PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5202, 23 November 1877, Page 3

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday, November 22. The Speaker took the chair at half-past two o’clock. LEAVE OP ABSENCE. On the motion of Mr. J. C. Brown, leave of absence was granted to Mr. Lusk for ten days. COAL SUPPLIED TO GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS. In answer to Mr. Kennedy, Mr. MacanDREW stated the Government had no objection to lay before the House a return showing the quantity of coal supplied to Government Buildings in Wellington during the six months ending the 30th September, 1876, and the like period of 1877; the rate per ton paid for the same, and by whom supplied. LIGHTHOUSE AT OPAO. Mr. TAWITI asked the Government, —If the Island of Opao, on which a lighthouse is being built, has been purchased from the natives * The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN replied that the native title had been extinguished over the land in the early days of the colony. IMPREST SUPPLY BILL. The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN, in the absence of the Colonial Treasurer through illness, brought down an Imprest Supply Bill for £IOO,OOO. The supply was agreed to without opposition. FINANCIAL STATEMENT. Mr. EOLLESTON said that the Statement, as it stands was inconsistent in itself, and certainly extraordinary as emanating from some gentlemen on the Ministerial benches, and he desired to know when the Government would bring down Bills embodying their proposals ? The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN said he was not prepared to answer the question, as the Government desired to know the opinion of the House regarding, the Financial Statement before bringing down Bills. Mr. STEVENS, in the course of an able speech, dealt with the figures in the Financial Statement. He said, taking the statements of the late and present Colonial Treasurers there was a deficiency in the general account of £200,000. He believed that the late Government had the fullest intention to take as little as possible from the land funds of Canterbury and Otago, and the reason for their proposing to take the sum of £167,000 was that it was necessary to square the colonial accounts. The present Colonial Treasurer, instead of taking £58,000 from Canterbury and £109,000 from Otago, proposed to deal with the subject in a more comprehensive manner. They had yet to learn whether their method would be acceptable to the people of the two provinces. He then went into the figures of the Colonial Treasurer in reference to provincial liabilities to prove that many of the sums set down were repayments of loans, and could not be charged as current expenditure. He thought an expression of the public opinion should have been taken before such a policy as that enunciated by the present Government was adopted. It was an immense change, and should have been brought down in one well-considered comprehensive plan. When he looked at all the circumstances, he could not help believing that the policy would act upon his district with crushing severity. He thought it would have been better to have localised the provincial liabilities and made them a charge on the provincial revenue. He was afraid that there was a strong desire to seize upon the sums deriving from the large laud sales before all the land was parted with. He did not think the seizure of the Land Fundwouldalter the relative positions of different parts of the colony in regard to their prosperity. He was of opinion that it ■would be found that the different parts would remain as before. If great caution was not exercised, the credit of the colony would be depressed, and they were running a very great risk in launching a loan to the extent of £4,000,000. However, it was useless to protest against it, as the people had once tasted blood, and they could not be stopped now in their desire to borrow more money. Coming after the declaration of insolvency by the present Ministry, they should either withdraw their proposal to borrow, or retract the statements they had made so damaging to the credit of the colony. Mr. BOWEN wished to say a few words on the proposals of the Government with regard to the Land Fund. He would not deal with the figures in the Financial Statement, as they had been fully entered into by the bon. member for Egmont and the hon. member for Christchurch. With regard to the Bill for the inscription of stock, the Government should not lose the opportunity of the best method for funding the debt. No one in the country believed a fortnight ago that there would be any alteration in the Land Fund this session, and he thought it was not right that such a radical change as now proposed should be made without due consideration, and without consulting the people. There was no guarantee that any part of the colony would be benefited by the change, or that either the North or the South would get what it desired. He could see the other night that some places would get nothing at all; Canterbury is made the victim, because free selection prevails there, and a large area of land might be parted with without any proportion of the proceeds going to the district to which it belonged. The late Government proposed to allow £380,000 more to Canterbury this year than the present