PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5448, 12 September 1878, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wednesday, September 11. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m. REPORTS, ETC. Some papers were laid on the table by the Hon. Colonel Whitmore. Notices of motion were given by Messrs. Mantel),. Pharazyn, Hart, and Hall. CARRIAGE OP GUNPOWDER. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE said, in reply to a question on a previous day by Mr. Waterhouse, that he had not been able so far to ascertain that the Railway Department had declined the carriage of gunpowder. He would recur to the subject. WELLINGTON CITY RESERVES BILL. The Hon, Sir DILLON BELL -said that the Local Bills Committee had received a visit from Mr. Travers, in his capacity of City Solicitor. So far 'as Mr. Travers had been able to-- form a judgment, he stated that the committee had been misled. SirD. Bell asked the Speaker what was the proper course to take under the circumstances, —should the reference of the Bill back to the; committee be moved, so as to have Mr. Travers’ evidence ? The Hon. the SPEAKER said the better course would be to remit the Bill back for further consideration. The Hon. Mr, MANTELL suggested that the Bill should be withdrawn, so-as to allow of its being introduced in another place, where the members for the city could have an opportunity of dealing with it. The Hon. Colo'nel WHITMORE objected to such a course, as a great deal of trouble had already been taken with the measure in the Council. The Bill was referred back to the Local Bills Committge. RABBIT NUISANCE BILL. On the order of the day for the third reading of this Bill a short discussion occurred, hon. gentlemen being strongly of opinion that the bonus for the destruction of rabbits should be continued under the Bill.— The Hon. Colonel Whitmore said the matter could be considered in the other House. The BUI was then read a third time, and ordered to be transmitted to the House of Representatives. DANGEROUS GOODS BILL. , This Bill was read a third time and passed. NAPIER HARBOR BOABB BII.L. This measure was brought up from the other Chamber. It was referred to the select committee to which the Nelson Harbor Board Bill had been already sent. , ADMINISTRATION BILL. ■ . The Hon. Mr. WILSON moved the second reading. The most important clauses were the two last but one, which provided that the mother of illegitimate children should be able to succeed to property, and at her death the children. Second reading agreed to. ROAD BOARD BILL. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE moved the second reading. This and the other local Bills were not Bills which involved the Government policy. In this particular one an effort was made to incorporate clauses whioh had been found to be most in use over the colony. He thought property should be represented, but no plural voting sufficient to do so was likely to be agreed to by Parliament, It was quite possible the Bill wsuld ■not become law this session, but even so the introduction of the measure would ventilate the subject, and give an opportunity for action hereafter. The Bill was one evidently of detail, was not a policy one, and therefore would be best discussed in committee. The Government would not force these local measures on the linns. [The Hon. Dr. POLLEN; What does the hon. member mean by saying the Bill is not a policy one ?] The Government did not consider the measure involved any Ministerial question, it was one on which they would not ask hon. members to waive their own opinions so as to admit of its passing, but gentlemen could take whatever course they thought best with regard to it. [Col. Whitmore, who appeared indisposed, spoke at times very indistinctly, and it was difficult to catch bis meaning.] The Hon. Mr. HALL thought the Bill of very large importance to country districts. He was glad of the footing on which the Government had placed the Bill, in leaving it an open question. He (Mr. Hall) did not consider the measure should be passed this session. The Bill was, he understood, to harmonise the county councils and road boards. This was a very desirable work. There was one feature which ho thought could be very much improved, and that was legislating by reference. Considering the class of raeu to whom they were about to commit the working of this measure Parliament could not make it too simple. The money to be spent would bo principally derived from rates, and he thought it would be only just that voice should be given in proportion to the amount paid, t He hoped that in committee it would bo put into such a shape as that it would go forth as the form m which that Chamber would like to see the Bill passed, and then in another session an exhaustive measure could bo passed. The Hon. Mr. HOLMES said that the general impression was altogether in favor of road boards. (Hear, hear.) Legislation should go therefore to empower six or eight of these boards to combine as a council. A better class of men had administered the road boards than the county councils. (Hoar, hear.) He instanced a case where on the resignation of a chairman of a county council the position was put up at a sort of Dutch auction, and an eminently unsuitable man got it because he offered to take it at £IOO a year less thau a good man -would take'it for. Mr. Holmes thought the matter slicqld be considered in connection with the counties—that there should be only one taxing bodyThe Hon. Sir DILLON BELL thought it a pity if the Bill should not pass this session. Ho Would increase the power of road boards, and do away with the county councils. He

