PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4802, 12 August 1876, Page 2

PAR LIAME NT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Friday, August 11. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m. COMMISSIONERS OP PUBLIC DEBTS SINKING FUND, On the adjourned debate upon the motion of' the Hon. Mr. Waterhouse, that the Commissioners should be summoned to appear at the bar, coming on, Mr. Waterhouse’s motion was withdrawn, and an amendment by the Horn. Mr. Menzies to the following effect agreed to; —That the Hon. the Speaker be requested to direct the attention of the Commissioners to the delay which had occurred in the transmission of the report, and remind them of the terms of the Act. , THE NEW ZEALAND ; CROSS ENDOWMENT ACT. The Hon. Colonel WHITMOBE asked the Colonial Secretary,—Whether any, and if so, what steps have been taken to give effect to the provisions of the New Zealand Cross Endowment Act, 1869 ? The Hon. Dr. POLLEN stated he would see that the necessary steps were taken for carrying out the provisions of the Act. LEAVE OP ABSENCE. Leave of absence was granted to the Hon. Mr. Wigley for one week. SUMNER CAVE DISCOVERT. The Hon. Mr. MANTELL moved, —That there be laid upon the table, copies of all, letters and telegrams which may have been re-' ceived by the Government relative to the inquiry concerning the body found in the Sumner Cave, in accordance with a resolution of this Council, of 19th October, 1875. The hon. member stated that an English , scientific paper had copied from Hansard some remarks which he had made, to the following effect :—“He gloried in the fact that he was not a scientific man, and he did hope that he would be able to go to the grave without that disgrace.” He had never intended to say anything of the kind, and did not think he had said so. No one could have more esteem for scientific men than him, and no one, he might say, had shown a more disinterested regard for science than himself. He wished that his disclaimer should appear in the same record as the original statement, and for that reason had made it. The motion was agreed to. PUBLIC HEALTH ACT. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN introduced a Bill to amend the above Act. Bead a first time, and second reading fixed for Wednesday next. The Council then adjourned till Wednesday. HOUSE OF BEPBBSENTATIVES. A , Friday, August 11. W The Speaker took the chair at half-past two o’clock. QUESTIONS. In reply to Mr. O’Borke, who asked, — Whether it is the intention of the Government to extend the chain of special settlements throughout the Seventy-Mile Bush, so as to connect more closely the special settlements in the province of Wellington with similar settlements in Hawke’s Bay, the Hon. Major Atkinson replied in the negative, and in similar terms in which he had replied to a question about making special settlements in Auckland. The Government would not give land away, but would encourage settlement by means of the deferred payment system. Mr. BEES asked the Government—l. Whether the Premier has been appointed Agent-General in England for the colony of New Zealand ? or, 2. Whether it is intended to appoint that honorable gentleman to that position 1 or, 3. Whether it is intended to appoint any other gentleman to that position 1 The Hon. Sir JULIUS VOGEL said the Government had not yet even considered the matter, and any member acquainted with the usual practice would know that a Government would not consider such a question while a motion challenging the existence of the Government remained undisposed of. native lands commissioners reports. Sir GEOEGE GREY asked if the Government will lay before the House the reports they have received from the Native Land Purchase Commissioners in the Poverty Bay district ? The Hon. Sir DONALD McLEAN said the whole of the reports were upon the tablewith the exception of one, which contained grave charges against an officer of ,tho Government, and, it was considered inadvisable to lay that upon the table before the officer had had.

