PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4835, 20 September 1876, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Monday, September 18. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at 7.30 p.m. QUESTION. The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON asked the Colonial Secretary,—Whether the appointment of Sir Julius Vogel to the office of Agent-General in London has been confirmed ? The Hon. Dr. POLLEN said that the terms of the question were such that he was unable to give a precise answer. The power of appointment was vested in the Governor under the Public Works Act. Sir Julius Vogel had been offered the Agent-Generalship, and had accepted the offer; but as yet the appointment bad not been made by the Governor. MOTIONS. The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON moved,—That there be laid on the table of the Council a copy of the conditions, instructions, and restrictions, if any, given, and also the amount of salary and allowances to be granted to the Agent-General. He said that he had less diffidence in asking for this than he anticipated, on account of the answer which had just been given to him by the Hon. the Colonial Secretary. As the appointment had not actually been made, it would not be thought a personal matter on his part. The Hon. Captain ERASER seconded the motion pro forma. He was sorry that anything had occurred during the past few days to interrupt the intimacy and good feeling existing between the hon. member and Sir Julius Vogel. The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON explained that the hon. and gallant member was altogether wrong in his statement. The Hon. Captain FRASER continued, and said that he understood the hon. member had accosted Sir Julius and asked him what he meant to do with regard to the Agent-General-ship. He had then said that he thought there was no man better fitted for the position. After some interruption by the Hon. Mr. Robinson, The Hon. Dr. POLLEN said there could be no possible objection to the course proposed by the hon. member, and the Government would take the earliest opportunity of complying with his request. The Hon. Colonel BRETT said his hon. friend who moved the resolution reminded him of a creature in the animal kingdom called a chameleon. After considerable disturbance, he proceeded, and said he drew the simile because his hou. friend so frequently changed his colors in such a wonderful and mysterious manner. If Sir Julius were to return to New Zealand, his hon. friend would probably be one of the first to hail him as Premier again; but if matters went contrary, or anything turned up unfavorable, he would turn again like the animal referred to. His friend’s opinions were a matter of perfect indifference to him (Colonel Brett) for they could place no reliance or faith in them. To be in order he would move that the previous question be considered. The Hon. Mr. MANTELL said that it was a new fact in natural history that the Hon. Mr. Robinson should resemble any brute beast in creation. While seconding the Hon. Colonel Brett’s motion pro forma, he should vote with the Colonial Secretary. The Hon. Colonel KENNY said that some hon. members possessed fertile brains in making comparisons, but he was thankful that he could consider a question of this kind without imputing motives to anyone. He suggested that considering the statement of the Hon. the Colonial Secretary both hon. members should withdraw their motions. The Hon. Mr. STOKES suggested that the motion should take a different form. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE supported the motion, and expressed a hope that the Hon. the Colonial Secretary should name a day when he would bring down the information asked for. He would himself have taken action in the matter had not the Hon. Mr. Robinson tabled this motion. The Hoa. Dr. POLLEN repeated his assurance that the information should be forthcoming as soon as possible. The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON, in reply, said that he could appeal with confidence to the Council as to whetwer his conduct justified the remarks which had been made. As to the Hon. Colonel Brett, they all knew that he would speak half a dozen times in as many hours, and each time change his mind. Speaking one way, he would vote the other. He understood that his hon. friend had dined with Sir Julius Vogel, and supposed that he had profited by the society in which he had been. He bad done justice to the prompting which doubtless had been given to him. (Cries of “ Order.”) He himself had not been actuated by personal motives in the matter. All he required was information. He would leave himself in the hands of the Council —if they thought he ought not to press the motion he would not do so. The Hon. Colonel BRETT, understanding that the original motion would be withdrawn, withdrew his motion.

After some discussion, the original motion was also withdrawn, the Hon. Dr. Pollen undertaking to lay the papers asked for on the table.

The Hon. Dr. POLLEN then moved that the name of the Hon. Mr. Hall he added to the following committees, viz. : —Waste Lands, Canterbury Diseased Sheep Bill, Library, House, and Printing. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE then moved, —That a message be sent to the Lower House, requesting the attendance of Sir Donald McLean and Mr. Sheehan, to give evidence before the committee on the Native Grantees Act, 1876. STAMP ACT AMENDMENT BILE.

