a second time. The Wellington Rivers Bill, Greytown and Masterton Reserves Bill, Highway Boards Empowering Bill, and Wellington Tollgates Bill, were read a third time, and passed. The Invercargill Municipal Council Empowering and Waterworks Loan Bill, Imbecile Passengers Act 1873 Amendment Bill, and Anatomy Bill, were considered in committee, reported, and the two latter were passed. ABOLITION OP PROVINCES BILL.

The Hon. Mr. MANTELL resumed the debate on this Bill, and said although he had been strongly opposed to abolition, he should not have supported the Bill had not its operation been postponed till after next session. The measure was not a good one, because it did not provide for the succeeding institutions to provincialism, and he should have liked to have seen the transition more gentle. In the past, too much power had been given to the Provincial Councils, and had a seat in a Provincial Council been accompanied by a seat in the General Legislature, provincialism would have gradually died out. He should heartily vote for abolition, but did not like the Bill.

The Hon. Mr. SCOTLAND did not think it proper that at the fag end of its existence a Parliament should pass a measure of this kind. He had three years ago voted in favor of giving provinces additional powers and money, and was sorry the Bill had not passed. He believed now that it would be better to increase the powers of provinces, instead, of increasing the powers of the General Government. The promises of the Government never could be carried q.ut, but would end in the land compact of 1856 being broken, which would be an act of spoliation ; therefore, he should vote against the Bill. The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY, as a member of the Provincial Council of Canterbury for a number of years, desired to say a few words in reference to the Bill. While he had always admitted that some alterations were required in the present system of provincial government, he thought it should be in the direction of qualifying their powers. He had always thought this, and a few years ago had moved and carried a resolution embodying his views, to be forwarded to the General Government, with the hope that something might be done in the way of making the two systems work together more harmoniously ; and had that resolution been given effect to, they would not have seen such a Bill as the Abolition of Provinces Bill before them. There was a feeling that the Bill had been sent up to the Council merely as a matter of necessity, and that the Council were to deal with it as a purely formal matter. He did not share in that feeling, believing the details were of such importance that the Council should discuss them. He could say, from what he had seen of the details, he thought them decidedly objectionable, and felt convinced that they would not give satisfaction in the larger provinces, such as Otago and Canterbury. Therefore, he desired the Council to express an opinion on the matter. It was true that it was said the matter would come before them for consideration in another session, but that might not be the case ; and if members of the Council did their duty, they would at once apply themselves to examine the Bill, and see whether they were justified in giving up provincial institutions for the substitutes promised in this Bill. He for one was not prepared to see provincialism swept away till something more satisfactory was put before him to take the place of it. He proposed to refer to several of the clauses, and should commence by a reference to the tenth clause. That clause was supposed to provide for education in the provinces, but he wished to point out that in some of the larger provinces, such as Otago and Canterbury, there would be no educational bodies in existence after the Act came into operation. In Otago, the members of the Executive were the Board of Education, so that if the Provincial Government were abolished the Education Board would also be abolished; while in Canterbury they had no board at all, everything being in the hands of the Government. It seemed to him, therefore, that unless a general Act or special Acts were brought in at once the whole scheme of education, both in Otago and Canterbury, would fall to the ground when this Bill came into operation. Then with regard to the disposition of fines on scabby sheep, under the 14th clause he believed owing to the system in vogue in Canterbury the result would be unfair. He considered a great mistake had been made by the House of Representatives in so amending the 16th clause that the land fund could not be appropriated for immigration purposes. As they all knew, up to 1870 the provinces had been charged with immigration, and if they had not, Canterbury and Otago would not have been in the position they were at the present time. Since then the cost had been met out of loan, but it was not likely that would be done in future, and the annual cost entailed by immigration must be met by the Consolidated Revenue. Now, he did not think the Consolidated Revenue could bear that charge, for there was no doubt that the colony must keep up immigration in a small stream, and he thought the land fund might fairly be called upon to bear it. He regarded clause 17 —the clause referring to the issue of Treasury hills to make up deficiencies—as a most important clause, and one of the most objectionable clauses in the Bill. He looked upon it as a most vicious principle to endeavor to provide funds for the provinces where no land fund existed, in anticipation of the results of future years. He did not believe, however, that more than the £IOO,OOO worth would be issued, for it would be found that they would never be repaid ; but he was afraid that the land compact of 1856 would be broken, and the whole land funds of the provinces made to contribute to the general revenue of the colony. (Hear, hear.) Referring to clauses 18, 19, and 20, he remarked that they had been misplaced, as clause 28 should follow clause 19, and then passed on to discuss the question of subsidies to road boards. He looked upon the proposed payments from the Consolidated Revenue as a mere sham and bribes held out to centres of population. The Consolidated Revenue would never be able to bear this strain for any length of time, at any rate not for more than a year, as tire claims upon it now were as much as it could bear, and besides this, he was quite sure that within the course of a year or two there would bo a great cry throughout the country —a cry which the Parliament would not be able to withstand —■ for a great reduction in the Customs duties. With reference to these road boards, he thought they should be divided into two classes—the first class consisting of cities and old-established districts; and the second class, of newly formed towns and outlying districts. The reason for this was apparent; for as in Victoria—whence this scheme of subsidies was obtained, but where it had had to be abandoned some years ago—old established districts would get all the money, while those newly established would bo starved out. That would certainly be the result of this measure, unless something were done in the