an opportunity of replying to the accusations, which it might be necessary to inquire into. Sir GEORGE GREY submitted the House should have the information at once, seeing that the House had been in session for two months. How much longer was the House to wait 1 It was pointed out that the_ hon. member was not in order in entering into a discussion on a “ question.” ■ - Sir GEORGE GREY then moved the adjournment of the House in order that the paperqjjnight be laid upon the table. As a generid principle it was absolutely necessary that tries?'-” rt-s, sßonld be placed before the ' House, as ij; i a course could not prejudicially affect the character of officers, _ because the House would not form an opinion until the whole'matter was before it. Mr. SHEEHAN supported the hon. member for the Thames, and said the House while in session was the Government, and had a right to have full access to every report. A long series of interruptions occurred owing to points of order being raised. The Hon. Sir JULIUS VOGEL then spoke, deprecating such a discussion at such a period of the business of the House, pointin 0 out that it was a course seldom followed m the House of Commons; and in reference to the main question said if the reports of officers were made to the House instead of to the Government, the consequence would be they would be filled with charges of all kinds. He pointed out that it was undesirable for membersto encourage private communications from officers of the Government. Sir GEORGE GREY denied that he had received his information from officers of the Government. . Mr. READER WOOU said the most important debates in the House of Commons had come on in this form. Mr. MACFARLANE asked when the the Government would be ready to place the papers upon the table? _ _ The Hon. Sir DONALD McLEAN said in about three weeks. Mr. REES advocated the adjournment of the House until the papers were forthcoming. Sir ROBERT DOUGLAS said it seemed to him there was an attempt to drag into an unfinished debate some circumstances which, if time were not allowed for an explanation, it might be hoped would be unfavorable to the Government. It was unfair conduct. ' The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD said the real question was whether the House was to form its opinion on a matter of which only one aspect was to be presented. If the House were to follow such a practice the result would he that many decisions of the House would be most undignified and most unfair. Further discussion ensued, after which the motion was withdrawn.

NATIVE LANDS SALES BILL. 0n the Hon. SirDONALD McLE AN asking for leave to introduce this Bill a long discussion took place.—Mr. Sheehan strongly urged the necessity of not legislating on the subject this session. He condemned the Government for having kept so important a measure back until such a late period of the session. It was a matter which affected the interests of a large section of the country, and the most important measure of the session, and its provisions should have been made known to every Maori and every European in the colony.—Messrs. Taiaroa and Karaitiana, Sir G. Grey, Messrs. Eess, Nahe, Wakefield, and others addressed the House, condemning the action of the Government.—The Hon. Sir Julies Vogel, in reply to the arguments of the preceding speakers, referred to the press of business during the session, and pointed out that not a day had been lost. As soon as ever the debate which arose on the first day of the session was over the Financial Statement had been brought down, and then political questions had been raised which would have quite Justified the Government in refusing to go on with any business until the motions brought forward by several hon. members had been entirely disposed of. However, the Government had not done that, but had pushed on business in the meantime. He deprecated such proceedings as opposing Bills on the first reading, and said if the second reading of the Bill were fixed for an early date it°could easily be postponed if necessary. place, and said it had been most unfair to the hon. member for Christchurch, who was to have spoken early in the afternoon on the separation proposals.—Mr. Montgomery and Whitaker also addressed the House on the question,—The Hon. Sir D. McLean said the sole object of the Government had been to. have the Bill fully discussed, and in fixing the second reading for next week they hoped to have the provisions of the measure discussed, and the Bill then referred to a select committee of gentlemen specially qualified to deal with it. Replying to' those speakers who had feared that there would be an outbreak, he said hon. members in so speaking suggested such matters to the natives, and it really seemed as if hon. gentlemen wished to bring about such a state of things.—Mr. Sheehan said the freedom of speech in the House was being interfered with by such talk as that of the Native Minister. First they were told that to speak of finance was to depreciate the value of securities ; now that to talk of native affairs was to promote a war. Next it would he said to talk of public works would cause buildings to fall down. He went on to criticise severely the Native department, and said it was a disgrace and a scandal to the country, and that Tt Waht Maori was a publication supported at the expense of taxpayers to .advo’cate the interests'of. the Government, and libel opponents in-.private and public capacities.