PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5104, 2 August 1877, Page 3

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wednesday, August 1. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at the usual hour. QUESTIONS. In reply to Colonel Whitmore, — who asked whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce during the present session any Bill for the appointment of commissioners or trustees to take over the estates held under grant from the Crown upon trust by the various religious denominations for purposes of religious, charitable, and educational purposes, in accordance with the recommendation of the Royal Commission published in the Appendix to the Proceedings of the House of Representatives, 1870, —the Hon. Dr. POLLEN replied that in the course of a day or two he would be able to give an answer to the question.—Colonel Whitmore gave notice that he would repeat the question that day week. In reply to a question by the same hon. gentleman,.—as to whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce during the present session a Bill to amend the Protection to Animals Act, 1873, —Dr. Pollen answered in the affirmative. LIBRARY COMMITTEE. The number of the Library Committee was, on the motion of Major Richmond, increased to ten, and the name of Sir F. D. Bell added to it. NEW BILLS. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN introduced the Census Act, 1877. The Bill was read a first time, ordered to be printed, and its second reading made an order of the day for Friday next.—He also brought in an Act to alter the law relating to the Apprehension and Arrest of persons for Misdemeanor and other Offences. IN COMMITTEE. The Friendly Societies Bill and the Industrial and Provident Societies Bill were slightly amended, passed through, reported, and their third reading made orders of the day for next (this) day. The Council then adjourned. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wednesday, August 1. The House met at the usual hour, and the Speaker took the chair, PETITIONS. A number of petitions were presented, among them one by Mr. Travers, from residents at Palmerston North, for a road south of the Manawatu. QUESTIONS. In reply to Mr. Hamlin, who asked the Government,—Whether they intended this session to bring in a Bill to amend the Medical Practitioners’ Act, 1869, The Hon. Mr. WHITAKER replied in the negative. Mr. SEYMOUR enquired whether the Government had received any reports from inspectors in the Australian colonies of the condition of stock in their respective districts ; and, if so, whether they would lay the reports before the House ; and, if not, whether they would endeavor to procure them ? The Hon. Major ATKINSON said the Government had received no reports. In reply to Mr. Stout, the Government intimated that no steps had been taken to establish savings banka in connection with the public schools, beyond granting the ordinary facilities. The matter must rest with the Education Boards in future.

In answer to a question from Mr. Lumsden, the Hon. Mr. Bowen said a communication had been received from a Judge of the Supreme Court in reference to the Invercargill Supreme Court House, and steps were taken to remedy the defects complained of ; but all had not been completed. Mr. REES asked the Attorney-General—-(l.) Whether the expenses of the defendants in an action now proceeding in the Supreme Court, at the suit of the Hon. H. 11. Russell, M.L.C., against the printers and publishers of the Waka Maori, are being borne by the Government ? (2.) Whether the Waka Maori is now being conducted at the cost and expense of the Government ? The Hod. Mr. WHITAKER said the action was brought by the plaintiff, against the printers and publishers of the paper, for an alleged libel contained in articles which appeared in the paper in July and August—a time when the publication was to all intents and purposes a Government publication. The Government were therefore defending the action, but whether the expenses of the defendants would be paid by the Government was a question, as in all probability the costs would fall on the plaintiffs. The paper was now being carried on by the Government under an arrangement, full particulars of which would be brought before the House shortly. Sir G. GREY rose to a point of order, as to whether the Attorney-General should have attempted to prejudice the minds of a jury by giving his opinion on the merits of the case. As he was the highest law officer in the colony,* his opinion was likely to carry weight. The SPEAKER thought the remarks of the Attorney-General would have been better unsaid. LICENSING DILL. A Bill to amend the licensing law was introduced by the Hon. Mr. Fox. PROPOSED AMENDMENT OP STANDING ORDERS. Mr. CURTIS moved that the Standing Orders be amended so as to provide that no member should address the House for more than twenty minutes consecutively unless by leave of the House. He said there could be no doubt an evil did exist, and the question was how was the evil to be remedied and less talk ensured ? It was a favorable time for making such a rule, as no party contest had yet commenced. He did not mean that every member

