PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4808, 19 August 1876, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Friday, August 18. The Hon. the Acting-Speaker took the chair at the usual hour. SOUTHLAND WASTE LANDS BOARD. The Hon. Dr. MENZIES asked the Hon. Dr. Pollen, —If the Government will lay on the table all papers and correspondence relating to the dissolution of the Waste Landa Board of Southland, and the subsequent appointment of members of the Board ? The Hon. Dr. POLLEN had made inquiries, but had not ascertained that any letters had been received on the subject. He would make further inquiries. GAS CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION ACT. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE moved,— That, with a view to obtaining uniformity of legislation upon the subject of gas supply by private companies, it is desirable that there should be passed a Gas Clauses Consolidation Act. He thought that legislation of a general character was wanted. He had lately been on the Timaru Gas Committee, and found that in that Bill there was a provision for making incoming tenants pay gas charges due. On asking the legal gentleman in attendance on that committee they were informed that this was in accordance with English legislation. They received that statement with confidence. He (Mr. Waterhouse) had no doubt but that gentleman had made the statement in good faith. It was not, however, true. In fact, English legislation went in a contrary direction.

The Hon. Dr. POLLEN thought that an Act of the land mentioned by the Waterhouse was wanted. At this periods* , the session it was impossible for the Government to give attention to the matter. It would be a fit subject for consideration during the recess, and attention would be given to it. Much more care was given by the gas companies to the production of dividends than to making good gas.

RAILWAY RETURNS. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE moved—That there be laid on the table of this Council a return showing the entire cost charged to the permanent debt of the colony, as far as can be ascertained, of each railway in each island, including rolling stock, buildings, and plant; the working expenses of each railway ; the annual amount considered sufficient to cover the maintenance of the railways and tear and wear of ths locomotives and plant. The hon. gentleman spoke shortly to his motion, finishing by saying that he hoped they were moving in the direction in which they thought they were, and not living in a fool's paradise.

The Hon. Dr. POLLEN said there was no objection on the part of the Government to the production of the return. Some of the information might be found in the tables appended to the Public Works Statement. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE, in speaking to the question, said that if an allowance were made for wear and tear, &c, it would be found that no railways in the colony were paying over working expenses.—This statement was taken exception to, at least so far as Canterbury was concerned, by the Hon. Mr. Hall. In that province a depreciation fund had been in existence for some time. The railways were paying revenue over and above that fund.—The Hon. Dr. Menzles depre. cated a discussion on finance on the introduction of such a motion as that before the House. He hoped that another opportunity would be taken for raising the question.—The Hon. Dr. Grace if the sleepers lasted for seven years and the culverts ten it would be found, he thought, that the natural development of the country itself, in addition to the increase |o£ traffic, would meet the necessary expenditure for wear and tear.—The Hon. Colonel Kenny; thought the information on the subject of railways at present in their possession was not entirely correct. Therefore, now, when there wa3 leisure, it was desirable they should obtain correct returns.—The Hon. Colonel Brett endorsed the statement of Mr. Hall as to railways in Canterbury. He thought hon. members should not take too gloomy a view of the future, simply because there had been a fall in wool.—The Hon. Colonel Whitmore replied at some length. He thought the Canterbury railways should be left out of the argument, as exceptional. The motion was agreed to.

WASTE LANDS COMMITTEE. The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON moved that the names of himself and the Hon. Mr. Edwards be added to the committee. —Agreed to. SECOND BEADING POSTPONED. The second reading of the Canterbury Diseased Sheep Ordinance was postponed to Tuesday next. THE PUBLIC TRUST OPEICE BILL. The seaond reading of this Bill was moved by the Hon. Dr. Pollen. The object of the Bill was to increase the usefulness of the Public Trust Office.—The Hon. Mr. Hall would like to have some information as to how the main Bill was working. He trusted that there would be a full discussion on the 10th clause, which introduced an entirely new principle. He thought the Government deserved credit for dealing with the subject, and would support the second reading.—The Hon. Mr. Waterhouse thought the amendments proposed appeared to be desirable, but would wish to see the Bill carefully scrutinised, so that it should not give too much power to the department. A principle, however, cropped up again in the 4th clause which the Council hai before condemned. If an executor took up the trusts of a will he should not lightly relinquish them. No encouragement should be afforded him to do so. —The Hon. Dr. Grace supported the second reading. He agreed with the previous speaker as to clause 4, but nevertheless there were many cases in which it was desirable that trustees should be permitted to relinquish their trust.—The Hon. Colonel Whitmore considered the trust office an unnecessary department. If it were to exist, however, the Bill before them was in many respects desirable. He agreed with the provisions giving power to the Public Trustee to raise money on estates under his control where necessary.