The second reading of tins Bill was moved by the Hon. Dr. Pollen, who characterised it as a departmental Bill, and the alterations in the law were merely of a technical character. The “Bill was read a second time, and afterwards considered in committee. LAWRENCE RECREATION RESERVES BILL. This Bill was read a second time, after a little discussion, on the motion of the Hon. Dr. Mknzies. eknwick lease and conveyance bill. This Bill was further considered in committee, and the third reading was fixed for next sitting day. ddnkdin reserves exchange bill. A similar course was adopted with regard to this Bill. RATING BILL. The clauses of this Bill were further considered in committee, and the third reading

fixed for Wednesday, the Horn Dr. Pollen •„ promising that the Bill,, as amended, should be printed and circulated in the course of Tuesday. PUBLIC WORKS BILL. This order of the day wasdischarged on the motion of the Hon. Dr. Pollen, and made an order of the day fornext sitting day. ■ The Hon. the Speaker left the chair at 9.10 p.m. Tuesday, September 19. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair, at the usual bom - . NEW ZEALAND UNIVERSITY BILL. The second reading was moved by the Hon. Mr. Stokes, who explained the object of the measure. He thought it would strengthen the University and extend its influence. The Bill had the approval of the Chancellor of the University.—lt was supported by the Hon. Dr. Pollen, and Mr. Waterhouse ; and after some remarks from the Hon. Colonel Brett, Mr. Acland (who also supported the measure). Captain Fraser, Colonel Whitmore, and Dr. Jlenzies, Mr. Stokes replied, and the second reading was agreed to. To be committed on Friday next..

THE INDEMNITY BILL. This Bill was brought up from the Lower Chamber. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN said the circumstances under which this measure was introduced were fresh in the minds of hon. members. The Bill being of an exceptional character, he trusted that the same courtesy which had been extended to it in another place would be extended by the Council.—The Hon, CoL Whitmore thought the proposition of the Colonial Secretary for the suspension of the standing orders was not j ustified by the circumstances. —The measure was supported by the Hons. Mr. Waterhouse and Mr. Hall.—The Hon. Mr. Mantell, though he was a supporter of the Government, doubted the propriety of in any way interfering with the courts of the colony.— The Hou. Dr. Menzies and the Hon. Mr. Acland supported the suspension of the standing orders.—The Hon. Mr. Wateroouse spoke at some length on the second reading. He blamed both parties in the late struggle. He should support the reimbursing the expenses which members of the Opposition had been put to. —In this view he was followed by the Hon. Mr. Robinson.—The Hon. Col. Kenny blamed the Hon. Mr. Whitaker for the advice he had given. He should support the Bill, but withmany scruples, as he considered Ministers greatly to blame. Some further debate ensued, the Hon.. q Mr. Hall saying he could not agree with the remarks of the Hon. Mr, Waterhouse that both parties were to blame. He (Mr. Hall) thought the late state of affairs entirely due to the action of the Opposition. A division was taken on the second reading, which resulted as follows : —Ayes, 20 ; noes, 3.—ln consequence of some remarks which passed as to the construction of the 81st standing order, referring to members of the Council not voting on any measure in which they had any pecuniary interest, the Hons. Mr. Hall and Dr. Pollen did not vote, though the Speaker had intimated that he should not have felt justified in challenging the votes of these hon. members.

The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE moved an amendment in the 3rd clause, to indemnify the members of the Opposition who had incurred costs in the matter. The amendment was supported by the Hons. Captain Fraser, Mr. Mantell, Colonels Whitmore and Kenny.—The Hon. Dr. Pollen opposed it. Provision could, if necessary, be made in another way. Were the amendment carried it might have the effect of awakening agitation in another place. He trusted the hou. gentleman would withdraw his amendment. —The Hon. Mr. Peacock opposed the amendment, and Mr. Acland supported it. On a division the amendment was carried by 15 to 9.—After some further debate the Bill was reported, and read third time.