—The Bill was read a first time, and the debate as to when it should be read a second time was proceeding -when the House adjourned for refreshment, THE SEPARATION RESOLUTIONS.' At 7.30 the House was crowded. Mr. STEVENS on rising was received with loud cheering. He said he did not in any degree underrate the importance of the debate the House was now engaged in, but he thought he had heard of the question before. It had not been discussed for years, hut the desire for separation had been in the minds of a certain Section of the community—more or less latent since the year 1866, but he was also aware that the proposals now before the House were in no degree so complete or so well thought out as the proposals of 1866, brought forward by the hon. member fob Waikato. He remembered the debate on those proposals exceedingly well; he remembered how ably they had been introduced, and he remembered the fate which had befallen them. He had opposed those [proposals, and the proposals now before the House were more objectionable than the proposals of 1866, and he should oppose them. But he wished to set himself right on one matter, and to Justify the vote he was about to give, and which might appear rather paradoxical in view of his utterances between 1866 and 1876. At one period of the history of the colony ha had been in favor of separation, but he would exactly explain the attitude he had taken up. In 1872 he had been a candidate for the representation of a district, and then he had expressed the opinion that it would be desirable that there should be an insular form of government. At that time the colony was going in for an enormous expenditure for immigration and public works, and in view of that large expenditure he had proposed that there should he an Immigration and Public Works Board in each island to superintend and direct the expenditure; and that also, in V ■ ctr yiection with this, it would he expedient ■ that < .management of the waste lands of thr' colony .should he handed over to these bodies.' But he might be permitted to remark at that time the schedule of railways had not been placed upon the table of the House; tho whole world was before tho people, and those loans Which tho colony was responsible f or had not been borrowed. Tho way was clear for the proposals for constitutional changes to bo carried out; and Judging from what had taken place since, ho was not prepared to say that it would not prove a benefit to the colony had the proposed change been carried out. He considered that each locality would have known how best to expend its share of the money to bo borrowed, and though admitting it was an open question, he still thought the money would have been more judiciously spent had each island had the spending of its share of money ; at any rate,

he had felt that any alternative from provincialism, in view of the large undertakings entered upon, was desirable. So far in explanation ; and now as to the immediate question. First as to the objection—and he considered it the only point which required much consideration —which had been raised, that the House was not a representative body.- He was exceedingly sorry that in this the first session they the newly-elected of the people met, it should have been said they did not represent the people. But was it true? He remembered the men who had sat in former years, and who had filled the office of lawgivers with such credit—men like Croshie Ward. Men like him whose disappearance from this earthly scene had struck sorrow to the heart of the colony but a few days ago.— he spoke of Isaac Earl Featherstou—no longer would be seen in the councils of the. State, and he remembered .that their example would form a guide worthy of acceptance by politicians of any time. But still he claimedthat this House of Representatives represented the public feelings, the sympathies, and the desires of the people as fully and faithfully as any House of Representatives which had ever existed from the first period of this colony’s history. In the House was the material for as good a Government, as good an Administration, or as good an Opposition as had ever been seen in any Parliament which had ever met since he had resided in this colony. Therefore he denied that this House was not a representative body. In dealing with this question of separation he should consider it without reference to the Government of the day, and the vote he should give upon this occasion would in no degree affect the standpoint from which he should discuss the financial and other Ministerial measures. He was thoroughly independent in the position he took up, and when he came to. discuss the financial position of the colony he should he equally independent. In looking at the propositions of the hon. member for the Thames the first thing that struck him was the want of information. If he voted for them and was asked by his constituents to give an account of his stewardship, what could he say ? He could merely say he had voted for an arrangement by which the Middle Island had taken the permanent responsibility of an annual charge of £625,000, and by which the North Island had taken a permanent responsibility of £190,000. That was all that he could tell them—that they were to pay that amount for external interest. He could not tell them anything about the basis of the debt of the colony, nor of the ultimate direction o£ taxation. All he could tell them was that the provinces had been abolished, and that each island was to pay the amount which he had stated. He would like to know from the hon. member for the Thames what it was intended to do in reference to the public creditor. Was it intended to divide the public debt or not ? And if it were to he divided, how was the credit of the colony to he maintained in the future. When he was in England two years ago he had made it his business to try to find out what course this colony should take if it meant to keep up its credit. He had spoken to men