direction he had indicated. He thought much inconvenience would result from Provincial Councils not meeting again, and altogether was much dissatisfied with the proposals of the Government. In fact, it appeared to him that they were incapable of bringing forward a proper measure for consideration, and he was not prepared to vote for the Bill.

The Hon. Mr. LAHMAN said the part of the colony from which he came, Westland, would hail the Bill as the best thing which could befall the colony. Whatever might have been the cause, provincial institutions had now failed, and the country cried out for a simplification of government. As for the example of Belgium and Switzerland, quoted by Mr. Johnston, they had only been shown the bright side of the picture. In the latter place, not only had the taxation been heavy, but bloodshed had been one of the results. He was satisfied there was nothing like the English Constitution, and it was to this they should refer, instead of to countries with which they had nothing in common. The people of New Zealand were tired of small provinces, and looked to the colony for that justice which provinces had hitherto denied them, and there was not the slightest fear that any of the ill results which had been prophesied in the other branch of the Legislature would accrue from he Bill. .He believed the Government would be quite able to carry out their financial promises.

The Hon. Dr. POLLEN, after a few preliminary remarks, proceeded to criticise the speeches which had been delivered in opposition to the Bill, and in answer to the Hon. Mj. Chamberlin, whom he must consider for the nonce leader of the Opposition, said the hen. gentleman had made several assertions, but had adduced no arguments in support, therefore, it would be sufficient for him (the Premier) to say his opinion was opposed to that of the hen. gentleman. He contended that the promises >. made were not delusive ; for before making his propositions the Colonial Treasurer