Government. There was nothing to prevent the whole of the land revenue being squandered upon the ordinary purposes of Government. In Canterbury there was a very strong feeling that injustice would be done to that province. He asked again what guarantee they had that while one part of the country would be robbed another part would get what it desired ? He did not think the colonisation of the Land Fnnd was a necessity. Neither did he believe that it would aid the general revenue to such an extent as people imagined. He believed the proposal was a scheme to relieve the Government for postponing a tax upon property. The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE said he had opposed the present Ministry because he thought it would be a standing menace to the unity of the colony. But there was a distinct pledge in the Financial Statement that the unity of the colony would be maintained, and he accepted this, and would support them as long as they adhered to their present policy. He agreed with the proposal to make the Land Fund colonial, and was surprised to hear gentlemen who were desirous of abolishing the provinces without consulting the people now crying out that the Land Fund should not be colonised without an appeal to the people, Mr. Gisborne then defended Sir Georr'e Grey from the attacks which had been made upon him, and quoted extracts from various records to show the esteem with which the Premier was held by all classes of the community daring the time bo was Governor of the colony. Mr. SUTTON objected strongly to the localisation of any portion of the land revenue. It would be better if the taxation of property were left to the local bodies, and the whole of the Land Fund goto the general revenue. He thought that the Colonial Treasurer, when deprecating the credit of the colony, should have informed the English creditors that there were over 16,000,000 acres of laud belonging to the Government, and that that was a security for the debt. He objected to the centralising policy of the present Government, and thought the fullest powers should be conferred upon local bodies. Mr. D. BEID said when they hore in mind the gross charges which had been made against the late Government, and looked it We Finan-

cial Statement, they could truly say that the mountain had been in labor, and had brought forth a mouse. He then went into the history of the past eight years to show that the assertion that the late Government was a continuous one was incorrect. ■ It was a frequent charge against the late Ministry that they abolished the provinces, but why did not the present Government when they assumed office do nothing to counteract that policy. They accepted it, but why did they not accept' it months ago, and not waste the time of the session in useless railings ? The Premier had hinted the other night at unfair practices on the part of Ins predecessors in office, hut he (Mr. Reid) challenged him to name one single instance of such unfair practices. He read extracts to show the libellous statements which had been circulated by “ our own correspondents ” to damage the members of the late Ministry. Mr, Reid spoke strongly of the accusations which were coast. ■ jly being made by Sir George Grey iu attributing to an bon. member a desire for office as a visible means of support. He next addressed himself to what had been said about the necessity of government by party, but party had assumed such proportions this session that it prevented healthy political action. The Statement of the Colonial Treasurer was an ample justification of the finance of the late Government. It was stated by the Colonial Treasurer that his proposals would place the finance of the country on a stable basis. Ho denied that it would effect this, and stated that his Statement was confusing, contradictory, and inconsistent in itself. They had heard speeches during that session about taxing property, but they were now told that to avoid fresh taxation it was necessary to take the Land Fund. With regard to giving local bodies 20 per cent, of the laud revenue, it would be found that the effect would be the same as if no revenue were set apart for local bodies. There would he a deficiency of £155,825 in Auckland, Wellington, &0., to be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue, and Canterbury would lose £153,760 and Otago about £73,000 by the proposals of-the present Government. He could not see how any member representing an Otago constituency could justify his voting for these plundering proposals. It would be an act of gross injustice to Otago, and he would record his protest against it. Any man with any particle of truthfulness about him could not deny that the Government party had obstructed business during the present session. Mr. STOUT stated that it was not usual when a policy was brought down to attack it in little details, but that was the course adopted by the leaders of the Opposition. Let them rttaok the policy of the Government, and table a motion to that effect, and not confine their remarks to carping criticism of how sums were added up here and there. He contrasted the opinion which the member for the Taieri entertained of Sir George Grey last sc “ion and the opinion of that gentleman which he now held. The continuous Government had changed their finance every session, and yet they called their finance a far-seeing finance. It was founded on no principle ; it had no backbone to it. It was. like their policy on all other subjects. Had the hon. member for Taieri not deserted his party, they would have been able to enforce that justice should be done to Otago. Yet the gentleman who bad deserted his party bewailed the fate of Otago. He (Mr. Reid) had felt aggrieved at certain statements which had appeared in the Otago Daily Times’ Wellington correspondent’s letter, but did he ever complain of the gross personal abuse which had appeared in the colonic. 