OTHER BUSINESS. The second readings of the Debtors and Creditors Bills and the Fraudulent Debtors Act 1875 Amendment Bill were postponed until next sitting day.—The Otepopo Atheuseum and Public Library Reserve Bill was read a second time and referred to a committee to verify the schedule. —The WaiukuNative Grants BiU was read a second time and referred to the Waste Lands Committee. —The Renwick Leases and Conveyance Bill and the Dunedin Reserves Exchange BiU were read a third time and ordered to be transmitted. —The Public Works BiU was discharged from the Order Paper and made an order of the day for the next sitting day, a strong opinion being expressed by the Hon. Mr. HaU that the Council should waste no further time in postponements.—The Treasury Bills Extended Currency Bill was received from the Lower House and read a first time, the second reading being made an order of the day for Thursday.—Leave was given to the Hon. Mr. Wi Tako to attend and give evidence before the Committee on Native Affairs of the Lower House.—This concluded the business, and the Council adjourned at twenty minutes to nine. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tuesday, September 19. The Speaker took the chair at half-past two o’clock. petitions and notices of motion. Several petitions were presented and notices of motion given. QUESTIONS. Mr. MURRAY asked the Premier, —What action the Government propose to take to give effect to the suggestions contained in the Public Petitions Committee’s report on the petition of C. E. Pritchard? The Hon. Major ATKINSON said the Government did not propose to take any further steps in the matter. Mr. Pritchard wanted not only the laud for nothing but payment by Government of passages of those coming to settle on it. Government would not give away land.

Mr. TAIAROA asked the Native Minister, —lf the Government will have the sum of £6OOO, with interest thereon, placed upon the Estimates, to be paid to the native owners of the Princes-street reserve, being rents due up to the issue of the Crown grant? The Hon. Sir DONALD McLEAN said a final settlement of the claim had been made by the Provincial Government of Otago, and the General Government did not propose to place any sum upon the Estimates to pay a further claim.

Mr. BARER asked the Minister for Public Works, —If it is the intention of the Government to construct a bridge over the Hokitika river, on the .line of the Ross-road. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said a balance of the sum voted some years ago for roads in Westland was unexpended, and Government intended to spend this on the Oka-rito-road. Unless the House voted money to construct the bridge in question, Government did not propose to place any sum on the Estimates.

Mr. J. E. BROWN asked the Commissioner of Telegraphs,—When the telegraph office at Amberley will be erected and opened for business ?

The Hon. Mr. WHITAKER said the plans were prepared, specifications nearly ready, and tenders would soon be called for.

Mr. STOUT asked the Premier,—Whether the Government intend to make provision for the establishment of Penny Savings Banks in connection with the public schools ? The Hon. Major ATKINSON said the matter would receive careful consideration at their hands, and if possible they would give effect to the idea. Mr. ANDREW asked the Premier,— Whether ho will lay before this House, at an early date, copies of correspondence which may have passed between the Government and any person or persons on the subject of the appointment to the office of Agent-General? The Hon. Major ATKINSON said there would be no objection to laying the correspondence bn the table. NEW BILLS. The following Bills were introduced and read a first time:-By Sir G. Grey— A Bill to provide for the construction of a railway from Grahamstown to the Waikato'river. By Mr. Murray A Bill to extend the boundaries of the incorporated town of Milton. By Mr. Thomson— A Bill to make provision for the leasing of certain reserves at Port Molyneui..