carefully gone into the financial aspect of the question, and in his place in the House of Representatives had declared that it was possible not only now, but in all probability for . some time in the future, to maintain those promises to pay the endowments which the Bill held forth. He (the Premier) was more inclined to rely upon the statement of the Colonial Treasurer, with all the facts before him, than upon the ex parte assertions of the HonMr. Chamberlin, As for the statement that the Government had brought forward this measure in order to obtain support at the general elections, he could not see the'cause for it. How was the support to be obtained? Inasmuch as the Bill having been passed in the House of Representatives by a large majority, ceased to be the Bill of the Government, and, in fact, became the Act of all the representatives of the people, he did not see how the Government could claim support on account of it. He was sorry the hon. gentleman could not support the Government, .but thought the Bill would be passed nevertheless, and trusted that experience would teach the hon. member he was wrong. Another hon. gentleman (Dr. Menzies) had expressed himself as generally favorable to the proposals of the Government, but had asked questions as to what was to follow provincial institutions—what was to be their substitute. His answer was that no substitute was necessary—that these institutions had been created to meet particular circumstances, and those circumstances having in the course of time and progress of settlement disappeared, such institutious were no longer necessary—had, in fact, become anachronisms which might be properly swept away. That which was to succeed them permanently to secure local government was a question of time ; that which was to succeed them immediately were road hoards and local institutions of various kinds, which had been growing up in the colony for the last twenty years, although the effect of the central sing influence of provincialism had been to stop the growth of these institutions, and" to absorb that portion of the revenue which ought to have been distributed for the encouragement of the growth and increased, usefulness of these road boards. The Provincial Governments had to that extent stopped the progress of real local selfgovernment in the colony, which he believed could only be promoted by the change. Whether in the future, the form of local selfgovernment would continue to be road boards, or w hetber shires would take their place, depended very much upon the people themselves, or their representatives. . In the Bill’ now. before the House of Representatives—the Loca Government Bill—the Government had indicated generally their views of what ought toh done, but it was probable that that Bill, e-

if it should pass the Assembly this se would not be brought into operation ur Abolition Bill came into operation, ar that time- the people;during the e’ would have the opportunity of exp.opinion as to the form of G they would like. Their rep' would then come to the next session prepared to assist and i Government on that point. His J had said also that it was unsafe, that mistake for a central government to , too much with local affairs, but that w;. the mistake the Government desired to a\ The operation of the Abolition Bill would to centralise legislative power in the Assemblj, where it ought to be centralised, and as far as executive and administrative power went, decentralise and strengthen as much as possible. His hon. friend opposite (Mr. John Johnston) had made a speech to which all had listened with the greatest pleasure 'and attention, and which had induced them;to regret that they did not hear the hon. . gentleman more frequently on questions arising in the Council His hon. friend had denied, in reference to this Bill, that there had been any expression of opinion by the country on the question of abolition, but he thought that, seeing the proposition of the Government had been before the country in a most prominent manner during the recess —that the energies of those interested in the continuance of the provincial system had been exercised in endeavoring to influent public opinion—seeing, he said, that such had been the case, and there had been no expression of opinion against the measure, he thought the Government might fairly argue that when sogreata change was involved andnooutcry had been raised against it, silence might be taken as an absolute and complete acceptance of the proposition. If the change, which was said to amount to the abolition of human nature or something of that kind, was so very bad, they would assuredly have heard from the people < the colony, who would not be false to t> rights ; but as no such complaints had brought forward, they might safely co>

that the feeling of the people was wi' in the change about to bo made, passed on to the objection taken graph in the Governor’s speech last which it was said the tone of de’ Council was in favor of a"

defended the paragraph beca general and of a carefully-guardi The reference to Belgium and Swit. been so ably answered by Mr. Lai. he need not refer to it. Another mate his hon. friend (Mr. Johnston) had also to, was of greater importance, though not know that it was directly connected the question then under discussion, viz., financial operation of floating the four mil loan. During his remarks on that subject used words which he (Dr. Pollen) was very son_ to hear used in reference to the transact tion. He had said it was “discreditable.” Now, the whole of the transactions with respect to this loan had been published, and had been freely canvassed and freely discussed throughout the colony ; they had been before the representatives of the people in the Assembly, and it had been shown that the whole of the transactions between the Government and Rothschild, who disposed of that loan, had been conducted by authorised parties—the Crown Agents, the Agent-General, and the late Premier and Colonial Treasurer. All this had been shown ; and the general verdict was, that considering the magnitude of the transaction, and considering the circumstances under which it was effected, it was in all respects not a discreditable transaction, as the hon. gentleman had characterised it, hut a transaction which was eminently creditable to the parties negotiating, and to the colony a highly success-