1 , journal day after day. However, since the Financial Statement had been brought forward, that journal had ho leading articles. It was evidently frightened to deal with the subject. Mr. Stout quoted figures to show that Otago would gain to the extent of £20,000 this year by the proposals of the present Government, as compared with those of the previous Administration. He looked upon the settlement of land ns the primary object ; the revenue secondary. He hoped to see every acre of agricultural land in this country reserved for settlement in small farms, and one-third of the rent being spent to make roads. That would be more than they had ever got in the past. Speaking of abolition, he said it was attributable to Canterbury members. They had made an alliance iu order to get their runs. He contrasted the policy of the late Government with that of the present. With the former everything was an open question, whilst the latter had brought forward their policy and told the House that if it was not accepted they would retire from office. Mr. MONTGOMERY said he would like to see the Bills embodying the proposals of the Government before he spoke on the general question. The speaker then attacked the finance of the late Ministry, and accused them ’of petty pilfering of the land revenue, while the policy of the present Government was more straightforward. He did not think that the Ministry would be able to make both ends meet, as stated by the Colonial Treasurer. It would be found that there would be a deficiency of from £200,000 to £250,000. If the Land Fund was to be oolonialised, there must be one land law from one end of the country to another, and a uniform price fixed for the lands. The gentlemen on the Treasury benches had not treated the subject of taxation in the way that might have been expected of them. There would be no fair system of finance in this colony till they adopted taxation upon property. £74,000 would be taken from Canterbury this year by the present Ministry in an open high-handed manner, whilst the late Government, in a friendly way, proposed to steal £38,000. He had confidence in the present Ministry, and trusted to a modification of their finance ; but as for the gentlemen opposite be had no faith in them. He failed to see that the inscription of stock would benefit the credit of the colony, and referred to New South Wales, which, without such a provision, was able to borrow money at 4 per cent., whilst New Zealand had to pay 5. Mr. ORMOND said that the policy of the hon. member for Akaroa, from his expressions that night, appeared to be that of a Government formed out of the Middle Party, with himself as chief. The Government that would bring down a uniform price for all lands in the colony would soon lose their seats on the Treasury benches. In everything that Mr. Stout said he had a motive for making it appear that the Government was not a squatters’ Government. It was a matter of notoriety that the largest squatters in the House worked hard to place the present Ministry in power. It was also notorious that the Colonial Treasurer was largely interested in squatting. (No, No.) He understood that he had been connected with the large purchases of land made by “Big Clarke.” No attempt had been made to answer the figures of the hon. member for Egmont. The hon. member for Dunedin (Mr. Macandrew) was responsible for the Estimates. They were bogus estimates, and his party would see in committee that they were properly inquired into, and would do their best to prevent the money of the colony being spent in the way indicated. They were simply figures supplied by the present Minister of Lands, and the late Government intended to thoroughly revise them before bringing them down. Speaking of the proposed four million loan, he thought it would be injurious to their credit to borrow such a large sum, two millions of which was to meet outstanding liabilities. The late Government proposed to borrow two millions, and that would have been ample to meet the requirements of the colony. Even according to the Statement of the Ministry two millions and a half would be ample to make provision for their requirements. He trusted the House would not sanction a four milllion loan, and that the Ministry would he forced to be content with a much smaller amount. His colleagues were not responsible for the Supplementary Estimates, and he hoped the Colonial Treasurer would see that the fact of their being printed did not necessarily affirm that the late Gover-nment would bring them down. He was sorry to see the Premier telling the colony that the claims of the contractors would have to be met. The hon. member for Christchurch (Mr. Richardson) was well aware what the nature of these claims were, and that they were absolutely unfounded. Largo claims were made by Messrs. Brogden, and it was well

