PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4833, 18 September 1876, Page 3

PAR LIAME NT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Saturday, September 16.

Mr. Rees concluded his speech at 10 minutes to one a.m.

Mr. Thomson followed, and by arrangement the' House adjourned at a quarter to three for half-an-hour.

On the House resuming Mr. Thomson continued, and rambling considerably from the subject, the Speaker was asked as to whether he was in order.

The SPEAKER quoted from May’s “ Parliamentary Practice,” and stated the hon. member was in order. While allowing every latitude he must, however, express a strong and decided opinion that a very heavy responsibility rested on those members who spoke discursively, with a purpose, on a question of adjournment. Mr. Thomson then proceeded. Mr. JOYCE at 5 o’clock called the Speaker’s attention to standing order No. 55, under which the Sergeant-at*Arms was to take into his custody any stranger whom he might see or who might be reported to him to be in any part of the House, &c. He would like to know on whom rested the responsibility of reporting to the Sergeant-at-Arms. The Ministry were disqualified, and as a private member he was quite prepared to report to the Sergeant-at-Arms their presence in the House, and they were there only as strangers, that they might be taken into custody. He would like to ask the Speaker whether the reporting the matter to the Sergeaut-at-Arms was a privilege belonging to a member, or did it rest with the Speaker? The SPEAKER said that the hon. member was not justified in assuming that the Ministry were disqualified. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said that the hon. momoer who raised the question appeared to have forgotten that the question of disqualification was that then under the consideration of the House.

The matter then dropped, and Mr. Thomson proceeded with his speech. A little before six Mr. Thomson appeared to be very nervous, and losing his voice. Mr. JOYCE then raised a question under standing order No. 67, relating to the reading of newspapers, &c., by hon. members during debate. He was aware the question had been raised several times the day before, but on the first occasion it had been ruled that the order was obsolete. He thought himself that this was an open quest! ‘D, and it was not right that the hon. member who had been speaking should be so often drawn off his argument. Under these circumstances, he would move that the standing orders be suspended, so that order No. 67 might be eliminated. The SPEAKER ruled that Mr. Joyce was out of order, but he continued to speafc in spite of this ruling amidst cries of order and a general disturbance. The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS during the disorder expressed an opinion that the hon, member should be named and fined £SO.

Mr. JOYCE said that they might name him, fine him £59, or do whatever they liked, but he was not going to he told hy any hon. member what might happen to him. He was quite willing to submit to the Speaker’s ruling, but not to that of any hon. member who might see fit to get on his legs. Mr. THOMSON was still speaking when the House at 6 a.m. adjourned until 10 a.m.

The House resumed at 10 a.m., and Mr. Thomson continued speaking. In the afternoon Mr. Stout to address the Speaker on a question of privilege. He drew attention to the. fact that the Hansard reporters were not reporting the debate on the question before the House. As a member of the Reporting Debates Committe he was in a position to say that the matter had not been brought before the committee, and he should be glad to know, therefore, who had given authority for this departure from the usual custom of reporting all debates in a full House. He pointed out that a constitutional debate of this kind should appear on the pages of Hansardm ore than any debate of the session. At present there was no record of what took place in the House. In the daily papers there was no statement of the arguments adduced and as to why the House was sitting out if its usual course. He suggested that the Speaker should send for the chief reporter of the Hansard staff in order to ascertain how it came to pass that the debate had not been reported. The Hon. Major ATKINSON disclaimed any intention of suppressing the report of the proceedings. He had met the chief reporter, and had said to him if he wanted additional assistance in reporting the matter he should be happy to provide the necessary funds. The Government had no part whatever in causing the debate to be left unrecorded. Mr. READER WOOD said that it was an important matter, and suggested that it should be referred to the Reporting Debates Committee. Being one of that committee, he was in a position to state that the question had not been referred to them. Perhaps the Government would have no objection to the adjournment of the House until the committee had reported on the subject. Mr. BARFF said if they might assume that the last hon. gentleman was speaking in the interests of his party, it certainly showed that they had become weary of the task they had 86 MrfsTOUT asked whether he would be in order in moving that the chief reporter be called before the bar of the House for the purpose of ascertaining whether the debate had been reported, and if not, why not 1 The SPEAKER thought he would be in order, because he believed that a breach of privilege had really been committed. The Hon. G. McLEAN asked how Mr. Stout knew that the debate was not being reported, and said he had always understood that reporters were allowed discretion in tho matter of reporting when the practice of speaking against time was resorted to. Mr. STOUT replied that he gleaned his information from observation ; the reporters were not taking notes ; and in one instance there was no reporter in the gallery at all. Mr. TRIBE, referring to the remarks of Mr. Stout, said that every argument in the debate in favor of the adjournment had been reported in the House.