spoke at some length, advocating that the Bill should be sent to a select committee, when it might be got into such a shape as to pass the House of Representatives. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE differed from Sir D. Bell. It was quite clear that the Bill could not pass this session. The country would have the opportunity of considering it during the recess, and next session it could be brought up with fresh light thrown upon it. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE replied, and the Bill was read a second time. RATING ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE moved the second reading. He said the Bill was to remedy defects which had been found to exist. The valuations had been complained of, and it was intended to have triennial valuations. The 17th clause referred to special modes of rating, the. 19th provided for the levying of rates by road boards at any period of the year after constitution of the Boaid, whilst the 21st provided that the couuty councils may adopt the valuation under the Land Tax Act. The Hon. Mr. HALL was very glad to support the principle of triennial valuations. He pointed out that there was no provision made for valuers, although such were mentioned as having functions to perform. One defect in the present Act which was not provided for in the Bill was that there was no sufficient provision in case of a change of tenancy. He trusted this would be seen to. Bill read a second time, and its committa fixed for next day. COUNTIES ACT AMENDMENT. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE moved the second reading of this Bill. He said the Bill was to a great extent technical. Some amendments were brought in at the request of the local bodies themselves. A clause of the old Act gave facilities for bringing about a subdivision of the counties. The of the Government was against small counties. The Bth clause’'©! the Bill under discussion embodied a suggestion from the County Conference as to facilities for making up rolls. The hou. gentleman went through the various clauses, shortly explaining here and there. On the motion of the Hon. Captain Eraser the debate was adjourned. The Council rose at 10 minutes to 5 p.m, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wednesday, September 11. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m, PETITIONS. Petitions were presented by Messrs. Williams, Dignan, Swanson, Grey, O’Rorke, Beetham, Nabe, Sheehan, Ormond, and Macfarlane. NOTICES OF MOTION. Notices of motion were given by Messrs Fox, Richmond, Hamlin, Barff, Reeves, Richardson, Curtis, Wakefield, and Feldwick. PAPERS. Papers were laid on the table by the Hou. Mr. Sheehan and the Hou. Mr. Macfarlane. BUSINESS OP THE SESSION. Sir GEORGE GREY stated, in reference to the Hon. Major Atkinson’s suggestion on the previous night, that the Government, if the House desired it, were willing that public business should be proceeded with on Mondays for the remainder of the session. They would also be prepared to have each Thursday fixed as a Government day. Mr. MONTGOMERY Inquired if there was any motion on the subject before the House ? The SPEAKER replied iu the negative. Mr. MONTGOMERY hoped that the course indicated would not be allowed to be adopted without discussion. There' were many dissenting members to the course indicated by the Premier. Sir GEORGE GREY said he would give notice of motion on the subject. MINES ACT, 1877. Mr. REEVES asked the Attorney-General, —Whether the Government will take prompt steps to revise the Mines Act, 1877, with a view of reconciling the present conflict between the rules and the Act, especially in reference to water-races ? The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN asked .the hou. member to postpone his question till after the return of the Attorney-General, who was expected from the South on Friday next. COURT OF JUDICATURE. Mr. O’RORKE asked the Attorney-General, —Whether, in the opinion of the Government, it would be advisable to enact a measure in this colony framed on the model of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873, of the Imperial Parliament; and, if so, whether they will have such a measure prepared during the recess, and submitted to Parliament next session ? The Hon, Mr. SHEEHAN replied that au answer would be given to the question when the Local Judicature Bill came before the House. CHRISTCHURCH LAND TRANSFER DEPARTMENT. Mr. WAKEFIELD asked the Government, —Whether they have received any information as to officers of the Land Transfer Department at Christchurch' acting as agents for private persons ; and whether it is true that one of the officials in that office has resigned his situation rather than give up his agency receipts ? The Hou, Mr. SHEEHAN replied that the Government had received information which caused au inquiry to be made. One officer was found to carry on private and public business iu the department, and he was informed that he must elect either to do the public business alone, or leave the service. He elected to resign. Other officers were concerned, and the inquiry was still going on. If the matter had been referred to him in the first instance, he should have dismissed the officer in question summarily, (Hear, hear.) BILLS. On the motion of Mr. Richmond, the Nelson City Nuisances Abatement BUI was brought in, read a first time, and the . second reading fixed for that day week. On the motion of Mr. Wood, the Bill to incorporate the inhabitants of OampbeUtown into a municipality was brought in, read a first time, and the second reading fixed for September 20. 1 READJUSTMENT OF THE REPRESENTATION. . Dr. HODGKINSON moved,—That this House considers it desirable that the Government should, during this session, bring in a Bill for the readjustment of the representation in this House; or, if such a BUL cannot be got ready during the present session, that the Government bo requested to prepare one during the recess. He thought it desirable to obtain an expression of opinion on the subject. As would be seen by its wording, the resolution would not at all embarrass the Government. It was unnecessary for him to say much as to the necessity for a measure of this kind. Some districts were not sufficiently represented at the present time, while other districts had a much larger share of representation than they were entitled to, speaking comparatively. He thought everyone would allow that the present House did not represent the feelings of the country. The House was elected to carry through the Abolition Act, and there was now a feeling of disappointment throughout the country at the,-iro3ults- which had followed the passing of