should be stopped at the end of twenty minutes, but that power should be given to the Speaker to stop a member when his attention was called to the fact that twenty minutes had been exceeded. It would not often be used, but would have a salutary effect in inducing hon. members to condense their speeches., No doubt there was no such rule as this in the House of Commons; but if a member spoke too long, there was a means of stopping him,, viz., the count-out. But despite the House of Commons, we should make rules which suited ourselves. It might also be said it would reduce the power of a minority; but he thought it would not have that effect, though it might be fatal to talking against time. He hoped the motion would be agreed to. . Mr. SHARP hoped that the words without further debate ” would be added, j Mr. STOUT moved as an amendment that the words “by leave of the House” should be left out, as their insertion would give all power to the majority. Mr. GISBORNE hoped the motion would be rejected altogether, as it would if passed be an infringement of the rights of the House. He referred to the issue of the recent elections in Victoria to show that the people of that colony would not allow the freedom of debate to be interfered with. Dr. WALLIS disapproved of long speeches; but he thought such a proposal as this had never been carried into effect in any constitutional Legislature, nor could it be brought into effect. Mr. READER WOOD thought the matter was a joke; but as the Government had not spoken he presumed they were in favor of it. The proposal was exceedingly absurd. If it were passed it would be inimical to the beat interests of the country, as preventing the necessary full and tree discussion of measures brought before the House. Mr. CURTIS, speaking to the amendment, said if the motion were not carried the result would be that a much stronger measure would be required in a short time. Mr. MONTGOMERY asked for an expression of opinion from the Government. Mr. REES opposed the motion. Major ATKINSON said it seemed undesirable for the Government to express an opinion, and if the motion were pressed to a division some members of it would vote with the resolution, some against it. Personally he thought it impossible to lay down any cast-iron rule, although it would no doubt be much better if hon. members would condense their speeches. Mr. SWANSON thought such a rule would prove inconvenient to some who were unable to condense. If it were passed he hoped members would be allowed to read their speeches, in which case they might be able to condense. On a division the amendment was carried. Mr. WHITAKER then moved the addition of the words, “ and that the Standing Orders Committee be instructed to frame an order to give effect to the foregoing.” , The amendment was rejected, as also the original motion. THE FINANCIAL YEAR. Mr. MURRAY moved, —That it be an instruction to the Public Accounts Committee to report within one month as to whether it would be advantageous or otherwise to the public interest to change the financial year, so that it shall terminate on the 31st of March, or some date earlier than the 30th of June. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said there was no objection to the motion, but he could not see why it should be referred to the committee. If the House decided when it should meet, then it would be time enough to decide when the financial year should end, After discussion, the motion was agreed to. BEET SUGAR FACTORIES. Mr. MACFARLANB moved, —That in the opinion of this House it is desirable to encourage the establishment of beet sugar factories, and that the Government be requested to give an assurance that no excise or other duty will be levied on beet sugar manufactured within the colony for a period of ten years. The Hon. Major ATKINSON regretted that the mover had given no explanation of what he intended. He should be very glad to see the industry encouraged, but after past experience he hoped the House would not attempt to bind future Houses (which might refuse to be bound), and so open new claims for compensation. If the hon. gentleman would move for a bonus the Government would have no objection. Mr. Kelly, Mr. Macandrew, Captain Russell, Mr. Swanson, Mr. Gisborne, Mr. Travers, Mr. Joyce, Mr. Hodgkinson, and Mr. Murray, spoke to the motion, and ultimately an amendment, proposed by Mr. Swanson, for referring the whole matter to a committee of seven members, was accepted. ’ THE ESTIMATES, The Estimates for the current year were transmitted by message from his Excellency the Governor. THE HINBMOA AGAIN. Mr. MACFARLANE moved far a return showing the contract price for building the Hinemoa (2). The amount paid for extras in Great Britain (3). The total cost of ship on arrivalin Wellington. (4) If insured.—Agreed to. NATIVE LANDS . COURT BUSINESS. Mr. TRAVERS moved' for a! return showing the number of oases upon which the Native Lands Court has adjudicated, in each provincial district of the North Island, during the years ending 30th June, 1876 and 1877, and showing separately, as far as practicable, the adjudications in respect of lands purchased by the Government under the Immigration and Piiblic'Works Acts 1870 and 1873, lands purchased by private individuals, and lands retained by the natives. The Hon. Mr. ORMOND promised the return, but expressed a doubt as to whether all the information could be obtained. The motion was agreed to. AUCKLAND RAILWAY STATION. Mr. READER WOOD moved, —That, in the opinion of this House, the Auckland Railway Station should be removed to a site alongside the Queen-street wharf, as recommended by the Auckland Railway Commissioners in their report, dated the 6th March, 1877 ; and that the Government be requested to make the necessary arrangements for the removal of the station with as little delay as possible. The debate on this question was proceeding when the House adjourned for dinner. NOTICES OF MOTION. Mr. REES gave notice of motion to the effect that it was in the opinion of the House unjust and unconstitutional for any Ministry to use the influence and moneys of the Government in defending an action in the Supreme Court brought by one private individual against another to recover damages for alleged libel. (2.) That after the vote and distinct expression of opinion of this House last session. it regards the conduct of the Government in still carrying on that paper as highly reprehensible. Mr. REES also gave notice of motion for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the circumstances under which the bank overdraft of the Thames Borough was paid by the Government last session. CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS. Sir GEORGE GREY resumed the debate on this subject. He spoke of the defection from the Opposition side of the House of the gentleman who introduced the Bill, and said he hoped that gentleman would have had a creditable career under his (Sir George Grey’s) leadership. He then addressed himself to the question under discussion, and said it was essentially a poor law—(hear, hear)—not to make provision for the poor, but to induce the friends of the poor to provide for their wants. The Bill was a measure simply to pauperise the people ; but this was simply in keeping with their whole policy. Their native policy was simply calculated to pauperise the natives. He alleged that the natives at Tauranga had been stripped of their property. (Mr. Travers ; Hear, hear.) It was the same at the Thames, and at Hawke’s Bay. He believed that during the recess 8000 or 9000 acres had been taken from a native and given to a member of that House. That must be inquired into. The whole effect of this was to pauperise the natives. At one time he had been so depressed in spirit that he had thought of leaving New Zealand ; but he would not ; he would stay to the end—(hear, hear)—to punish the men who