Mr. STOUT then formally moved, that the chief reporter be called before the Bar of the House, to state why the debate was not being reported. The Hon. Major ATKINSON moved as an amendment that the Chairman of the Committee be called upon to give information. Mr. READER WOOD objected, as that hon. gentleman was a member of the House. At the same time he took occasion to reply to what Mr. Barff has said as to the weariness of tho Opposition. He could scarcely sec how that gentleman had come to'such a conclusion, as he (Mr. R. Wood) and some of his friends had during tho day been enjoying themselves in the pleasant walks of Mr. Ludlam’s gardens, while the Government members had been passing their time in the House. Ho had come to the conclusion that they, and not the Opposition, stood in need of pity. Mr. BARFF said there were two kinds of weariness, one was physical, and tho other proceeded from a sense of having done wrong, and a failure in tho endeavor to keep it up.

The°sfon. Major Atkinson and the Hon. Mr. Bft'&’KN expressed sorrow that the debate had not been reported.

Mr. BURNS said a good deal, the substance of his remarks being a demand to know who had stopped these men from doing their duty.

Mr. MAC ANDREW pointed out that if the motion before the House was adopted it would put an end to the matter, at once. Mr. BALLANCE, as Chairman. of ■ the Committee, informed the House that he had given no instruction to the UctTtsctvd reporters not to report the debate. ‘The amendment was put and, carried, and the matter then dropped. Mr. Thomson continued his remarks until 5.30.

On the House meeting at 7.30, the large lantern was not alight, and the building was illuminated by means of. a plentiful supply of candles.

Mr. THOMSON proceeded to resume his speech, when Hr. J. 0. BROWN wanted to know why the House was not lit up with gas in the usual manner.

The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON explained that the reason simply was that the Gas Company could not supply the gas—in fact, could not manufacture at so sudden and unexpected a demand the quantity necessary to light up the building for so many nights in succession. The gas burned for the past three nights had been 20,000 ft. per night, a quantity the company could not supply. Mr. READER WOOD blamed the Government for not having made better arrangements. They were the leaders of the. House in its business, and should have seen to such a matter.

A little discussion followed. Mr. THOMSON was about proceeding, when

Mr. WASON wished to make a statement. The SPEAKER said the hon. member for the Clutha could not be interrupted unless the hon. member for Coleridge desired to raise a point of privilege. Mr. WASON said he had a written statement which he should like to hand in to the Speaker. [He then advanced to the Speaker’s chair, and handed to the Speaker a document.] Mr. THOMSON continued his remarks for a few minutes.

Mr. J. C. BROWN rose to a point of privilege. A document had been presented by a member of the House to the Speaker in his official capacity, and hon. members had a right to be informed of the contents of it. The SPEAKER said he had not read the document. When he hid done so, ho should if he thought right give the House information as to what it contained. It was one of those matters in regard to which the Speaker had a discretionary power, and he should use his judgment. Mr. THOMSON then brought his remarks to a close. He expressed his thankfulness to the hon. gentlemen who had so patiently listened to him under the peculiar circumstances. He should resume his seat, feeling that he had endeavored to do his duty. Mr. DE LAUTOUR followed, but had not proceeded far when he suspended his remarks.

