PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4868, 28 October 1876, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. , Friday, October 27. 'The Hon. the Speaker took the Chair at 2.30 p.m. ■ QUESTION: - The Hon. Mr.' RUSSELL asked' the Hon. the Colonial Secretary,—What steps, if any, the Government have taken to carry out the resolution of this Council, passed last session, in regard to the Te Ante College estate- and other educational trusts arising from-donations from the Maoris or from the Government ? He read the resolution. The Hon. Dr.POLLEN said no steps had been taken, owing to his having forgotten that the resolution had been passed, and to no copy having been forwarded to the Government. . , . THE WELLINGTON CEMETERY. ' " The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE moved, — That, in the opinion. of this Council, it is desirable thatdmmediate steps should .be taken for closing the Wellington Cemetery,*: in the .mode prescribed by the Burials Act, 1874. In speaking to the motion, the hon. member read alerter from Mr. Allen, chemist, which has appeared in. the New Zealand Times, , and which referred to the cemetery and to . the prevalence of scarlet fever. ■■■;.; .; .The Hon. : Dr. POLLEN agreed with the last speaker: - It had been impossible hitherto for the Governor to take any action,, as it was first necessary for the Superintendent - to set apart another piece of land for a cemetery before the present one could be. closed. Hereafter it would be competent for the Governor to interpose in ajmatter of this kind. The Hon. Mr. MANTELL said it was easy for anyone to judge for himself of the state of the present cemetery by observing the oozings from the cesspools in the cemetery which were called drains. _ , The Hon. Captain FRASER could not understand how the Government could go to the expense of buying a yacht for his Excellency, and at the same time compel him to inhale the noxious gases from the, cemetery. This would exist, he supposed, until some two or three members of the Government were carried off, and then perhaps it would be remedied. He believed that this was the only town in the world at the present moment which had the cemetery in its very centra. Next session he doubted if it would be possible to induce members of Parliament to attend. . The motion was agreed to. THE, SPEECHES OP MAORI MEMBERS. .. The;. Hon. ‘ Mr. NGATATA moved,—That, inasmuch as the proceedings of Parliament and the speeches of Maori members are-not published in the Maori language in Hansard, it is, in the,opinion of this Council, very desirable that: every facility should he given to the publication and circulation of the WaTca Maori, so •that the Maori, people may have some knowledge of what is done, in-Parliament. The hon; gentleman spoke to his motion shortly, urging that .were: the WaTca discontinued the Maoris outside the House would have no means of knowing what was done inside. Did, he asked,- the Council understand the matter? Had they read the letter of Mohi Turei, which had appeared in Monday's New Zealand Times. That ; gentleman was anxious for the Maoris, , and had written. the letter, so that hon. members might see the state of the esse. —The Hon., Mr., Kohere seconded and supported the motion. The. thing the 1 Maories thought most of was the WaTca Maori. By it they might ascertain the laws that had been passed. -In it they had news from the Other island and from the rest of the world. The new laws were looked for there. The .Maoris got their first knowledge from what, they read in the Wdka Maori. _ It the WaTca were broken then would,the.natives have nothingto bear them upon the sea.—The Hon. Dr. Pollen ' thought the' desire of the Maori members a very natural one. . There were two means of accomplishing that "object. The one was a translation in Hansard itself, which would give it an -official character. The other was the: continued existence of the WaTca-, that depended on the money-being found for maintaining it. Whether that would be done He could not say. His own opinion went in favor of- the Hansard plan.