high in financial circles, and men who had made it a study, and they were unanimous in this opinion, that the larger the land revenue and the more valuable the public estate, the better would the credit of the colony be. And the reason the condition of the land was taken into consideration was this, that it was to he presumed that where there was a good landed estate there would in time bo a large population and better security for the creditor. But how was a good revenue or a valuable landed estate to be shown to the public creditor if the colony were to be divided in this manner. If the credit were divided, depend upon it it would fall to the lowest possible ebb. There was another thing he wanted to know about. The House had been told by the hon. member for Waikato that the Customs revenue was to be devoted to the Federal Government for the payment of interest. Suppose there was a surplus of Customs revenue—suppose, instead of the Customs revenue being £1,200,000, as it had been last year, it were to increase to £2,000,000, to which it was hoped it would increase in the course of a few years, what was to become of the surplus ? Was taxation to he reduced, or was the surplus to be divided between the two provinces ? This question would be found to arise; in time to come it might lie found that the incidence of taxation in one island would bear very differently from that of the other. What was to be dsne in such a case? These were some of the difficulties he wished to see cleared up. Now, he bad voted against the resolutions of the hon. member for Waikato, and he should like to say why he had voted against them. It was not because of any local feeling. He should not he animated by local feelings; and further he would say this, that were the history of the colony to be repeated he for one would never agree to any such compact as that of 1856. It had been a bad day for the colony that the land fund had been so divided. It would be desirable that the land revenue should he the revenue of the colony, and the indebtedness of the colony colonial indebtedness. But the position of affairs as they now stood must be looked at. For twenty years the Southern provinces had enjoyed this land fund, and that fact could not be got over. Sentiment must be respected, and the people, of the South felt that they had an established right of twenty years’ standing, and it would be of no use the Assembly attempting to change their opinion upon that point. It would be inexpedient'to'create a feeling. against the Legislature by placing the land revenue in the common purse. He deprecated the position taken up by the hon. member for Waikato. He had come there and represented the position of Auckland. He said the position of the land revenue was unsatisfactory to Auckland, and it was a position in which Auckland should not be placed. He (Mr. Stevens) did not understand him. If the hon. member wanted the education of Auckland children provided for, he would assist. He regarded the people of Auckland as his people just as much as the people of Canterbury were, and when the estimates were brought down he would assist in giving Auckland all she wanted. He appeared there as a representative of, the colony. Never (said the hon. member), so help mo God, have I taken a narrow selfish view of these matters. In my public capacity I have striven, and will strive ter do teat which will benefit the whole colony, and bring about a great future for this country. When I voted for abolition, and when I used such influence as I possessed for the purpose of securing abolition, I accepted abolition with the responsibilities of abolition, and looked forward to the most complete Government you can give New Zealand—a government at the expense of tho colony, and not governmental the expense of localities. I know no provincial boundaries, and if the hqn. member will come down with the estimates that are necessary for the govemnaent of Auckland I will give him my support to get the estimates through. I will assist him to get what is necessary for Auckland, but it must be upon this condition that tho expenditure shall be under the authority and control of the Parliament, and not under the control of provincialism For this we have been fighting years and years, and I hope no longer we shall give over the taxation of tho country to be expended by irresponsible bodies. When the Estimates are under consideration I hope tho hon. member will remember what I have said. Mr. Stevens went on to say that in future the power of governing should be vested in that House, and that governments should not be chosen with a view to pleaso particular localities. For years ho had noticed that when there was a change of Administrations the great anxiety was to form a Government’ which should represent this locality and that locality. What was the meaning of that? He could not understand it. If a Government was composed entirely of men from the Bay of Islands, or men from Stewart Island, or men from tho Chatham Islands, he would accept it and support it if it comprised the best men who could bo got within the boundaries of the colony. He did not attempt to ignore the responsibility of abolition. He was a nationalist, and as regards provision for the public departments, they should be provided for and presided over by that House, and that House . alone, because it was the Parliament which should govern from one end of tho colony to tho other. As