ful financial operation. He therefore did not know in what sense the word could have been used. The evidence of the transaction -being discreditable, if he understood it rightly, did not satisfy him that the word was properly used. First, it had been said that the debentures had been refused quotation upon the Stock Exchange, and that owing'.to the same circumstances causing this refusal the matter had been referred to a committee of 1 the House of Commons appointed to inquire into foreign loans. His friend had not said what was exactly correct in, the .first instance. The debentures had not-been refused a quotation, but his statement was correct to this extent, the scrip before the issue of the debentures had been refused the quotation ; but the reason for-that refusal wasnot becauseof any action of the Government or the agents of the Government, but owing to a supposed irregularity in the disposal of the loan by Messrs. Rothschild themselves. It was said that before the four million loan was advertised the firm had disposed of one-half of it, and it was imputed to them as an irregularity. They explained that in doing as they had they had followed a not unusual course, and thus the matter was settled. The operation had been a new one. It disarranged existing arrangements for the disposal .of colonial loam, and necessarily, inasmuch- as it took the process out of the usual course, it disappointed and annoyed a great number of persons who had, or supposed themselves to have, vested interests in the negotiation of these colonial loans. Under these circumstances he thought the Council would perceive that the statements of irregularities were easily traceable to the authors, for human nature was human nature on the other side of the water just as it was here. He trusted that the expression discreditable” would be withdrawn after that explanation. As for the reference to a parliamentary committee, they knew the value of a mere reference, and nothing wrong should be thought of till the committee’s report was received. In reference to the "Hon. Mr. Buckley’s objections, they related to matters of detail, and could be best discussed in committee, but he might say that provision would be made by the Government to prevent the confusion which the hon. gentleman apparently feared. A division was called for on the main question, and resulted as follows: . Ates, 23. Captain Baillie Mr. Miller Colonel Brett Mr. Ngatata ML Edwards Mr. Nurse Mr. Cray • Mr. Peter Mg. Hart r Dr, Pollen Mr. Hb’mes , Mr. Eenwick Mr. G. K. Johnson Major Richmond Colonel Kenny . ■ - Mr. Stokes Mr. Kohere Mr. Waterhouse Mr La 1 1 man Colonel Whitmore Dr. Menzies ' '' Mr. Wigley Mr. Mantell. Noes, 4. Mr. Chamberlin .. Mr. Russell Mr. J. Johnston Mr. Scotland, The BUI was ordered to be committed next day, andithe House then adjourned. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wednesday, October 6. The Speaker took the chair at the usual hour. PETITIONS AND NOTICES. Certain petitions and notices of motion were presented. Mr. SHEEHAN asked the Native Minister when-the report of officers employed to inquire into the petition of the Queen of Beauty shareholders would be laid on the table ? Sir DONALD McLEAN said the papers had just been received, and were being copied. HOW ’ did’ THE COMMITTEE’S REPORT OBTAIN PUBLICITY ?

The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS said he had been asked to offer some explanation with respect to the manner in which the report of the Ohinemuri Miners’ Rights Investigation Committe'e'had'been telegraphed to certain papers in the colony, but he thought it was doubtful whether, without instructions from the House, he would be justified in doing so. The SPEAKER stated that the Ohinemuri report was laid on the table of the House at ten o’,clock at .night, and was. placed in the hands off the clerk, with instructions to have it priutedj.ahd the next morning it appeared in every..newspaper in the colony. The question, therefore, was who transmitted-the report, and by what., means had it been telegraphed to these newspapers before it had been laid on the table' of.-the House? Members would see that !it- was destructive of a privilege of the House‘-if a report was to be surreptitiously obtained and despatched per telegraph to different parts of the colony before even the House had been put in, posses-, gion of that report. The information to be desired was whether /the'.Commissioner of