—The Hon. Capt. Fraser thought hardly sufficient attention was given to the speeches of those loyal gentlemen (the Maori members). He was astonished that the Government had so long, tolerated the plain sedition of the Wanangai—TTia Hon. Colonel Whitmore arid he had started the ’WaTca. It had been originally a newspaper, but had degenerated into a political engine, and consisted principally of, fulsome, praises of the Native Minister, or dispraise of those who did not agree : with him. It was most likely for this reason that the other Chamber -had disallowed the vote.,—The Hou..Mr. Hall supported the publication in Hansard, but as to the way to carry out that object—were the speeches published* in Hansacd itself they would bebound up with those of other hon. members, which would be to the Maoris a sealed .book., He would suggest . that the Maori speeches should be published separately. —The Hon. Mr. Mantkll proposed is_aaamendment that the,speeches of the Maori members be published in Hewiiard. In speaking to hia amendment, he commented strongly on the way in- which the .speeches- of the,- native members (some of them of great eloquence) reached the; ears of hon. members. He had refrained for seine sessions- from taking any notice of this matter, hoping for a change. He thought the Maori members should have an opportunity of correcting their speeches as other hon." members .had. : He expressed his great dissatisfaction with the interpretation of the speeches of the Maori members ’ of that Council ~ , ; „ It was suggested. to add the words “with a translation” to Mr. Mantell’s amendment, and in that form it was accepted by the-Hon. Mr. Ngatata, and agreed to. . THIRD READINGS. The Public Works, Lyttelton Harbor Board, and Native Reserves Bills. SECOND- READINGS. The New Zealand: Loan Bill and the Disqualification Bill.--IN COMMITTEE. ■■ The Council then want into , committee-on the two last mentioned Bills. ... The New Zealand Loan’Bill passed through, was reported,,read a third time, and passed. Disqualification Bill—As the Hon. Colonel WHiTMORE-did- not move...the., motion_standing in his name, the Hon. Sir, John Richardson felt constrained to do-so. The motion runs:— To add- the- following as a new sub-section to clause 6 ;—“ Any person being a Superintendent of any province,, or any member of any provincial Executive Council, who shall have i been such-Superintendent or member of Executive Council dozing the whole of . the present i session. o£Pariiament„ and who shall lie holding;

euch office at the time of the complete coming into force of the Abolition of Provinces ‘ Act, 1875.”—Some discußaiori ehsued, and the sub-section was agreed to' by 17 to 7. ~ - OTAGO AND WELLINGTON TOLLS BILL. " i The second reading was moved by the' Hon. Dr; PdliEN. Its object was of a purely local character.—The motion was carried. ■ ;INTKBTATENATWE, SUCCESSION BILL. After some discussibh. the second reading of the above was agreed to. •. : > ‘ IN COMMITTEE. The Council "was considering the Dunedin , Drillshed Reserves Bill when the adjournment tour arrived. : , : . . HOUSE. OF REPRESENTATIVES. . ■ , Friday, October 27. The Speaker took the chair at half-past ' two o’clock. i ..... THE PROROGATION. ; ! The Hon. Major ATKINSON said at the ' rising of the House he should move that it r adjourn tillnextday at eleven o’clock, and went I on. to state that little business would be * brought before the House, nothing more than the consideration of amendments made, in "Bills by the Legislative Council. <! The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS then enquired whether the Government would propose any new business'after Saturday, or if they would !, resist any new business proposed by private members. .He said there was a. general impression' that there would bo an attempt to , reintroduce and pass the Canterbury leasing clauses. > ’ The Hon. Major ATKINSON said the only , way in which .such a question- could come up would be by the Legislative Council re-inserting the clauses; The Bill wouldthen come to the House,,and the only .course open to the Governl inent would be to support the clauses. : Considerable discussion ensued.—The Hon. Mr. Reynolds said if the Government had the clauses reinstated, he would oppose ; them . on, every measure, and vote for a want of confidence: motion, if anyone would move it. — Mr. Rolleston said a great injustice had been done by a snatched victory, and he should ■ adopt every means possible to reverse that unfair division.