PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5187, 6 November 1877, Page 3

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Monday, November 5. The Speaker took the chair at half-past 2 o’clock. REPORTS. A number of reports were laid on the table by the Chairman of the Public Petitions Committee. THE SPEAKER. Sir GEORGE GREY moved, and it was atreed to, that owing to the ill-health of the Speaker, Sir William Fitzherbert, Mr. O’Rorke be appointed Speaker at such times as may be required for the remainder of the session. QUESTION OP PRIVILEGE. Hr TRAVERS laid upon the table of the House the report of the committee on the privileges of the House. The finding of the committee was—That the action of his Excellency the Governor in noticing a matter in agitation or debate in the House, as the reason for refusing to accede to advice tendered by his Ministers, was an infringement of the privileges of the House. Mr. Travers gave notice °that he would move that the House concurs in the report of the select committee, and that a respectful address from the House, covering the resolution, be presented by Mr. Speaker to his Excellency the Governor. _ He (Mr. Travers) understood thatit was the desire of the Government that the consideration of the matter should be postponed until the evening to allow members time to consider it. A discussion then ensued, several members expressing their desire to have the report considered immediately. . Mr. TRAVERS had no objection to this, and he said it was the unanimous opinion amongst the members of the committee that the breach of privilege was purely an inadvertency on the part of his Excellency. He did not think it would be wise to discuss the qualifications of Mr. Wilson for a seat in the Legislative Council, but it was clearly their business to discuss whether a breach of the privileges of Parliament had been committed by his Excellency taking notice of matters in debate, and having based his own executive action upon a matter in debate. The committee’felt that by such a course his Excellency would be in a position to influence the action which might be taken in the House with regard to particular matters, as it would go to show that the Ministry had not the confidence of the Governor. The publication had nothing to do with the breach of privilege, further than placing the House in possession of the facts of the case. The speaker concluded by again stating that the committee were of opinion that the action of his Excellency was entirely inadvertent and unintentional on his part, and that the address to his’Excellency should distinctly affirm this. The motion was then put, and on a division being called for, the report was adopted by a majority of 33 to 19, At this stage of the proceedings Sir William Fitzherbert left the Speaker’s chair, and it was taken by Mr. O’Rorke. no-confidence motion. Mr. HAMLIN said the statement of the horn member for Egmont, in moving his motion, that he would give the present Ministry time to sift the public accounts, was an extraordinary one, in the face of the hurry he had shown te displace the gentlemen now on the Treasury benches. He (Major Atkinson) had accused the Premier of being an autocrat, but there was not a greater autocrat in the House than the bon. member for Egmont. Another hon. member (Mr. Whitaker) had stated that the reason of the withdrawal of the Native Lands Bill was that the House was in too excited a state to deal with it. That statement fell flat on the House. If that Bill had become law it would have endangered the peace of the North Island. He denied that the telegrams from the natives expressing satisfaction with the present Ministry were not fairly interpreted to the House. The hon. member for Egmont felt that if the Government were allowed to develope a policy, he would never again sit on the Treasury benches. The hon. member had acted in a sordid and mercenary spirit. Major ATKINSON moved that the words be taken down. The ACTING-SPEAKER ruled that the words were unparliamentary. Mr. HAMLIN was sorry he had uttered anything contrary to the rules of debate, and would withdraw the words. It had been stated by the hon. member for Napier that the continuance of the present Government in office would tend to accelerate the movement amongst the natives to get back their lands. But there were no two gentlemen in the country better qualified to deal with the natives than the Premier and the Native Minister, or who would be more successful in inducing the Maoris to afford facilities for the settlement of Europeans upon their lands. Mr. TOLE addressed the House at considerable length in favor of the Government, in the course of which he said he did not think it advisable that the present Ministry should resign in consequence of an adverse vote, and quoted authorities on the subject. Mr. W. WOOD moved the adjourhment of the House, on the ground that it was desirable that the House should have an opportunity of considering the reply of his Excellency to the address on the breach of privilege question. The subject was one which very much affected the position of the present Government. Major ATKINSON objected to the adjournment of the House, as there was other important business besides the no-confidence motion which could be gone on with. Mr. Barff and Mr. Rees supported the adjournment, and oa the suggestion of Major Atkinson, it was agreed that the Speaker leave the chair till half-past 7. The House rose at 5 o'clock. On resuming, Sir W. Fitzherbert took the chair. message from the governor. A message from his Excellency the Governor was received, acknowledging receipt of an address enclosing the report of the committee appointed to enquire into the question of whether his Excellency had committed a breach of privilege by his memorandum in answer to Sir George Grey's application to have Mr. Wilson called to the Upper House. His Excellency’s message was to the effect that he had forwarded the report to his constitutional advisers, and so soon as he had received the advice of his Ministers on the subject he would forward his reply to the House. Sir GEORGE GREY then moved that the debate be adjourned in order that the Government might consider their position in relation to this matter. Mr. G. McLEAN opposed the adjournment of the debate, which, he presumed, would be followed by a motion for the adjournment of the House. This question of privilege, he contended, was one of an exceedingly paltry character, and should never have been allowed to take up the time of the House. Mr. W. WOOD rose to a point of order, and contended that the last speaker was breaking through the rules of parliamentary debate by referring to another question than that under discussion.