The SPEAKER (who had sent for Mr. Wason, and had just commenced to converse with him,) inquired why the hon. member had stopped speaking. Mr. DE LAUTOUR: I observe an hon, member is talking with you, sir. Of course my convenience is secondary to that of the hon, member for Coleridge. Mr. STOUT : Hear, hear.

The SPEAKER ; I see no reason why the hon. member should have • suspended his remarks. I have yet to learn that when the Speaker thinks fit to summon an hon. member to answer a question in reference to the business of the House, it is proper that a gentlemen who may be speaking at the time should cease speaking. In this case I requested the hon. member for Coleridge to attend me. Mr. DE LAUTOUR said he was not aware of that. The only fact he was aware of was that, as soon as he commenced to speak, the hon. member for Coleridge ieft his seat and entered into a conversation with the Speaker. If he (Mr. De Lautour) had said anything wrong, he hoped he might be The hon. member then raised a question of priviege, ami wished to know why the proceedings of the House were not being reported. Last session there was a prolonged debate upon a great principle, and the Opposition had felt it their duty to take a peculiar course. The debate was then reported. It wan unfortunate a similar course was not to be pursued on this occasion, seeing that the question involved was of a personal character as far as Ministers were concerned. The SPEAKER said he had not wished to interfere in the matter, but as hon. members appeared to desire the proceedings should he reported he would take care that instructions should be issued to the gentleman in charge of Hansard to have the proceedings reported, and to see there was no omission in future to reporting debates except the House should declare otherwise.

Mr. DB LAUTOUR proceeded with his speech for a few minutes, when he resumed his seat suddenly because the Speaker was in conversation with an hon. member. The SPEAKER said it was usual for hon. members to show a little courtesy to the chair. If the hon. member insisted that he should not confer with hon. members and the officers of the House, the only course left to him would be to interrupt the hon. member for Mount Ida by leaving the chair occasionally. The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS rose to speak to the question as the hon. member for Mount Ida had resumed his seat. The SPEAKER ruled the hon. member for Port Chalmers out of order, as clearly the hon. member for Mount Ida had not intended to conclude his speech. Mr. DE L AUTO UR said he should not have taken notice of the inattention of the Speaker had it not been that he was about raising a point of order to which the attention of the Speaker was necessary. Ho thought he might have been spared the reproof which had been given. He then raised a question as to whether Mr. Ballance’s amendment was in order.

The SPEAKER intimated that he had endeavored to follow the hon. member in his argument, and ruled that the report of the committee was in the possession of the House. They could also do nothing further in the matter unless ordered by the House. The amendment of the hon. member for Eangitikei was quite in order.

Sir GEORGE GREY then rose to a point of order, and stated that the word “ the” was omitted in the printed copy of the committee’s report. The SPEAKER said that he had noticed the omission. It was merely a typographical error, and he would undertake that the matter would be rectified on Monday. Mr. DE LAUTOUE then proceeded, and again referred to the fact that the debate was not being reported by the Hansard staff.

The SPEAKER said he had instructed the chief of the reporting staff on the matter. In reply he had received a letter from Mr. Barron, which he read. It was to the effect that it was physically impossible with the staff at his disposal to perform the work if the debate was to be reported, and 'he could not get the assistance in Wellington necessary to relieve the present staff of reporters. Mr DE LAUTOUR then proceeded, making personal reference to Mr. Wason’s conduct in supporting the Government.

Mr. WAS OK rose in personal explanation,, and said that the question of the Ministers having forfeited their seats had already been before the House. He for one was prepared to accept the decision of the majority and to recognise their right to rule the minority. He could only look upon the tactics of the Opposition as a desire to earn a childish reputation for having their own way.—Mr. W. Wood then addressed the House amidst a general disturbance, and was ruled out of order. Sir George Grey rose in personal explanation, and said that the hon. member for Coleridge having stated that there was a largo majority against his motion, he felt bound to say that the motion had never been put at all, but was traversed by an amendment. Mr. Wahon declined to recognise such a technical quibble as that raised by Sir George Grey. Mr. Db Laotour continued his speech until 12 o’clock, when Mr. O’Rorkb left the chair, intimating that the debate would be resumed at 10 a.m. on Monday.