—Mr. De Lautour said the conduct of the Government and the Canterbury members simply amounted to an invitation to the Council to introduce : the clauses.— Mr. Rees made a violent attack upon the Government, charging them with having made a • venal bargain with the Canterbury members, End accused the Premier of wilfully breaking . through an arrangement by which the division - of the committee the other evening was to be ' accepted as final —The Hon. Mr. Bowen warmly replied to Ur. Rees, throwing back ■ his assertions as untrue and impossible of - proper description within the limits of parliamentary language.—Mr. .HAMLIN moved (he adjournment, of the debate. After -some further discussion, on the suggestion of the Hon. Major Atkinson the debate was adjourned till 7.30.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE. i Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Eichmond for ten days. ■ , VESET STEWART SET ILEMENT. Mr. O’ROEKE asked the Government, — .Whether, with a view of strengthening the Kat’kati settlement, they will reserve another block of 10,000 acres in that neighborhood for ■ small capitalists, 'of the class introduced by Mr. Vesey Stewart ; the land to be paid for j . either under a special agreement or by the im--1 migrants themselves, under the deferred-pay-mcnt system sanctioned by this House? ‘ The Hon., Major ATKINSON , said ; the Government had :intimated to "Mr. Stewart that 1 ;i they would be willing to reserve a ' quantify of land, not to be given away,.but to be paid for at a fair price. • Min.. SERVICE.' ■ The Hon. Mr- WHITAKER read the following telegram, to be sent to Sydney, and moved that the. telegram be approved of “ Parliament has, been consulted, and we can only agree to alteration of present-contract on following conditions, namely—thirteen services a year; route, San Francisco to Sydney, calling at Auckland, omitting Honolulu at, same time as you desire. That’s giving you entire benefit of service at a subsidy of £70,000, leaving' to the two colonies :to provide a coastal service for Hew Zealand about, £SOOO. We cannot consent to'the Bay-of Island unless the' company fakes £75000, and provides a satisfactory coastal service,'.your * estimate of the expense being altogether erroneous. Com- - municate decision at once,-as we must make arrangements in case of discontinuance of the - : ThaHoni Mr.- STAFFORD ’said he did not approveof thetele'gram, andthought the Sydney ■Government had not 'treated._New.Zealand fairly; While the Hew South Wales'Government were getting numerous despatches their . Parliament was in session, but not a word was communicated to . it. Now, however, they . were forced to take some notice of the matter, and were trying to get : the best of' Hew' Zea-' land. Sydney wished to get a direct service half the cost of which a port of call was to pay., ' 'Such- «- telegram would effect ho good, and Hew Zealand .should carry on the temporary 1 service for two or three months, pending the. arrival of an accredited and responsible person to negotiate with: theGoverument,Why should Messrs. Gilchrist and Watt attempt to arrange the matter by inconclusive telegrams? The Hon, Mr. REYNOLDS quite approved of what had been said by; Mr. Stafford, and . said he considered the Sydney Government - were acting very selfishly. 1 Mr. JOHNSTON said Sydney was getting too' much, and suggested that Auckland should • .be made the, terminal port, leaving the New South Wales portion'of the service to be carried on by,a branch service. .' ■ - Mr. BURNS said ’ the more concessions .i. granted ; the more woiild be required, and the best thing was to pass a resolution compelling the, Government to/Stick to its bargain, or close the service at once. The service had al- ’ ways been unsatisfactory, and the sooner the ■ colony was quit of the whole thing the ■ better. .... Mr, STEVEHS moved as an amendment that the House was not prepared to accept any modifications beyond those . contained in the telegram of 14th October, save that in refer- • ence to calling at Honolulu. Mr. HUNTER opposed making the Bay of ‘ Islands the port of call, because of the incon- .. venience to passengers and icargo for Hew ■ Zealand. . . i ■' The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD did not like the amendment much better than he did the I ■ motion, because he considered the whole re--uponsibility should be thrown upon the Hew South Wales Government for its delay in this matter.. The New, South Wales Government were more anxious for'thei ser- ' ’ -rice than was New Zealand, because it was a' 1 point of honor with the former colony, to keep - upwith Victoria.:: : V Mr. ORMOND thought .the New South ' Wales Government were acting unfairly to New Zealand, and was in favor of the : onus - being cast upon New South Wales. ' However, he should suggest that ■ the present service should, be carried on temporarily .for a time , until delegates could meet the New Zealand Government. , Mr. JOHNSTON said it appeared to him that New , South Wales had had the: greater benefit from tlie contract 'so far, : and if New Zealand were merely to be a port of call, her contribution should be very much less thau that of New South Wales. The resolution was negatived by 36 to 29. The following is the division list: — , i ■. Ayes.—Messrs. Atkinson, Barff, Bowen, Brandon, Bunny, Button, Caxtls, Dignan, Grey, Hamlin, Henry, Hurst house, Kelly (teller), Lusk, Handers, G, McLean, Nahe, OHorke, Pyke, Ece«, Klchardson, Kowe. Soy-' - - mour, Sheehan (teller), Swanson, Takamoana, Tawitl,' Tole, and Whitaker. Nok&—Messrs. Balgent, J; C. Brown, Bryce, Burns, Carrington, De Lautonr, Fisher, Fltzroy, Gibbs, - Harper, Hislop, Ilodgkineon, -Hunter, - Johnston (teller), Joyce, Lmnsden, Montgomery,' Ormond, Pearce, D. Reid, Reynolds, Eolleston, Seaton,-Sharp, Shrlmskl. Stafford, Stevens (teller), -Taiaroa, Toachenmker, Thomson, Tribe, Wakefield, Wason, Williams, TV. -Wood, and Woolcock, On the amendment being put, Mr. Lusk moved the adjournment of the debate. He said he was afraid the House did hot know what it was doing, or if it did it was doing something which it would before long very much regret. A division took place on the question of the adjournment. Ayes, 40 ; noes, 26. The debate was therefore adjourned.

COUNTIES BILL—CONSIDERATION OP AMENDMENTS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. . - The clause referring to the limitation- as to the size of the counties was disagreed with; also -the amendments in blause-35. Clause 41,-elecr tion of chairman, amendment disagreed with. The amendment as to the Amur! county was agreed to. A division was taken on, the-quesr tion, the result being 38 to 21. _ ' " Several other~alterations were rejected, and Mr. O’Eorke then reported to the House. " _ The Hon. Mr. WHITAKER then proposed that a committee, consisting of the Hon. Mr. Bowen, Mr. Seymour, and himself, be appointed to draw up reasons for . such disagreements.—The motion was carried. Mr; SEYMOUR said before.the. House.,left this subject he wished to ask a question of -privilege.- In clause 167 he found - that the Legislative Council had altered one of the fines imposed under that clause ; from the sum of five pounds they had raised it to a sum not exceeding £2O. He wished to ask the Speaker’s ruling as to whether it was competent for the Council to do this. The SPEAKER replied that greater latitude had been allowed of late years in respect to fees, and read from May regarding the modern practice in England PUBLIC WORKS BILL. ~ ; ! The amendments made by the Legislative Council in the above Bill, were, on the motion ■of the Hon. Mr. Richardson, agreed to. ; BAN. PRANOISOO, MAIL SERVICE. The adjourned 1 debate on the proposals re the San Francisco mail service was resumed. ! Mr. SHEEHAN proposed an amendment to the resolutions,: as follows :—“And in the event of the contractors electing to call at Auckland, and desiring to discontinue the coastal service, that they-be "permitted to do so, on making a further deduction'of £SOOO from the subsidy, payable to them, the two colonies in such case undertaking to provide for.that service at their joint expense.” : Mr. BURNS asked whether an amendment couldbe moved before the substantive motion had been agreed to ? ■ ; The SPEAKER ruled that Mr. Sheehan was out of order. The Hon. Mr. McLEAN said the House were taking a serious responsibility on themselves in binding the Government down to a course from which they could not deviate. He thought passengers were entitled to consideration, and that