were guilty of such acts. It had been contended the poor had no right to claim aid. He submitted that all who had worked to enrich the country for years had a right to support in the decline of their lives. To hand over the poor to private persons was to abdicate the functions of Government, just as they were doing in the case of the Native Lands Court Bill. It was a Bill which would corrupt the poor as well as the rich. The Government ought to have said, “ We will appoint a commission during the recess to inquire into the matter, and embody the result of the inquiries in a Bill.” If there was to be a tax for the support of the poor, it should be levied, not on Customs duties, but on land and income. He ridiculed the idea of political quiet to which the Hon. Major Atkinson had referred. Those men who would sink a nation into such a state, whilst all that should be most valued was being destroyed, were not fit to be our leaders. The Hon. Mr. BOWEN had listened very carefully to the previous speaker, and arrived at the conclusion that he thought this Bill would be a very good measure, with the addition which his colleague the Premier had promised should be made. Sir George Grey had profusely abused the Government; but not in such a manner that the charges made could be gone into, and he might tell the hon. member that the Government courted the strictest inquiry. As to the native land question, he denied that the charges made by Sir George Grey were true. He remembered well the time when, under Sir George Grey’s Governorship, a large amount of land had been sold at 10s. per acre, bonß fide settlement being thereby retarded to a very large extent. Referring to the concluding remarks of the hon. gentleman, he was surprised to hear him say that he looked forward to the establishment of a poor law which should be a glorious charter to the people. God help the country, he should say, who would regard in such a light a poor law. The poor law in England was the greatest blot upon that country : a law which made every tenth man a pauper. The object of the Government was to encourage organised local charity. Several of the proposals might be well considered ; but what he wished to point out was that the proposals contained in the Bill would not interfere with charges that must be made for the maintenance of the poor upon the rates. As to the real remedy for pauperism it was not to be found in the establishment of a poor law. It was to be accomplished by the establishment of national education, a fair rate of wages such as it was hoped would prevail in this country, the spread of friendly societies (hear, hear), —the encouragement of small annuities, and the desire on the part of the whole community to assist by all means in their power their fellow-men, and protect those in less fortunate positions than themselves. Mr. MANDERS, speaking for the district he came from, said the peop'e there would be quite prepared to contribute pound for pound by way of subsidy for the care of the poor. Captain RUSSELL regretted that the ques- ' ion, which was in reality of a purely social character, had assumed something of a political character. He did not see that the Bill before the House referred to pauperism arising from an overburdened population. There was no pauper population, and this Bill had relation chiefly to hospitals, industrial schools, etc., and with the exception of a few large hospitals, he thought it would be found practically possible to maintain such institutions by voluntary charitable contributions. He believed that the effect of a measure of this kind would be to stimulate charity throughout the colony. Mr. DE LAUTOUR, in reference to the speech of the hon. member for Napier, Captain Russell, said the Charitable Institutions Bill was a Poor-law Bill under another name, and its provisions were such as would frustrate the attainment of the object which such a measure should have in view.