The Hon. Captain ERASER intimated his intention of supporting the second readiDg, as it would be a great relief to trustees. The Hon. Dr. MENZIES said that the object of the Bill was to simplify departmental management. It might be desirilbleno relieve trustees from some of their functions, the power in the Bill centralised too mucw6Lj»hU opinion. The power should be vested iiiWie" Supreme Court, and not in a Curator. The Hon. Mr. CHAMBERLIN supported the second reading, although he did not think it very creditable to the Government that they brought down their measures in such crude form" that constant amendments such as the present were a necessity. He did not like the 4th clause, but still would support the Bill. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN in replyiug said he was glad to see that the Bill met with such o-eneral approval. As to the objections raised against the 4th clause, he said that its provisions were expressly framed to relieve trustees from hardships cast upon them by previous real estate statutes. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Tuesday. ANIMALS IMPORTATION PROHIBITION BILL.

The Hon. Dr. POLLEN, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said that the law on the subject was not in a satisfactory condition, and regretted that there was not time to introduce a consolidation measure. He then spoke of the prohibition introduced in the Australian colonies, and the arrangements made by the representative of New Zealand at that time. This, unfortunately, was not carried out so far as New Zealand was concerned, and they were placed outside the pale by not being allowed to export cattle to Australia. Now, and for the last two years, all the Australian colonies, except Tasmania, could send stock to New Zealand without there being any reciprocal advantages. The Hon. Mr. HALL supported the second reading, but would like to Bee the report of the committee of the other branch of the Legislature dealing with the subject. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE was disposed to support the Bill, as it merely gave the Governor a permissive, and not an absolute power.'

The Hon. Colonel BRETT spoke in favor of the second reading, on the ground that there should be no further delay. He thought there was more urgent need for suppression of importation from Australia than from the United Kingdom. .The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE stated that from his own personal experience he felt sure the Bill was a necessity. _ .The Hon. ri)r: MENZIES would like some day* to elapse before went into committceon the* Bill, as many members of the HousewSulcf like ; K> read the report of the ' Lower House. Thequestien of the destruction " of diseased stock was well worthy of consideration." '.■■•'■ The Hon. Dr. POLLEN replied, and read the interim report of the committee of the Lower House. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Tuesday. PUBLIC HEALTH BILL. The second reading of the Public Health Amendment Bill was, on the motion of the Hon. Dr. Pollen, made an order of the day for Tuesday. WAIUKU CHURCH Or ENGLAND CROWN GRANT BILL. The House went into committee on this Bill, and on the motion of the Hon. Dr. Pollen the report of the select committee was read, which was in effect that no Crown grant should be issued until satisfactory proof of the payment of the purchase money be furnished. The Hon. POLLEN moved an amendment in accordance with the terms of the report, and the Bill was ordered to be committed on Tuesday. The Council adjourned at 8.30, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Friday, August 18. The Speaker took the chair at half-past two o'clock. PETITIONS AND NOTICES OP MOTION. Several petitions were presented and notices of motion given.' LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Reader Wood for ten days, and to the Hon. Mr. Reynolds for fourteen days. QUESTIONS. Mr. THOMSON asked the Minister for Public "Works,—Whether he has any objection to lay before this House a return showing, in tabular form, (1.) The vote?, and the several items under each vote, as these appear in the fifth schedule of the Immigration and Public Works Appropriation Act, 1875, with the amounts appropriated for each item. (2.) The sum paid under each item up to 30th June, 1876. (3.) The liabilities to the same date. (4.) The items which have lapsed. (5.) The sums paid in excess of the several items, if any. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said it would be better if the hon. member would give notice and move for complicated and somewhat incomprehensible returns like these in the usual manner. • Mr. ROLLESTON asked the Government,—Whether they, have received any recommendation from the joint Library Committee as to the advisablene3s of obtaiuing fresh designs for the new library buildings ; and if so, what action it is proposed to take upon it? The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said the committee in connection with this matter had reported that competitive designs should be called for. Mr. MURRAY asked the Minister for Public Works, If he will state the total cost of the railway from Dunedin to the Clutha; also, how much has been expended by the Provincial Government of Otago upon rolling stock, additions, and improvements ? Why the line has cost so much more than the estimate of " £270,000 to complete, with stations, and all the requisite rolling stock, and means of using it" ? The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON reiterated what he had said to Mr. Thomson, that it would be better to move for this class of returns in the ordinary way. Mr. MURRAY asked the Colonial Treasurer pared and laid before the House, showing the amounts actually received, in comparison with the.C'olonial Treasurer's estimated receipts, as shown in the Appendix to the Journals, 1875 ? The Hon. Sir JULIUS VOGEL said he wa3 not aware of the table referred to, and pointed out the great inconvenience of asking for returns day after day. The better course would be to move for these returns in the ordinary way. Mr. MURRAY asked the Minister for Public Works—lf he has any information as to the failure of certain portions of the ironwork of the railway bridge across the Waikato river, at Ngaruawahi, to sustain the weight of the bridge upon the withdrawal of the temporary staging, and if he will lay such information before this House ? The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said the cost of replacing the castings mentioned would not exceed £135. NEW BILLS. The following Bills were introduced and read a first time :—By Mr. Johnston, Foxton Harbor Board Bill ; by Mr. Ormond, Napier Athenaeum and Mechanics' Institute Incorporation Bill ; by Mr. Hislop, Moeraki Harbor Board Bill ; by Mr. Hislop, Kakanui Harbor Board Bill ; by Mr. Hislop, Law Practitioners Acts Amendment BUI. THE COUHTT COUNCILS BILL.