to these resolutions, the hon. member for Dunedin (Mr. Macaudrew) told them economy was required. Well, he had not been able to discover where was the economy of the proposed system. He had examined the matter from every point of view, and he had completely failed to perceive how economy could be brought about. He had prepared the first year’s budget of the new province of Munster (a laugh), and a very remarkable budget it was. The first item was £625,000, the portion of the interest to fall npon the Southern province, and he was happy to say that was the largest item. Next came £148,000 for interest on provincial loans, which brought up the total sum to be paid to the external creditor to £773,000 a year. The expenditure on account of departments he had set down at £351,000 ; allowances to municipalities, £22,928 ; allowances to road boards, £43,831 ; pound for pound allowances, £44,331 ; hospitals and charitable aid, £50,000 ; charges for surveys, £52,750. And here he would mention that he supposed the Middle Island would have to pay its share of the federal expenditure, and if they took the total amount of permanent charges for which the colony was liable on account of the civil list, pensions, etc., which in all amounted to £76,814, that would necessitate the Middle Island, or the province, if it only paid half, charging itself with £39,000. Then there was the federal legislative departments, and also a certain amount to be; paid for the expenses of the legislature in New Munster. He presumed that gas, messengers, printing, and all the other things which were found necessary in connection with the General Assembly would, to a certain extent, be also found necessary in connection with Provincial Legislatures. Then there were numerous miscellaneous expenses, such as those for domains, public buildings, and in all he put down these charges to amount to £73,930. Postal charges might be estimated at £IOO,OOO for the colony, and it would be but fair that at least three-fifths of this should be found, by New Munster. In all, therefore, he found that one and a half millions would be required to cover the expenditure for the year, and this upon the estimates of the Provincial Government for last year, most of his calculations being based upon provincial estimates. Now for the revenue. He found that the total Customs returns for the year were £1,420,000. Of this £967,335 would come to the share of New Munster. That was if tho Customs revenue in the future was as high as it had been last year ; hut it was to be remarked that his friends on the opposite side had been full of prophecies that the Consolidated Revenue would sink. The railway revenue for the two provinces last year had been £85,000. There might be some increase in this, but scarcely enough to equalise the finance. Then he went to provincial revenue, which had been £260,000 for the whole colony. In all he calculated he would have a revenue of £1,074,000. Now, what was the meaning of that ? It meant that the very first thing to be done was to increase taxation, or pay the whole land revenue into common stock. Her land revenue in common stock, and her railways in common stock, and then how much better would Canterbury be than if she threw her land revenue and railway revenue into colonial common stock ? Hon. gentlemen had appealed to Canterbury members not to sacrifice their province, but he should talk from the provincialist point of view for a few minutes. It seemed to him that if Canterbury fell in with the arrangement there would be a diversion of her revenue, not for some great public purpose, hut to swell the revenue of Otago, and she would be asked to suffer financial extinction for the purpose of galvanising into temporary life the corpse of extinct provincialism. He went on to picture the condition in which Canterbury would be if those propositions were carried, and prophesied that if the arrangement were in force a short time she would have to repair to Auckland for assistance. In the •past the Southern provinces had exercised self-denial, and speaking for a moment as a provincialist, he declared that now prosperity was overtaking the North Southern provinces should reap the result of their self-denial. Few people were acquainted with the immense development there had been of the resources of the southern part of the North Island of late years, and a glance at the trade returns showed that the progress made had been remarkable. .For the year 1871 the Customs returns of the province of Wellington amounted to £75,000 ; now they amounted to £190,000. In Hawke’s Bay in 1371 the Customs revenue was £24,000, while last year it was something like £41.000. In Taranaki the development had not been so marked, but still it was apparent. In 1871 the Customs returns only showed £5600, and last year it amounted to £8330. It was clear, therefore, that the North Island was advancing most rapidly, and the Southern provinces should think before they tried to cut connection with the North. Speaking from a sentimental point of view, he said there existed a strong bond of sympathy between the North and Southland that in time to come, should necessity arise, the South would not be able to withhold assistance from the North. He spoke highly of the self-denial and fortitude shown by the North in the time of the war, and said there were few in the. South who felt uncharitably towards the North. He would never say one word, and never hear pass unchallenged one word of reproach as regards the inhabitants of the North Island in matters of war, because he knew well enough the sufferings they had undergone in defence of their country. Now he was just on the point of concluding, which he supposed would bo a great relief to the House. (Cries of “ No.”) His hon. friend the member for Waikato had said he was of opinion that one of these days the two islands might come together again. When was that day to bo he would|ask ? Did he suppose for one single instant that when the people had lived