Mr. SWANSON was fully alive to the fact of there being an absolute necessity that something should be done; and the burden of providing maintenance for the poor was clearly the duty of the State. One means of meeting the difficulty was the system of insurance. Every civil servant should be compelled to insure, and people generally should be encouraged through this means to make provision for themselves and their children. He would, he said, in conclusion, give the Government all the assistance in his power ; but he begged them to withdraw the present Bill, and substitute one containing improved provisions. As the Bill stood it was lamentably deficient and unworkable.

Mr. BASTINGS announced his intention to vote for the motion of the hon. member for Christchurch, that the Bill be read a second time that eay six months, because he felt confident that the Bill would never have the effect intended by the hon. gentleman in charge of it. Experience had shown that there was no necessity for legislative interference with the charitable organisations at present in force throughout the country. He objected to the power placed in the hands of local bodies, and other provisions in the Bill were of an equally objectionable character. > Mr. JOYCE looked upon the Bill as a continuation of an experiment, and believed the country would arrive at the necessity of levying a rate for the support of the poor. In the meantime they had charitable institutions. The system ef voluntary contributions had worked well in the South. It had, so to speak, evoked the latent Samaritanism of the people. Such had been the experience in the smaller centres of population, and the same would, he felt sure, be found to be the case in the larger places. The Government proposition was one which would be found to carry out the object desired to be attained.

Mr. STOUT said the idea seemed to a large extent to have escaped notice that the Bill dealt only with a branch of a wider subject, namely, the way in which to remove the causes of pauperism. The Government were attempting in a very slipshod manner to deal with one of the greatest problems of the age. It was a dangerous principle to affirm that every man should look upon State aid as a right. It meant that the careful and provident man should be called upon to provide maintenance for the imprveident and profligate ; so far he agreed with the Hon. Major Atkinson. But so far as the Bill was concerned there was no limit to the aid which the Government would give, a principle which would call upon the revenue to supply funds for the maintenance of institutions which should not come within the provisions of a measure having for its object charitable relief. The Biff, in fact, went too far, instead of not going far enough. A new Government department would be required all over the colony, and an enormous expense thereby incurred. The practical question was—how should the Government maintain the present institutions which it hadHe deprecated the discouragement of public beneficence, which had a most humanising and benevolent effect. He was astonished at the action taken by Canterbury members, who, having opposed provincial institutions, now returned to what was past. He should support the Government and do what he could in committee towards making the Bill a workable and beneficial measure.