The Hon. Sir JULIUS VOGEL moved the second reading of this Bill, and informed the House that the whole subject of boundaries was open to revision and alteration. He then referred in detail to the provisions of the Bill. They had been compiled with the greatest eare. In addition to the provisions of the Bill, however, the Government would be prepared to discuss modifications. Before giving «. the financial results of local government in New Zealand, he gave the House the financial results of local government in England. He then contrasted these with the financial results of local government in New Zealand, in order to show the capacity of the county system. Whilst the Government recognised that they should press forward the abolition of provincialism, they also recognised that a considerable amount of discretion must be exercised in applying any general principle, and they further recognised that so far as possible no portion of the colony should be left discontented. They had been told,in somewhat "high falutin" language, that the province of Auckland was discontented, but it was impossible to discover what were the causes' of that discontent. If there was one portion of the colony to which the proposals of the Government were suitable more than another that portion was the province of Auckland. He asked the Auckland members to descend from their high pedestal and meet the Government fairly, despite the efforts of the governing parties in Auckland to prevent anything like a rational intercourse with the Government. Mr. Stevens had in the most quiet language testified to the willingness of the Colony to'assisfc Auckland, but his propositions were < immediately rejected with contempt. He aske'dvthe Auckland members to draw a line of division between their political feelings and this.plain proposals for local self-government, and to let the House know wherein they feJt injured, and the House would receive their statements "with attention. They came to the House not as delegates, but as representatives, and therefore capable of exercising a wise discretion. Tho Government had not set up any arbitrary standard for the boundaries of counties. The object was simply that those boundaries should be continuous, so as to promote the resolution of road boards into ridings of counties. But tho Government recognised that there were portions of the colony which might not be inclined to come under the operation of the Bill, and provisions would be therefore inserted to make tho Bill permissive. Such districts is those mentioned would so far as possible be assisted by subsidies and license fees, but these subsidies should be subject to the cost of construction and maintenance of main roads. Sir Julius "Vogel, in reference to the notice of Sir George Grey that ■ tho Bill should be read again that day six months, trusted that the notice had been given on Sir George Grey's own behalf, and not for a number of followers. It would bo most injurious if the House were to be delayed in going into committee and considering the Bill fairly. Unfortunately, Sir George' never gave bia attention to plain matters of butanes* in the