together in each island for a number of years with governments of their own, they would bo disposed for change ? Was he not statesman enough to know that tho people would cluster round that government for self protection ? Why should they make this separation, why experiment on the body politic of this colony ? (Applause.) Were the members of that House unable to deal with matters of great public importance ? He asked the members for the Waikato and the Thames, whom he respected as leaders of the colony, and men who had spent a largo portion of their lives in watching the government of the colony, were they going to throw away unity of the colony in obedience to mere temporary differences and to more outcries of loss of liberty ? He did not care what government they had. But what he did say was that they should give their assistance to help tho public representatives to establish a good system of local government, and a complete restoration of the public revenue in preference to studying local interests. Mr. DONALD REID said ho was sure the House must have felt highly delighted with the speech just delivered, as showing how sentiment and high ideas might lead an otherwise sensible man into error. He_ regarded the speech as a very confused ono indeed. From the Financial Statement he had presented the House, he (Mr. Reid) hoped the Middle Island would be spared his services as its financier. He was literally appalled at tho prospect before them, according to the statement of that hon. gentleman. In f act, he did not see how tho colony was to stagger on under such a prospect. So far as ho could gather from _ the speech, there was to be an expenditure in the Middle Island of £1,400,000. If there was to bo that expenditure in tho South, he presumed there would bo required a corresponding expenditure of three-tenths tho same amount in the North Island, and therefore we should have an annual expenditure of nearly £2,000,000 sterling. He (tho speaker) thought ho could put this financial matter in a much clearer form, and proceeded to explain how the South, under the proposals now before the House, would be relieved of certain burdens. As to the fears expressed by Mr. Stevens regarding the surplus revenue, ho thought it would he quite time enough to wait until they had a surplus revenue. He declined to treat the land question other than as a party one. It was as great a foundation for a party question in New Zealand as was ever the question of tho repeal of the corn laws in England. With regard to

the separation question, he might say that unless on this question he was prepared to support them as the best combination that could be had on the Ministerial benches. Whilst he might have to condemn certain of their actions, he would do so more in sorrow than in anger, and not with any intention of expressing a want of confidence -in them. He did not see any advantage in the form of government which the Ministry proposed to substitute for provincialism. As a reason for abolition it was urged that there were too many legislative bodies in the colony. The experience of this session showed that in future Parliament would make more laws in the year than all the Provincial Councils in the colony. For instance, there were now fifty-five purely local Bills on the Order Paper. Again, the cost of the Provincial Councils was complained of ; but what about the cost of ' the thirty-nine county councils, with paid chairmen, clerks, surveyors, and a host of officials ? It had also been contended against provincialism that it tended to centre expenditure in the chief towns, but the county system would only multiply this evil and consolidate expenditure in the favored centres of thirty-nine counties. Nor would the county system benefit the outlying districts to the same extent as the provincial system did. The province of Otago had been compelled to sell its land and keep up a high rate of expenditure, in order to prevent their people from being weaned away from a good form of government by the lavish expenditure of the General Government. The new policy proposed to pursue a vicious system by giving the municipalities more than they had ever previously received, to the injury and exclusion of the outlying districts. He hoped the Assembly would raise its voice against this part of the Government proposals at least. What the Government proposed to do by subsidising municipalities out of the Consolidated Revenue was simply to tax the people more, and return them indirectly a portion of the increase, less 25 per cent, for collection. Their finance would compel the General Government to sell tho waste lands to large capitalists rather than to small holders. The county system would be an admirable one if the country were thickly populated, but under the present circumstances would he worse than useless. The county system devised by Otago some years ago was one suited to the position of the colony, but that proposed by the Government was quite unsuitable. He saw that one county was to be called Otago. He trusted not. He had a reverence for the name of the province foremost in progress and activity, and .would not like to see it degraded to the name of a county. The Government proposed to abolish nine provinces that were well organised and carrying out their duties, and to substitute four times the number of emasculated counties, incapable of carrying on their duties. He quoted former utterances of the Premier in favor of provincialism, and against a county system. Comparing the proposals qf Mr. Whitaker, of the Government, and of" Sir George Grey, if he were shut in as regards the two first, and had to accept one or the other, he would accept thpse of Mr. Whitaker as being