Mr. EOLLESTOH would support the amendment, that the Bill be read six months hence ; and in reference to what the Premier had said regarding the institutions of Canterbury, he said that hon. gentlemen’s remarks were, he regretted to say, entirely incorrect. Included in the £29,000, which he said had been expended in that province, was an amount of £9OOO expended on the Lunatic Asylum and other institutions, which could not be properly classed under the heading of charitable institutions. The hon. gentleman addressed the House in a speech of considerable length, in which he made explanations to clear himself of certain imputations arising out of a misuuder* standing of his remarks made in speaking to the original motion. The Hon. Mr. WHITAKER referred to the speeches of the hon. members for the Thames and Christchurch, showing that a confusion of ideas and incapability to comprehend the measure before the House had led them to bo rather irrelevant. The Bill did not deal with hospitals under the General Government, nor with other institutions, but simply with those maintained by charitable aid; and their position would materially be improved under the proposed system, the Bill providing for subsidising them, and thereby

placing them in a proper positiontobesupported by the State. As to the suggestion of the hon. member for Wanganui, the Government would be glad that a commission should be granted during the recess to investigate the whole subject. At present the whole general question was in a state of transition, and he hoped that during the recess information would be obtained in the manner suggested, which would enable the House to deal permanently with the question next session. Mr. BRYCE had since the Bill was introduced felt a difficulty in understanding what the leading principle of the Bill was, and the speech of the last hon. gentleman on the Government benches had completed his confusion. Touching on the question of State aid, he said if assistance from that quarter were given to the reckless and improvident, that class would soon outnumber the careful and industrious class of people, and the result would inevitably be a state of society unpleasant to contemplate. He would support the second reading ; but hoped to see the provisions of the Bill largely amended in committee. Mr. KENNEDY supported the reading of the Bill, in consideration of the voluntary system contained in it ; but he objected to the distinction between large and small districts. The latter should be placed in the same position as the former with regard to voluntary contributions. Mr. FITZROY accepted the explanation of the Attorney - General, and supported the second reading. The ;Hon. Mr. STAFFORD had listened with great interest to the debate upon this all important question. If they could succeed in solving it they would have done more than had been accomplished through a long course of years by all nations, but did not think a solution of the question would ever be arrived at which would prove satisfactory alike to those who have and those who have not. He regretted that a larger amount of information had not been supplied with regard to the work of charitable aid in existence in other countries, which would have materially assisted the House in the consideration of the subject, and he cordially approved of the suggestion of Mr. Fox as to the appointment of a commission to collect information during the recess, which would prove of valuable assistance in placing the whole question on a permanent basis. Mr. BRANDON briefly expressed his intention to vote for the second reading of the Bill. The Hon. DONALD REID having replied, The question that the Bill be read a second time was put, and a division taken, the result being that the motion was carried by 42 to 11. The following is the division list : Ayes, 42: Atkinson, Baigent, Ballance, Beetham, Bowen, Brown, J. C. (Tuapeka), Bryce, Burns, Cox, Douglas, Fitzroy, Gibbs, Gisborne, Harper, Henry, Hunter (teller), Johuton, Joyce, Kelly, Kennedy, Kenny, Lumsden, Macfarlane, Maunders, McLean, Murray, Murray-Aynsley, Ormond, Reid, Rowe, Seymour, Seaton, Stafford, Stout, Sutton, Swanson, Tesohemaker, Wason, Whitaker, Williams, Wood, W. (Mataura). and Woolcook. Noes, 11 ; De Lautour, Fisher, Lusk, Montgomery, Rolleston (teller), Sheehan, Stevens (teller), Thomson, Tole, Wakefield, and Wallis. Pairs —For : Carrington, Richardson, Reynolds, Button, Russell, J. C. Bowen, Tawiti, Morris, and Fox. Against : Curtis, Bastings, O’Borke, Bees, Grey, Travers, Karitiana, Hodgkinson, and Reader Wood. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday next. The Hon. Major ATKINSON moved, and it was carried, —That clause 25 of the Charitable Institutions Bill be considered in committee of the whole House next day. The House adjourned at 12.35 a.m.