Telegraphs had authorised the transmission of telegrams after ten o’clock at night; if not, it would-he perfectly obvious that the report must have been telegraphed before it was laid on\the table, which fact threw doubt upon the honesty of certain of the Government officers. Mr. BRYCE thought he might throw some jjrrht: - oh' the subject. He had made a statement'to thd Speaker that morning, which he had, ’ho objection to repeat. After the first meeting of committee he found published on the same day, in the Evening Post, a statement .of the proceedings, which almost '• amounted to a report of what took place in the committee-room. He had been under the impression that the proceedings of committees were not to be divulged, and he drew the attention of the committee to the fact, and also brought it before the notice of the House, when he had been informed by the Speaker that there was no imperative rule upon the subject, and that in fact the practice of the House of Commons tended in the direction of giving full publicity to committee proceedings. ■' He believed himself that such a course was quite proper, inasmuch as the proper carrying out of representative institutions was quite impossible without full publicity. When he found, therefore, that no imperative rule existed in reference to this subject, he began to be exceedingly careless in the matter. As chairman of the committee, he had had a draft of the report, and had taken it upon himself to show it to members. It was out of his hands repeatedly, and he did not know what became of it in the intervals. Although the report wus only a draft report, the alterations ,made by committee were very immaterial, so .that in fact the report might have been telegraphed days before it came on. He thought this statement was quite sufficient to indicate that the report could have become public property without any dishonor on the part of the servants of the House. He himself thought it foolishness to endeavor to conceal these things, and moreover, that it was next to impossible to do so. The SPEAKER pointed out that the report of the committee might have been re-committed and amended, in which case it was undesirable that an erroneous statement should be made in the different papers of the colony. Another point was that the evidence, which did not appear on the table, was published in the following morning's paper. Mr. hi AC ANDREW suggested that the discussion should be postponed till Friday,

which was a Government day. Sir DONALD McLEAN announced that the person principally concerned in the improper issue of miners’ rights at Ohinemuri had been dismissed from the Government

service as laud purchase commissioner and He further stated that the Government would inform the House of any further action which might be taken in the matter. Messrs. Fyke, T. Kelly, and Bryce having addressed the House, Mr. WAKEFIELD hoped the question would be settled definitely either one way or the other. The morning paper had made no explanation, but had, on the contrary, even made fun at having obtained the information, merely saying, “ we got it.” The subject was allowed to drop. goldfields amendment bill.

The message from the Legislative Council •“specting the amendments made by them in e Goldfields Bill, and disapproved of by the use of Xtcpresentatives, was read by the ‘KKB, who stated that the question was r e of considerable importance. Members ould see that if the Legislative Council were Emitted by the House to have the right of altering any charges on revenue made by this

House, they might have every Bill providing for charges upon revenue referred to them again with amendments. Ho might state that the practice of the House of Commons in such circumstances would be not to proceed any further in the matter, either by the appointment of a conference or in any other way. Sir DONALD McLEAN as the message was calculated to give rise to a question of great importance, proposed that it should be postponed until there was more time for its consideration. He should not like to see the Bill thrown out, as it was one of considerable public importance. Ultimately it was decided that the message be considered next day, when, if found necessary, it could bo adjourned until Friday, a Government day.