the New Zealand. Government were entitled to say to the New South Wales Government, You must come to Auckland. Therefore he should support the amendment of the hon. member for Rodney, which he sincerely hoped the House would adept. The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS argued that the Pacific :Company should be bound to carry out the contract so far as distributing mails, with smaller boats for coastal service if necessary. j ■ 1 ; ' The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD thought New South Wales was endeavoringto obtain undue advantages over the New Zealand Government, and said, if the addition was made as proposed by the member for Rodney, the resolution would be in effect the same as the telegram which Mr. Whitaker had read to the House. The Hon. Mr. WHITAKER denied that such was the case. His proposition was that £75,000 was to be paid, less any deduction for the postal service. Under his proposal; no election as to calling at Auckland was given to the contractors. It would be seen that the resolutions now proposed were quite different. Mr. Whitaker pointed out the difficulties attendant! upon making the Bay of Islands the port of call. He also said that' if the Government were permitted to. make : arrangements for the coastal service the mails would be distributed much quicker than they were at present, and at a cost, as he. had found from the manager of the Union -Company, of £SOO a year if Auckland were- the-port of call,-and of £IO,OOO a year if the Bay of were made the port of call He advocated adopting Mr. Sheehan’s amendment, but his (Mr. Whitaker’s) impression was that no matter what action the House took the San Francisco service under, any circumstances would come to an end; j. !

The amendment was put, and a division was taken; the result being—Ayes, 42; noes, 23. Ayes ; Messrs. Atkinson, Baigent,, BarfT, Bowen, Brandon, Bryce. Bunny, Carrington, Curtis, Dignan, Donglu, Gibbs, Grey, Hamlin, Hialop, Hunter, Hursthouse, Jobnstoh, Joyce, Kelly (teller), Kennedy, Larnach, Lumsden, Handers, McLean, Nahe, O’Eorke, ■Rearce, Pyke, Rees, Richardson, Rowe, . Seymour, Sharp, Sheehan (teller), Swanson, Takamoana, Tawitl,' Tole, Tribe. Whitaker, and Woolcock. , Noes : Messrs. Andrew, Brown, J. C. (teller). Burns (teller), De Lautour, Fisher, Fltzroy, Harper, Kenny, Montgomery, Murray-Aynsley,. Ormond, O’Rorke,, Reid, Reynolds, Eolleston, Seaton, Stafford,Stevens, ■ Taiaroa, Teschemaker, Thomson, Wason, and W. Wood. . - The question as amended was. then put and carried. •" ‘ DISQUALIFICATION' ACT (k6."2.V Ajnessage was received from the,Legislative Council enclosing the . above Bill, in which the Council had made an amendment. ' . The amendment was .in' reference to. the sixth section,; providing that no members; of the Legislative Council, House of ’ Representatives, Superintendents, or Deputy-Superinten-dents should be qualified to take office under Government. —Mr. Borns proposed that the amendment be disagreed with. ;- 1 ’ The question was; put, and the noes declared to have, it, when the Hon. Major Atkinson called for a division. The result was that the amendment was negatived by 31 to 26. FURTHER REGARDING COUNTIES BILL. The reasons drawn up by the committee appointed at an earlier period of the evening, in reference to the rejection by the House of the amendments made in the Counties Bill, were agreed to. ; : ! SUSPENSION OF STANDING 5 ORDERS. The Hon. Major ATKINSON moved that the standing orders be suspended, in order that private business might be taken after halfpast 12. Sir GEORGE GREY asked how many members should be present to decide the question. - The SPEAKER : Two-thirds. Sir George Grey left the House. The SPEAKER announced that there was a sufficient number of members present. The question was then put and carried. BATING BILL. i The House proceeded to the consideration of the amendments made in the Rating Bill by the Legislative Council. ■ Several amendments were disagreed to, and managers appointed toi draw up reasons for disagreeing with the amendments made by the Legislative Council,MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL. The amendments made in the above Bill were (some of them) disagreed to, and managers were appointed to draw up reasons. [Left sitting.!