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The House went into committee on this Bill, which was further considered in respect to several amendments and new clauses, reported on, and ordered to be recommitted ,on Thursday. TREASURY BILLS EXTENDED CURRENCY BILL. The House went into committee on this Bill, which was considered, reported, read a third time, and passed. PUBLIC TRUST OFFICE BILL. This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to bo committed on Friday. LAND TRANSFER ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday. MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The House went into committee on this Bill, which was considered, amended, reported, read a third time, and passed. OTAGO AND ABOLITION. Mr. MACANDREW moved,—Whereas the Abolition of Provinces Act, 1875, is repugnant to the wishes and detrimental to the interests of the people in the province of Otago, and whereas it would be highly subversive of the first principles of good government to deprive any section of her Majesty’s subjects against their will and without their consent of those political institutions which were conferred upon them by the Imperial Parliament, and under which they have grown up and prospared—lt is therefore resolved that a respectful address he transmitted to his Excellency the Governor to the effect that he may be pleased at the earliest possible date to dissolve the Provincial Legislature of Otago, and to cause a fresh election of Superintendent and Provincial Council, so as to afford the people in the said province an opportunity of considering and determining as to the form of local self-government most suitable for their requirements ; and that pending the will of the people being ascertained as aforesaid, his Excellency may be pleased to take the necessary steps so as that the provisions of the said Abolition Act shall he held in abeyance as respects the province of Otago. Resolved further that in the meantime, and pending the decision of the newly elected Provincial Legislature, the affairs of the said province shall continue to be administered in terms of the Kew Zealand Constitution Act. He said he had no desire at this late period of the session to raise any prolonged discussion upon this motion, nor did he think there was necessity for speaking at length himself, for the resolutions were so clear and were of such a character that they must commend themselves to the judgment and sense of fair play of almost every member of the House. It would be observed that the resolutions were based upon two distinct facts recognised by the people of Otago, and which in his opinion could not be disputed, except by those who were determined not to see. The first fact was this —that the Abolition Act passed last session was repugnant to the wishes and opposed to the feelings of the people of Otago. If any evidence of the existence ef that fact were required, he might simply point to the fact that of the thirteen Otago representatives who last ‘session voted for the passing of the Abolition Bill only one had been reelected by the same constituency he was last session supposed to represent. That was a very remarkable piece of evidence as to the state of feeling in Otago ; but further, of the twentyone representatives returned to the present Parliament by Otago province only one had not been pledged to vote for financial separation as a sort of mitigation of the evil the Abolition Act would produce. In addition to these proofs, numerous public meetings were now heinc held throughout the length and breadth of the province. The people had met with the greatest enthusiasm and unanimity during the past ten or fourteen days, and had passed resolutions appealing to the Parliament not to inflict upon them a government they did not desire. He read the resolutions passed at the Dunedin and Caversham meetings, and said they might be taken as fairly exhibiting the feeling of the people throughout the whole province. It had been said the public meetings had been arranged and resolutions framed by members of the House; in fact, by himself ; but he denied it. The statement that he had instigated the public meetings was without the slightest foundation. He had not done so, nor had