House. The abolition question was,now in this position : When the proposal was' made to abolish provincialism in the North Island, the objection of Auckland was not to abolition, but to making it partial, and not extending it to the South Island. Then Sir George Grej made his appearance, and his first act was to appeal over the head of the Governor to the Secretary of State. Then abolition was extended to the whole colony, and the rational course of Auckland would have been to have approved of this. Sir Julius "Vogel then went at some length into the financial position of Auckland. Last year they had not pressed forward the Local' Government Bill, and, it would be a misfortune if abolition were now to take effect without a system of local government being'provided, and he begged the assistance of all members to make the provisions of the Bill as suitable as possible to the requirements of the colony. Sir GEORGE GREY had hoped that the Premier, : in moving a constitutional measure like this, would have abandoned his practice of endeavoring to sow dissension between different portions of the colony. He would not trouble about the attacks made upon himself and the province of Auckland. Sir George Grey accused the Canterbury members of having by their votes previously this session deprived Auckland of its rights. And now Government proposed to hurry through this session a measure which would prevent the Auckland people from determining how their waste lands should be dealt with. Canterbury would support Government in this, expecting to obtain a renewal of its pastoral leases. Sir George Grey said that in moving that the Bill should be read a second time that day six months, he did so in no political or local spirit, but simply as having a regard to the whole colony. The Counties Bill was the most objectionable measure in the world as contrasted with the government they had enjoyed. The measure merely meant a robbery of the people, a reduction of them to serfdom, and a maldng them slaves to the monied classes. When the general election took place on the abolition question the people had no idea that a measure of this description was to be brought forward this session. The speech of Sir Julius Yogel showed that Government were ashamed of the measure, and were prepared to sacrifice its provisions in every respect. This being so, he would have been content to have gone into committee on the Bill, had it been founded on just and righteous principles. But it was not. It proposed a system of voting by which the monied class would swamp all others. The franchise was left in a most objectionable form. The Premier proposed to rob the people of the rights they now possessed, and to make the mass of the people pay the enormous debt he had squandered, whilst property holders and monied men would be exempt. Sir George Grey contended that he was more in favor of real local self-government than was' the Premier, and would give manhood suffrage under the county system. He asked, in conclusion, to let the road boards continue for the present, and let the people have time to think' out a measure of local self-government, or let the Government give a manhood suffrage instead of a property representation. Mr. MANDERS spoke on behalf of his district of the desire there for a system of county government. Mr. CURTIS said with respect to the Bill before the House that it was the most important one of the session. While he was prepared to support the second reading, he regarded it as providing too elaborate machinery. He could scarcely see how the one pound contribution for one was to be given to those councils. The provisions for financial arrangements were not at all clear. The functions of the councils would be confined to the maintenance of the main roads, and some minor matters. There were two ways in which the councils might have been made attractive, namely, by the abolition of the Road Boards, and placing, their functions in the councils. By those means the latter bodies would assume additional importance, and intelligent and influential men might thu3 be induced to take part in them. No provision had been made for mining leases, and- it did not appear whether the counties were to have the administration of goldfields. Mr. ROLLESTON proposed to say very few words in explanation of his intention of voting against the Bill. The House had had before it the question of separation ; but they had now come to the discussion of the Bill, which really involved the question whether or not provincialism should be abolished. He believed the Bill was entirely unnecessay, and should therefore vote against it. It was entirely too complicated. Confusion would arise between the functions of councils and road boards, and he believed the machinery would be found more expensive than that by which the affairs of the country had been hitherto administered. It neither supplied a real form of government nor substantial revenue to the people. The borrowing power given by the Bill was a perfect sham. Did the House suppose any body of men would lend on such security as there provided ? The Government had neglected altogether the colonial question of the harbors, which were pre-eminently the connection between the local districts of the colony. If there was one thing more than another that ought not to be dealt with by small local bodies, it was these harbors. This Bill was a search for a missing link between the local bodies and the colony, and he did not think it would supply the deficiency. His own experience was that the counties would clash with the road boards, and the divisions proposed to be made by the Bill would prove unsatisfactory in result. He deprecated the multiplication of the functions of the House, and believed that after abolition took place, members would find it difficult to act effectually for the good of the country from the want of the provinces, which acted as buffers between the people and the General Government. He should vote against the Counties Bill ; he should be untrue to himself if he did not. He did not record his vote so, he wished it to be distinctly understood, as a party man ; and he wished to express his regret that Sir George Grey should not give himself and others the credit for sincere motives and honest intentions, such as they were ready to believe he was actuated by. Mr. DONALD REID said he entirely agreed with the hon. member for Nelson in the speech he had made, because it was in favor of provincialism pure and simple; but he could scarcely understand how he could conscientiously vote for the second reading of the Bill, holding such opinions. If he saw any probality of securing more approaching, provincialism, he should vote against the Bill; but as it was he should bo prepared to give it his careful consideration, the Ministry having said they woidd consider the size of the distrists. He believed if the district he came from were divided into two counties, that would be the most suitable substitute of provincialism. He contended for large counties, because the changes to be made were experimental, and it would be thus easier to retrace the steps taken, should it be found that error had been committed. It was quite possible, for instance, that the county councils, on being formed, might neglect to fulfil their functions. With regard tp the revenue, he thought very little would be left after provision being made for local requirements. There were many parts of the Bill he did not approve of; but 1 he thought he should not be justified in voting against it, if it could be so amended as to be of advantage to the country. With regard to the provision of the land fund, he did not think it would conduce to harmony between the different parts of the colony. He would much rather the Government had, like the member for Waikato, at once said that the South was to contribute so much towards the North. He regarded the voting provisions with more favor; and, concluding, said he should give the Bill his earnest consideration, although believing that the form of Government it proposed would never be, so acceptable to the country as that for which it was to be a substitute.