known , that that firm were strenuous supporters of the present Ministry, and were mainly instrumental in placing them in office. Sir GEORGE GREY : It is absolutely false—as false as the other foul charges which have been made against mo. The SPEAKER was understood to say that the best course would be to take the words down. Sir GEORGE GREY moved that the words be taken down. Mr. ORMOND submitted that he had not infringed the rules of debate iu anything he had said. The words having been taken down, Mr. Ormond was requested to withdraw while the matter was discussed. He withdrew accordingly. Sir GEORGE GREY said that no single word had passed between him and the Messrs. Brogden with relation to these claims. With the exception of his colleagues, he had mentioned it to no person. His attention was first drawn to this matter by Mr. Reader Wood, who told him of the nature of these claims. When he found that the first claim had been made good, he thought it was well to inform the House of these claims. Personally he was of opinion that that firm was exceedingly hostile to him. Mr. STOUT said that the words were more a reflection upon the House than upon the Ministry, and moved to the effect tkat it was derogatory to the privileges of'this_ House to accuse hon. members of having been influenced in their votes by contractors, and that the hon. member for Clive he called upon to retract and apologise. Mr. McLEANsaid the words were not nearly so strong as those which had often been used by Sir George Grey. He had frequently accused the late Ministry of using their position to benefit their friends. The hon. member had made no charge against the Premier. He simply said that the representatives of Messrs. Brogden had used their influence to place the present Ministry in power. Mr. MOORHOUSE thought it was a perfectly ridiculous matter to waste the time of the House in discussing the question. It was perfectly just for the representatives of any firm smarting under an act of injustice to come down to the House and use their influence with members to have their grievances redressed. He knew the agents of Messrs, Brogden had been particularly active, hut he did not infer anything corrupt from their action. Mr. REES commented warmly upon the conduct of the hon. member for Clive and those who had supported him in the charges he had made. Mr. BOWEN said it was an absolute farce for the hon. member (Mr. Rees) to lecture the House upon good manners. There seemed to be a custom growing in the House that the hon. member for the Thames could make charges of corrupt practices against others, whilst if anything was said against himself, he rose up to protest, and a sort of State trial was held. He felt indignant that the words of his hon. friend were twisted into a serious charge, whilt he and others were subject to the most gross charges of corruption from the hon. member for the Thames. The SPEAKER was understood to say the words were not unparliamentary ; but that as they contained a grave charge they might be taken down. Mr. BRANDON regretted exceeding that stronv language was becoming usual in the House, but in the present case he thought they were making a mountain out of a molehill. The SPEAKER was understood to say that it would be better to let the matter drop, now that it had been well ventilated. The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD did not think the expressions of the hon. members could be taken to impugn the personal honor of members. However, as they might be twisted to reflect upon hon. members, he would move, That the House regrets that the words had been used, and that the hon. member be requested to withdraw them. The adjournment of the House was moved, to which Mr. Stout objected, and in the course of his remarks he was called to order by the Speaker. After several members had addressed the House the motion for adjournment was withdrawn, and Mr, Stout accepted Mr. Stafford’s amendment, which was then put and carried. Mr. ORMOND withdrew the words, and continued his remarks on the original question. He had always looked upon the Land Fund as a subordinate object to the unity of the colony. He would, however, be found to givehis support to thegeneralisationof the Land Fund, but he would reserve to himself the right to criticise any Bills which might be brought down to give effect to the proposals which did not meet with his approval. It was customary to say that the chief portion of the laud revenue would be drawn from Canterbury, but he had good information for stating that iu future they would derive the largest portion of the land revenue from Otago. The cream of the lauded estate in Can:erbury had been parted with, but a great public estate yet remained in Otago. Referring to Sir George Grey’s opinions about representation, he said they would result in the large towns governing the country. Mr. Ormond concluded by stating that he would support the Government in carrying through Bills which would give effect to the colonisation of the Laud Fund. No other member rising to address the House, the question for going into Committee of Supply was then put, and carried on the voices; but no further business was done, and the House adjourned at half-past one.