he, or any member of the House, as far as he was aware, suggested a single resolution. The meetings and the resolutions alike had spontaneously emanated frnmthepeople themselves throughout the province. (Ironical cheers.) Hon. gentlemen might cheer ironically, but they would find out by and by what the people felt. The second fact upon which the resolutions had been based was that the Abolition Act of last session was detrimental to the interests of the people of Otago. He had in proof of this only to point out that abolition involved the province of Otago being deprived of £IOO,OOO to £200,000 a-year, which would otherwise be spent within its own territory. It further meant that the controlling power over the expenditure in every part of the province was to vest in Wellington, beyond the reach of the eyes of the people. (Hear, hear.) These reasons were, he thought, aburidaut to show that abolition would be detrimental to the interests of Otago at all events. It was said that the people in the other provinces of New Zealand, except Auckland, entertained a different opinion as to the effect it would have upon them. It was said they were content to relinquish those powers of local self-government which had been conferred upon them by the Imperial Parliament, and which he took leave to say once relinquished, it would not be an easy matter to reacquire, although the time would come when they would be exceedingly anxious to reacquire them, (Cheers.) It was said all the other provinces preferred to be governed from Wellington. He could only say he should be very sorry to interfere with the provinces which thought so, or to insist upon their retaining a system of government of which they had got tired or thought effete, however much mistaken he deemed them to be; but he would ask for similar treatment towards Otago let her have what she ■wished, and do not attempt to force this abolition upon her. Otago was quite willing to bear her fair share and full proportion of the burdens of the colony so far as past liabilities were concerned, but she insisted that she should have the whole of her land revenue and the whole of her railway revenue to be expended within her territory and under the control of the people of the province. That was what Otago insisted upon. They did not want the people of Hawke's Bay, and the people of Taranaki, and the people of Wellington to say in what way Otago’s money should be spent, and to direct that a bridge should be put here, a road there, and a railway somewhere alse. Otago wanted to look after her local affairs for herself, wanted to retain those institutions under which she had prospered in the past, and the people of Otago could not think why the rest of the colony should endeavor to force upon them a government they did not want. He asked the House, then, to pause before it did this great wrong upon so large a section of her Majesty’s subjects as is comprised within the province of Otago—a wrong which if persisted in would he felt perfectly convinced create and perpetuate similar feelings in the minds of the people of the province to those which were entertained by the people of Ireland towards the Imperial authorities —afeeling which he regarded as ablot, the weak point of the British Constitution, It was a great thing to foster in the hearts of the people respect for the authorities, but if such a course as that the abolitionists proposed were followed, that feeling would be greatly weakened. He asked the House to pause before they robbed the people of the right to conduct their own affairs, and handed over the right to that House, which was filled hy unequal representation like that of Hawke’s Bay and Taranaki. (Hear, hear). He asked it in the name of the Constitution, in the name of justice, in the name of that sense of fair play which was supposed to be a characteristic of Englishmen all over the world, in the name of 100,000 people of the colony—--100,000 people who if a deaf ear were turned to them would demand it for themselves, not as suppliants, but as freemen. (Cheers.) He implored the House to pause in the reckless course of action upon which it had entered—- ‘ a course of action which was only calculated to weaken the authority of the law, which