waiiepeka railway deviation. Mr. THOMSON moved that it was desirable that the Government should give effect to the recommendation of the Public Works Committee on the subject of railway deviation at Waitepeka. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said the deviation asked for would entail an additional outlay of £17,000. He thought the work would be injudicious. Some discussion followed, after which Mr. MAC ANDREW moved an amendment, which was carried, that the Hon. Mr. Richardson visit the locality in question, so as to enable him to judge of the merits of the case from personal observation. MOTUEKA BRIDGE. Mr. C. PARKER moved that the report of the Immigration and Public Works Committee, on the question of the erection of a bridge over the Motueka River, on petition of the inhabitants of the district of Motueka, be referred to the favorable consideration of the Government.—Agreed to. STATE FURNITURE. Mr. YONDER HUYDK moved that the House should, to-morrow, resolve itself into a committee of the whole, to consider of a respectful address to the Governor, praying his Excellency to place on the supplementary estimates a sum not exceeding £ISOO, for the purpose of providing such furniture for the Government House, at Auckland, as will make it a fit place of residence during his Excellency’s visits to that part of the colony. The motion was withdrawn, at the suggestion of the Ministry. WILLIAM SWANSON’S PETITION. Mr. SHEEHAN moved that the correspondence in connection with the petition of William Swanson, presented to the House iu 1874, and laid on the table of the House, iu return to an order of the 15th day of September last, be printed. dr. o’donoghue. Mr. MACANDREW moved that the House agreed with the report of the Public Petitions Committee, on the petition of Dr. O’Donoghue, of Port Chalmers. The petition was £4OO for attendance on Government immigrants. From the statement of the Ministry, it appeared that the Government were willing to pay such an amount as their officers would certify to, and the officers would only certify to an indebtedness of £lO.

The resolution was agreed to.

RESERVOIR FOR TEVIOT. Interrupted debate on the question, that the report of the Immigration and Public Works Committee on the question of the construction of a dam or reservoir at the Teviot, on petition of miners at Roxbm-gh, be referred to the favorable consideration of the Government. The motion was agreed to without discussion. RAILWAY TO ROXBURGH. Mr. BRADSHAW moved that the report of the Immigration and Public Works Committee on the question of the extension of the main line of railway from Lawrence to Roxbugh, on petition of Mayor and Councillors of Roxburgh, be referred to the favorable consideration of the Government. The House adjourned at half-past seven; On resum : ng, The House proceeded to the order of the day CUSTOMS DUTIES REPEAL BILL. Sir GEORGE GREY moved the second reading of Certain Customs Duties Repeal Bill, and said he proposed to take off those duties which pressed on. rich and poor alike. He would first take the tax off tea, which formed the principle article of consumption in every house in the colony. He asked that the 6d. per pound levied on tea should be removed, and that the incidental charges springing from that duty should also be removed from the consumer. The incidental charges were the interest upon the duty, which had to be paid by the consumer; the cost of bonding the goods, and interest thereon, which also had to be paid by the consumer. What he asked therefore was, that a duty amounting to about £60,000 a year nominally, and in reality amounting to about £90,000, should be removed from the people of New Zealand. He asked that a similar course should be pursued with regard to coffee. The sacrifice in this case would be something like £7OOO a year. He then came to a still, more important article—sugar—the duty upon which was nominally Id. per lb. He believed if the duty were taken off sugar, together with the incidental charges to which he had referred, that New Zealand, abounding as it did in fruit, and capable of growing anything, would develope an extensive and valuable trade in the exportation of preserves. He proposed also to take the duty off flour, the duty levied upon which amounted to a very large sum. He had named that article in the schedule because he was desirous that every article of general consumption should be freed from taxation. If he should be forced by necessity he should make a concession in respect of one of these articles, in order to obtain the others ; but he did still hope that the House would agree to the Bill passing in the form he now proposed. The taxation he proposed to take off would amount to about £185,000 a-year. In taking these duties off, for the reasons he had before stated, he was sure that something like £250,000 a-year would be the relief to the population of New Zealand. That was a large and important sum ; and if, as he believed, in the course of the next two years they were likely to have a considerable pressure of taxation upon the people, and a considerable diminution in the expenditure, and a crisis which would affect almost every family in New Zealand, then, if this provision were made beforehand, it would enable them the better to meet the times which he firmly believed must come. Having made such a provision, they would have done that which was wise and just, and which he believed the Government ought to have dona ere now, and which he should always regret they had not done. He was entirely convinced from an analysis of the estimates that a reduction could be effected to the extent of from £140,000 to £150,000. In a fortnight the Government might bring down Estimates reduced by £150,000, and by doing so they would confer upon the country a lasting benefit, and if they did not, that would be the course which the coming Parliament would most assuredly pursue. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said when the hon. member for Auckland City West announced to the House that an Opposition had been organised, and that he was its leader, everyone in the House was rejoiced to hear it. But when the hon. gentleman assumed the position of leader of the Opposition, it of necessity precluded his right to assume the character of a free lance. The hon. member could not stand before the country at once as leader of her Majesty’s Opposition and free lance. Now, therefore, he (Major Atkinson) would like to know from the hon. gentleman, whether it was as leader of the Opposition, or as a free lance, that he had introduced this Bill tonight. He was bound to take it for granted, as the hon. gentleman had not disassociated himself from his party, that it was as leader of the Opposition that he had brought forward the Bill. That being the case, the position was this : he was bound to believe that the hon. gentleman knew that no Government could accept at the hands of the Opposition a Bill reducing the revenue of the country. Therefore, he must ■ conclude, either that the hon. gentleman did not desire the Bill to pass, or that he wished it to assume the form