Mr. MONTGOMERY referred to Mr. Donald Reid as having said in a more forcible way what he (the speaker) would have said. He thought tho Bill was not a good one, but might he so amended in committee as to be rendered workable. Ho would keep the road boards as they are at present, and would assist

the different members in forming boundaries. • With regard to sudsidising counties out of Con-' solidated Revenue, he thought it waßa mistake. To make them thoroughly self-reliant .'thfey should have to depend solely on their own resources. It was folly to run away with the idea that by the effect of abolition money would be' obtained from some unknown Sources..; Haying said so much, he would conclude'by saying that he should vote for the second reading, :in the hope that amendments, of a desirable character would be effected in committee, and reserving to himself the right to vote against the third reading. Mr. WASON intended to vote for the Government 'on this question, because it-was something tangible at last. But the Bill was deficient in the fact that it did not provide for the localisation of the land! revenue,; and another objection to it was the necessity for numerous elections so soon as it should be brought into force. He should, however, lend his best assistance to make the measure acceptable to the country. ' Mr. DE LAQTOUR opposed the second reading of the Bill, because he regarded its principle as being injurious to the interests of the people. An objection to the Bill which had generally escaped notice was that they were taught to look for the residue of the land fund. With regard to the Otago province, no counties could be constituted there. Otago was powerful enough to protect herself, and the Government would find that she would resist any attempt to rob her of £IOO,OOO next year. Dr. HODGKINSON said he should oppose the second reading, and in committee should not feel himself bound to pay the least atttento it. He considered the abolition of the provinces last session was ultra vires, unlawful, that the House had not the legal power to make a clean sweep of all the provinces. • To make the action justifiable a majority of twothirds of the people should have been obtained in favor of it. He believed thst it had come to this, that the country must either kill centralism or centralism|would kill the country. He should give this Bill his most unqualified opposition. - Mr. GIBBS said some of the speeches on this question had been essentially provincial speeches, notably that of the Superintendent of the province from which he came. He was astonished to hear some members averring that they did not approve of the Bill, yet would vote for the second reading ; and others that they would oppose the second reading, and if that was carried they would trouble themselves no further with it. In committee he trusted the Bill would be so considered as to make its provisions applicable to the different parts of the colony. Mr. BURNS was out of the country when he first heard of the abolition resolutions being carried, and he could scarcely understand it, because the provinces, aB it seemed to him, were carrying out the work they were constituted to perform ; and his obtaining a seat in that House was due to the fact that his opponents were abolitionists. He did not intend to vote for the second reading of the Bill, because he could not honestly support its principle ; but if the second reading were earned he should use his best endeavors to improve it in committee.