everv good citizen and every wise legislator ought to do his utmost .to maintain and strengthen. (Cheers). The Hon. Major ATKINSON said the Government were placed in a somewhat difficult position owing to the course which the hen. gentleman (Mr. Macandrew) had pursued, as it must be evident to the House that his hon. friend had not adduced one single argument why that House should specifically repeal the Abolition Act of last session. The hon. gentleman had his sympathy to a great extent in the sentimental speech he had just delivered. The speech from beginning to end was the speech of a man who thoroughly believed in tlie cause he was advocating; but he seemed unable to recognise the fact that that cause was the cause of a past time —a cause that had passed away. What did the speech of the hon. gentleman consist of ? He started by telling the House that the Abolition Act was repugnant to the interests of the people of Otago ; and in order to show that it was repugnant, he informed them that the majority of the members now sitting in (he House, representing not Otago, but constituencies in Otago, were elected, not to do away with the Abolition Act, but to vote for financial separation.

Mr. MACANDREW: As a mitigation of the evil.

The Hon. Major ATKINSON : Well, as a mitigation of the evil. Now, he took it as a very remarkable fact, in the face of the great influence possessed by the hon. member for Dunedin, and of the efforts made by those gentlemen who really believe in provincialism, that the cry on the hustings of Otago should have been, not for the re-establishment of provincial institutions in their present form, but for financial separation. The desire in the majority of cases was for a modified form of provincialism. So far as he knew, except in one or two directions, none of the Otago members had expressed themselves in favor of the re-establishment of provincialism on its present basis. Yet the hon. gentleman would ask the House to do so to re-establish the province of Otago as it was before the passing of the Abolition Act. Apparently his object was to re-establish the Provincial Government in order that the province of Otago should continue to enjoy the advantages which the Constitution gave it, and that it might be remodelled so as to suit Ot’go itself. He (Major Atkinson) contended that the course proposed could not be adopted by the Government, and they would be untrue to the interests of the colony if they entertained such a proposal for one moment. The House was by far the most fitting tribunal to decide what was the best description of’ local institutions for the people throughout the entire colony. He was not going to underrate the meaning of the meetings which were now being held all over Otago. He thought he estimated them at their true value. He was willing to allow them very great weight, but not for a moment the weight which his hon. friend apparently attached to them. He must say very distinctly that the people of Otago were under a misapprehension of what the meaning of abolition was, and of that he contended they had absolute proof by the statement which Mr. Macandrew had made that night. He had told the House, as he had told his constituents, that the bringing into force of the Abolition Act must deprive Otago of £150,000 a-year. Well, he should like to hear something more than a mere assertion of that kind. He wished that the hon. gentleman had condescended to tell the House how he had arrived at the conclusion that the people of Otago were going to lose that money. He could not do so, and he would now challenge him, in the face of that House, to show in his reply that by the present proposals of the Government the province of Otago was not an absolute gainer. The bon. gentleman should have gone into figures, and backed up his assertion by clear proof. Mr. MACANDREW: I have done so formerly. The Hon. Major ATKINSON: All he knew was that he had carefully searched for a report in which he could find the figures which the hon. member stated that he had used, but could not find it. He would again say distinctly that by the proposals of the Government the province of Otago would not lose one halfpenny of its land fund. He would not go into figures now, but would undertake to prove the truth of what he said to the House before it rose. In the meantime the burden of proof clearly rested with the hon. member foi Dunedin. It might be proved, although he could hardly believe it when he thought of the hon. gentlemen who were going to support Mr. Macandrew, that abolition meant one purse for one colony, the land fund of Otago being taken to meet the necessities of Auckland. But he (the speaker) contended that it meant no such thing. He was satisfied that the proposals of the Government and the decided stand which they had taken during this session, had alone saved the land fund from being made colonial, and he should have thought Mr. Macandrew would have had no doubt upon this point, when he saw the company in which he was on the motion before the House. When he heard the hon. member for the Thames cheering when Mr. Macandrew said that Otago desired the disposition of the local land fund and revenue in its own way, he was surprised, seeing that the action which the member for the Thames had taken during the present session had been chiefly with a view of obtaining that land fund for the colony. Sir GEORGE GREY: It was not the chief object I had in view. The Hon. Major ATKINSON: He was at least very active in that direction, and so far as he could understand, the hon. gentleman meant to obtain it as soon as he could. As to the appeal made to permit Otago to have local government, that was the very object the House had in view in passing the Abolition Act. It desired then and still desired to give to the people of Otago local government; and until the provinces were abolished, dead and gone, they would never enjoy real local government. He did not wish to be misunderstood. He was willing to admit that the Provincial Government had done a great work in Otago, and the same might be said of other provinces—in Canterbury, for instance, where the Government was still doing a great work. But what he said was that provincialism was not local government—it was centralism on a small scale. The hon. gentleman asked the House to let the people of Otago attend to their own local affairs. Now, it would have been better had he told the House what were those local affairs, because it appeared to him (the speaker) that the decision of what form the local government should take ought not to be left to any section of the community. He was not going through the arguments that had been brought before the House with regard to the advantages and disadvantages of provincialism. He took it that that point had been settled by the Abolition Act being placed upon the Statute Book of New Zealand, and he was not called upon to defend that Act until some arguments had been adduced to show why it shouldbe removed from the Statute Book. When any gentleman brought forward such arguments, he should be prepared to advance reasons for the passing of that Act, and why the house should maintain it in its present position. Those who asked for a modified form of provincialism did not tell the House what it meant, and he should like to know how they proposed to carry on the colony financially. Mr. MACANDREW : By Treasury bills. The Hon. MAJOR ATKINSON would call the attention of the House to this—that the hon. gentleman could not be in earnest in his motion when he, could jokingly suggest that the means of carrying on the government of the colony should be by Treasury bills. (Laughter). For more than twenty _ years they had tried [provincialism, and this fact could not be gainsaid— that throughout that time they had never been able to apply the revenue of the colony to the wants of the people evenly throughout the land. That, he contended, would be a sufficient reason for the reconsideration of tbeir position. They had found that provincialism did not supply a good and fair government. Some parts of the colony had been rolling in wealth, while others had been pinched almost to starvation ; and so long as they retained the provincial form of government, so long would that be the case. Although provincialism had done much for