of a want of confidence. Now, from the rumors heard in the lobbies and elsewhere, he had satisfied his mind that it was not a want of confidence motion. Therefore, he had been driven to the conclusion that the hon. gentleman had brought the Bill forward without a full knowledge of the fact that whether it was right or wrong, owing to the, position taken up by the hon. gentleman the Government wore bound to reject it. This was not a position in which the House could desire to see the leader of the Opposition. The hon. gentleman had undertaken to perform a task on Friday which ho (the speaker) shoiild be glad to see him perform. He had undertaken to prove that there was a deficit in the public revenue of one quarter of a million, and yet with this (assumed) fact before him, he came down with a Bill asking them to sweep away £176,000 of that revenue. [Major Atkinson went on to criticise details in the speech of the member for City West.] Since the hon. member had given notice of his intention to bring down the Bill, there had not been sufficient time to obtain accurate information from the various parts of the colony ; but he had obtained from Wellington the income and expenditure of three classes of laboring men, and the duty on that expenditure. This had been compiled after conversations with the men themselves, and examination of their tradesmen’s books, so that it might be taken as tolerably correct. The first case was that of a common laborer, with a wife and three children. He had £lO5 a year, making 7s. per day and overtime. The total sum he contributed to the revenue, including tobacco, was 16s. 3d. per head per year ; so that his income was £lO5 per year, and taxes only £4 Is. 2d. In the second case, the man received Ss. per day, but he did not get regular work, being employed only about 260 days in the year ; and his income amounted to £lO4 only. This man was rather more free iu his expenditure, spending more on dutiable articles. He had two children and a wife, and his contribution to the revenue amounted to £5 Is. 6d., or 18s. Bd. per head. The third case was that of an artisan with a family of four. He earned £165 per year, and contributed to the revenue £6 9s. 9d. The class of men he had referred to numbered about 90,000, or a quarter of the entire population. So that the total revenue raised from this source was under £90,000 a-year. Therefore, the balance of the revenue was raised by the remaining three-quarters of the population. The practical effect of his hon. friend’s Bill would not be to benefit the poor, especially ts a largo portion of those people were domestic servants, whose taxes were paid by their employers. It would destroy one of the most important trades in the colony, and the hon. gentleman had brought it up in such a form as left the Government no alternative but to reject it absolutely. Messrs. O’Conor. Andrew, White, Reynolds, Hunter, J. Shephard, McGlashan, Bunny, Wakefield, Gibbs, and Sir Donald McLean having spoken, Sir George Grey replied, and a division was taken on the question that the Bill be read a second time. The Bill was thrown out by 41 to 15. WESTLAND WASTE LANDS ACT;

The House went into committee on the above Bill. Considerable amendments were made, and the Bill was rej"lf.te<k OTHER BILLS. The Auckland Waste Lands Act Amendment Bill and the Dunedin Corporation Borrowing Powers Extension and Debentures Bill were read a second time. The House adjourned at 12.50 a.m.