more straightforward, and less likely to lead to extravagance and ill-regulated expenditure. The only logical sequence of the abolition resolutions was the proposal of Mr. Whitaker. The Government proposals kept the word of promise as regarded the land revenue to the ear, and broke it to the hope. He had no faith in the subsequent localisation of the land fund if the Government proposals were carried. The Government drew their majority on the Abolition Bill from among the weak members of the House. Sir George Grey’s resolutions did not mean separation, but simply the consolidation of the provinces into two. Mr. Reid repudiated the statement of Mr. Tribe that he and others advocated provincialism because they derived official advantages from it. He estimated the cost of the three governments proposed under the ' separation resolutions as £45,500, as against the cost of the present Government, £55,000. Alluding to Mr. Ballance’s speech, Mr. Reid said that it had been urged that the resolutions of the hon. member for the Thames were not a scheme local government, hut in his opinion those resolutions were ■ infinitely superior to the counties scheme of the Governme'nt. He disagreed entirely as to, the views which had been expressed as to'an' elective Upper House. ‘He thought that the present system was very preferable. He did not think the House was in earnest as to a reduction in expenditure. It was distasteful to the Government, and although individual members cried out for retrenchment, when it came to particular local subsidies, each' local member would speak against economy in that direction. The Ministry might deal with their land fund and their railways,, or might initiate a South Sea Island scheme, but the people would not allow them to tamper with the Constitution. When the historian dealt with the question now before the House, posterity would read that at a time of unexampled prosperity, with a great system of education, a flourishing agriculture and manufactures, and in fact everything to make life enjoyable, the people, instead of being satisfied, waxed' fat' and kicked, and altered the form of their government. He hoped that the very men who were the cause of -this change,.would not have cause to regret the action they had taken. Mr. MOORHOUSE spoke under difficulties in consequence of the distracting eloquence of some previous speakers. All the ideas he had previously formed from studying the question were upset by some of the extraordinary statements which he had heard uttered. Still, as having whilst taking part in public life in Canterbury, and whilst Superintendent of that province, experienced the workings of the Constitution which Sir George Grey had boasted of having founded, he might speak with confidence of the past history of provincialism. And in this connection he contended that if there were a contest for the palm of progress under provincial government Canterbury, as against Otago, would win in that contest. He was proud of his connection with Canterbury and of now representing the chief city of that province after an absence from it of some years ; but he was firmly convinced that abolition was the best thing for the provinces, and that he would be doing a service to the colony, and Canterbury by supporting it. Mr. Moorhouse justified his action in reference to former movements for separation, which were only intended to produce peace in the North- Island; but the present movement ho could not support. As to the expense of the three governments contemplated by Sir George Grey’s resolutions, the expenses laid down by the Opposition were purely conjectural, and no one could as a business man enter upon such a speculation as separation npon mere conjecture. And upon this question he pointed out’ the extensive scale upon which provincial government was carried out in Otago and Canterbury, and asked if when ono government was established this style of thing would he lessened? He characterised the present debate as perfectly uselcks, and only intended by Sir George Grey to harass the Government. Sir George Grey might not desire office himself, but he had associates who did desire it. Still, when they knew these resolutions had no chance of being carried, why bring them forward ? The question of abolition had been thrashed to death, and why waste tho time of the House only to worry the Government and waste tho time of the country in the interests of party ? Mr. Moorhouse paid a high tribute to tho services and success of Sir Donald McLean as Native Minister. ■ Mr. LARNAOH would not detain tho House very long, because ho thought enough had been said on both sides to enable them to come to a division, and nothing that could be said further would affect a single vote on the division. He had always been an abolitionist, but he could not support an abolition which would give them thirty-nine counties or small provinces. He therefore supported separation in preference. Captain RUSSELL had taken a number of notes of the speeches made by Opposition members, but so effectually had those speeches been disposed of by other members, notably those for Rangitikci and Wanganui, that he had little to say. The outcome of those resolutions, talk as some might, must be final and complete separation, and this he would oppose. He regretted tho personal animosity and rancour which had boon imported into the debate by Opposition speakers, who had assailed Min-

isters in a most reprehensible manner. With regard to what had been threatened concerning a Maori war, he thought such could never come about again except by the grossest mismanagement. Mr. WAKEFIELD moved the adjournment of the debate, which was carried, and the House adjourned at 1.45 a.m.