Mr. STOUT thought the position taken up by some hon. members was peculiar. While disapproving of the Bill, they would vote for its second reading, in order to improve it in committee. He was of opinion that when a principle was vicious in character, it was the duty of those who recognised it a 3 such to condemn and oppose it thoroughly, and without qualifications. There was a. vast amount of administration relegated to the counties, and this showed that specialisation of function was recognised; and that being so, why had the provinces been destroyed? This admission begged the whole question, it wa3 upon this foundation that provincialists had taken their stand. The provincial form of government had not been perfect, but the remedy applied should have been an improving remedy, and not a remedy which destroyed. The, experiment proposed to be made was not, calculated to succeed. A vicious system had been adopted to obtain constitutional reform. Eor instance, he denied that abolition would ever have been carried had it not been that ; vast bribes had been offered the. out-districts. This Bill was objectionable, inasmuch as it was a class measure, in the direction of ] property voting. For instance, the Bill gave five votes to one person, and to another only one. The whole power and management of the. most important works in the colony was placed in the hands of property holders. The whole of the land fund would be thrown into the hands of the large property class. If the grants from the censolidated fund, grants from the treasury fund, and grants from the land fund were to be denied, the Bill would not be passed, because those grants had been held out as bribes to the country. There was another fatal objection in the Bill, namely, that of setting the town against the country, consisting in the introduction of a poor law for the first time in this colony. By the 136th clause the counties were to provide for asylums; hospitals, and out-door relief. This would give the country an undue advantage over the towns, inasmuch as the poor would concentrate in the centres of population, which would favor the large landed proprietors at the expense of a less wealthy class, and it was sheer absurdity to suppose for a moment '. that this would be amended in committee. This was not the way to promote good government, national life, and national feeling. There would be more wrangling and discontent under this- new system than had ever been experienced before. It was a great mistake to suppose that | good government could be obtained by an Act of Parliament. It was said that provincialism was a bad form of government; and in order to improve it the Government brought down a measure containing provisions which would never be found acceptable to tho majority of the people. With regard to the promises made by the Government last session, he said not one of them had been kept. The Local Government Bill of last session differed greatly from the Local Government Bill of this Bessron. Under this Bill members would come up, not in tho in-, terest of the colony, but to get as much as they could for their own districts. If this Parliament were in America and similarly constituted, we should have the Government going to members and promising them roads in different directions as recompense for ti&eir support. But of .course that could not occur in New Zealand; but there was just a possibility of our copying the manners of the Americans, as communication was further developed. In England the county system had proved a failure simply because they had no provinces, and the direction of public feeling there was to create those very institutions which we in New Zealand were about to destroy.

Sir ROBERT DOUGLAS said statements had been made against those who supported the Government of a nature most trying to bear unmoved. The last speaker, for instance, had, with the power of a special pleader, turned on them with abuse ; and he much regretted the remarks made by tho city members Of Auckland. It was as untrue as it was unfair to accuse him and others of coming to that House as beggars : they merely came to ask for justice. Much of the injustice done to out-district 3 was owing, to the representatives of those districts having been overruled by a power under the Constitution which never ought to have existed, and which was often composed of unscrupulous persons. On these grounds he supported tho Government, and further, because the proposals would give the people an opportunity of governing and providing for themselves.

Mr. LUMSDEN spoke in.support of the second reading of the Bill, and advocated the division of the provinces into large counties. He did not think, however,' that the Bill, without considerable alteration, would be acceptable, to Otago at least. Mr. LUSK, after replying to the remarks of Sir Robert Douglas as to tho Provincial Council of Auckland, proceeded to give his reasons for opposing the Bill. The Bill was crude, and should not have been brought down by the General Government, with the suggestion that the House should exert themselves to make it workable. It was simply an empowering Bill, enabling the people to tax themselves to a greater extent than they eould at present; but along with that increase of power they wor«

-given a machinery- so ■ cumbersome-and-bur?. derisom'e that'it would absorb the greater"por>, tion iof * the' revenue raised. - by. i the,' .extra taxation. .';..'"■■; | Mn THOMSON havinp addressed himselfto the question for some time, I < '■

•-.'■ Mr.;ROWE moved the adjournment of [the debate, which was carried. ,•- '■..■■ \. ; ■■■ ■:' The House adjourned at 12.30 a.m..* H| •■