The SPEAKER ruled that the hon. member for Waikouaiti was quite out of order.. The question then before the House’was the adjournment of the House. Mr. McLEAN, with due deference to the Speaker, submitted that the question of privilege was then the subject of debate. (Many “noes” from the opposite side of the House.) The Government had asked for an adjournment on the message of. his Excellency, in order that they might consider their position in relation to it. The SPEAKER again ruled the hon. member out of order. Mr. MOURHOUSE then rose to order. He asked whether on a motion of this sort being moved it was not reasonable to expect the reasons in the mind of the mover why the adjournment should take place ; and admitting that to be so, was it not competent for hon. members to argue against those reasons ? The SPEAKER explained that the question was not raised in that way either. The privilege question might be referred to in speaking to the motion for adjournment, but that was entirely different from speaking to the merits of the question itself. Mr. McLEAN disclaimed any intention of going into the merits of the question of privilege, which he might remark the House would never have heard of but for the bon. gentlemen who now occupied the Government benches. Sir GEORGE GREY rose to a point of order this time. He objected to the last remark of the hon. member opposite. (The SPEAKER said something was undesirable and contrary to Parliamentary usage, but the reporter failed to catch what that something was.) Mr. McLEAN remarked that the feelings of the Ministry, and especially the leader’s feelings, were very tender indeed, but being so thin-skinned they should recollect what hard things they, when in opposition, said of the late Government. He then continued ; The reason for asking for this adjournment was no doubt in order to escape the no-con-denee motion, which they knew would go against them, and they now desired to resign on another motion altogether. (Here there were criesof “ Division” from the Government party, and much laughter from its leading mirthful members, Messrs. Rees and Stout.) Mr. McLEAN : Hon. gentlemen might laugh, but they would see next day whether what he stated was not a fact. Why did not the Government be bold and face the thing like men, instead of running away from it as they were doing ? When he was on those benches nothing would have induced him to run away from a vote of no confidence. (More laughter of a sarcastic character.) The late Government had manfully stood up to meet motions of the kind, and he was sorry to see the gentlemen at present on the Ministerial benches adopting a different course. They had attained their present position by queer means, and they wished now to get out of it by means equally queer. It was a most extraordinary accident by which they got there, and now they wished to get out on this question of privilege. What he asked was that they should have this question of no-confidence settled by taking a division on it, and then they might adjourn. Mr. MOORHOUSE -said before the question was put he should like to draw attention to the want of logic on the part of the Government. The. Government found themselves face to face with a difficulty of a remarkable character. His Excellency had sent down a message to the effect that he intended to have recourse to the advice of his counsellors, and although every respect should be paid to the announcement of such an intention, still it would, in the face of the resolution passed by the House, be entirely unconstitutional to allow themselves to be delayed from coming to a decision on the resolution by the expression of an opinion by the Governor, even if carried by the Governor’s responsible advisers. They should go on with the business of the colony entirely independent of what his Excellency might think. They were debating on an abstract question. The waste of time in that House during the session had been at the instance of the present Government and their associates. All these questions of privilege, disqualification, etc., had been brought before the House by the Government and their party, who would be consigned to the “ cool shades of respectability” so soon as the House divided on the no-confi-dence motion. Mr. FOX said the Opposition were quite willing to go on with the business; at the same time he would not object to an adjournment since the Government appeared to think it necessary to. consider their position again; but he desired to have placed on the proper shoulders the responsibility of delaying the business of the House. The Opposition were ready and anxious to proceed with the business of the country. Mr. WAKEFIELD hoped the House would hear no more of this “ waste of time,” for which, if anyone was responsible, it was the hon. member for Egmont. (At this confusion reigned supreme for a time, cheers from the Government party, and something resembling groans from the Opposition.) The little speech made by the hon. member for Wanganui was simply a trick to place the responsibility of delay on the shoulders of the Premier. That gentleman was entitled to be treated with courtesy, and his request for an adjournment of the debate should not be met by unworthy sneers. He hoped the adjournment would be agreed to without any further debate. The motion was then put and carried. Sir GEORGE GREY then moved that the House adjourn until half-past 2 o’clock next day. The motion was carried on the voices, and the House adjourned.