the provinces—it had done a great deal for Otago in particular—he said without fear, of contradiction that the Public Works and Immigration scheme inaugurated and carried out by the House had done more for Otago than all the provinces put together. He asked them to look at the number of immigrants the Government had introduced, the great works they had carried on, and said the works of the provinces during twenty years existence would not compare with the works performed by the Central Government during the last five years. He did not intend troubling the House with many more remarks, but would say this, that if the resolutions before the House were carried, it meant the reintroduction of provincialism, without any consideration at all of the way in which the affairs of the colony were to be carried on. It was quite certain if the resolutions were adopted that they finest relegate that power, not only to the Provincial Council of Otago, but to the Provincial Councils throughout the islands. It must be done whether they would or not ; then, ho would ask, what state the colony would be in ? One province would go in for abolition, one for autonomy, one for a Crown colony, and another for a separate colony, and another for the old Constitution. He asked the House whether it was fair to relegate to the provinces such a power', by which New Zealand would be split up into separate colonies ; and said he was quite convinced that the House would see the sense and justice of the Government proposals. He concluded by saying that the House could and would provide a form of government which would thoroughly satisfy the people of New Zealand. Sir GEORGE GREY said he had on previous occasions felt a sense of shame at some opinions which he had heard expressed in the House. He had with sorrow heard it said in threatening language that if one gentleman — a favorite of the Government —had been within a thousand miles of New Zealand, none of the Gppositiou would have spoken as they had spoken; and last session a member of the House, the paid editor of a newspaper of the late Premier, had stated that if the latter gentleman had been in New Zealand certain members would not have dared to say what they did with regard to him. But he had never listened to statements which had caused him greater sorrow than those which the Hon. Major Atkinson had made that evening He had appealed to nothing but the lowest motives money, money, money, was the theme of his address. He accused the hon. member for Dunedin of placing the Government in a difficulty. Why, they were always in difficulties, and it was unfair to say that the Opposition were placing the Government in a difficulty, when they were speaking in the interests of the people of New Zealand. He denied that Mr. Macaudrew’s speech had been wanting in reasons for the course proposed to be adopted, and said the object of the Government in carrying abolition was to set up one governing class in the colony, and to reduce the mass of the people to poverty and lower them beneath their feet. Referring to what the Premier had said with respect to the land question, making it appear that it was one as to whether Otago should he robbed of its land fund or Auckland should want, he said it was a wrong statement, and that it was an infringement of the rights of mankind to use arguments of that kind. He referred to the Government refusing to make the land fund colonial, and accused the Premier of endeavoring to raise differences between the members for Auckland and Otago. The most malicious spirit, he said, could have devised nothing more wicked. It was not a fact that there could be no local government until abolition was an accomplished fact, for the reason that the Provincial Councils had the power to introduce any form of government they chose. He twitted the Government with having been so long about devising a form of local government, referring to the withdrawal of certain Government measures, and denied that the carrying of abolition was, under the circumstances, legal. Proper representations of the case had not been despatched to the Imperial Government, and he pointed out that before the provinces could be swept away the people of the country must be appealed to and their consent obtained. Until which abolition could not become an accomplished fact. He was determined, along with the Superintendent of Otago, to consult his Provincial Council, despite the Abolition Bill, so as to educate their children to run the race of public life with distinction. He did not think that the people of New Zealand would ever be so degraded or base as to surrender their liberties into the hands of a few professional politicians.

Mr. MANDERS denied that at his election he had given any pledge as to separation on such a principle as that advocated by Mr. Macandrew. He had long been an opponent to provincialism, and was supported in that view by his constituency. His experience as a Provincial Councillor had strengthened his views. However, he would not vote against Mr. Macandrew’s resolutions, because until the promulgation of the Counties Bill he bad opposed the Abolition Act. since the people had not been consulted about it.

Mr. REID was disappointed with the defiant attitude of the Government, who he thought, seeing the deep feeling that had been aroused throughout ths country, would have been inclined to be more conciliatory.

Mr. REYNOLDS, regarding Mr. Macandrew’s motion as a virtual vote of want of confidence in the Government, would vote against it. He did not think that a free opinion of the public would be obtained by the election of a Provincial Council, manipulated by the provincial authorities, with the command of provincial funds. Mr. BURNS considered Mr. Macandrew’s resolutions very reasonable, and denied that they were in any way tantamount to a vote of want of confidence in the Government. Messrs. Pyke, Stout, Wakefield, W. Wood, Gibbs, Shrimski, and Barff having addressed the House, the division was taken. For the Government, 37 ; against, 21. The following is the division list : Ayes: Andrew, Atkinson, Baigent, Ballance, BarfT, Bowen, J. E. Brown, Brvce, Carrington, Cox, Gibbs. Harper, Henry, Hunter, Hursthonso, Johnston, Kelly (teller), Kennedy, Kenny, Macfarlane, Sir D. McLean, G. McLean, Montgomery, Moorhonso, Murray-Ayns-ley, Ormond, Richardson, Richmond, Rowe, Russel), Seymour, Stafford, Stevens, Tribe, Whitaker, Williams, Woolcnck. Noes : J, C. Brown, Burns, De Lnutonr, Dignan, Grey, Hisiop, Joyce, Lumsden, Macandrew (teller), • Murray, Nahe, Rees, D. Reid, Rollcston, Seaton, Sheehan. Shrimski. Stout (teller), Swanson, Takamoana, Thomson, Tole. R. G, Wood, W. Wood. SUPPLY. The House then went into Committee of Supply. In reply to a question, The Hon. Major ATKINSON said the Government would place the alterations proposed in the Estimates, if of sufficient importance, before the House in print. Progress was reported, and the House adjourned at 1.35.