J;hatfflf asure ‘ One result of abolition was thßTrtK© P ro SJ ess of the colony had been stopped through the want of roads and bridges, and the feeling of disappointment and discontent that prevailed throughout the country showed the necessity that existed for a readjustment of the representation and the election of a new Parliament. Unless some change took place m the existing system, and if the sessions were so Ion"- as°the two last had been, he feared they would have to resort to the very objectionable system of paying salaries to members for attending to the legislative work of the country. If some 'change were not effected, he feared that the representation would be placed entirely in the bands of the wealthy class of people, and the salaried people, who would make politics a sort of trade. Some agitation had been caused recently by a statement about separation. So far as his opinions went, he did not. think there was any necessity for separation. He believed the wish of the people generally was that New Zealand should be one united colony. He did not think that Wellington need fear that any such great constitutional change would take place. Sir GEORGE GREY said the Government felt grateful to the hen. member for bringing forward a resolution of this kind, because his so doing enabled them to explain away a misunderstanding that prevailed. The Government concurred in the resolution of- the hen. member, and would offer no opposition to it. Mr. McLEAN said it was only when a Government was strong in the House that the representation of the colony could ho placed on a fair and proper basis. He hoped the Government would bring this Bill in dating the present session, and he -would give the Bill his most earnest support if it proposed to do equal justice to the towns and the country districts. He hoped the Government would give the House some satisfaction as to when they intended to bring down this Biil. Mr. S LEVENS was glad the Government had given its concurrence to this resolution. In the district he came from a great necessity existed for a [readjustment of the representation, and he hoped some other member of the Government would so far amplify what had been said by the Premier as to state that a

Bill on the subject would be brought down this session. The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE said that if he were asked what he preferred he would say that in bis opinion a readjustment of the representation of the country in that House would he far more conducive to the interests and prosperity of the colony than the proposed extension of the franchise. It would be a very undesirable thing if a dissolution took place in the present limited state of the franchise and the unequal representation that existed. Ho hoped the Government would bring in a Bill this session for the readjustment of the representation.

Mr. FITZROY thought the House and the country were tired - of the evasive replies that the Premier was in the habit of making. He hoped the House would have a more straightforward and satisfactory statement than had been made by the Premier on this subject, and that another hon. member sitting on the Government benches would inform the House that the Government intended to bring the Bill in this session. ■ Mr. PYKE hoped the Government would do no such thing. There could bo no dissolution either during or after the session uuless Ministers wished it. There was no party or combination of parties able to throw out their measures —— (Hear, hear, and Oh, oh),— and ho hoped the Government would not be led away by the specious statements of hon. members on the opposite side of the House. He hoped the Government would bring down no more Bills this session, but would push on those already on the table. If they did not do so, they would not be able to keep a House together after six weeks more. Therefore he would, say to Ministers, “ Push on what is already in hand. The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN thought the answer of the Hon. the Premier sufficiently distinct. (Oh, oh, and Hear, hear.) Ho thought there was already plenty of work before the House for one session, and unless they sat later into the night he did not see how all the work could bo got through. Mr, WAS ON said that the provincial district of Canterbury required six additional members before it could be on a par with other parts of the colony. The interests of the people were not represented, and altogether a most anomalous state of affairs existed with regard to the subject of representation. There were unjust inequalities that ought not to be allowed to exist. He thought it was* the duty of the Government to keep faith with themselves and the country by bringing in a Representation Bill this session. He begged to move, as an amendment, That all the words after “ House' 1 in the third line be omitted. Mr. MANDERS agreed with most of the remarks made on the subject by the hon member for Dunstan. Mr. TOLE thought it would only result in a useless waste of time if the bon. member for Coleridge insisted ou his amendment being put to a divisionThe Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said the question of representation, so far as his district was concerned, was one of the most important that had yet been brought before the House. He hoped the Government would bring in a Bill this session providing for that readjustment of representation which was so necessary in the country. Mr. WOOD thought the motion inopportune. A temporary measure might be brought in to deal with existing inequalities. He begged to move the previous question. [Several Hon. Members : You cannot.. There is an amendment before the House.] Mr. MONTGOMERY asked if the hon. member could not move the previous question? The SPEAKER ruled that he could not, Mr. FELD WICK considered there was already a great deal more business before the House than could be got through this session. Under these circumstances, he did not see that there was any necessity for either the motion or the amendment, and he begged to move that the debate be now adjourned. The motion for adjournment was put, and the House divided—Ayes, 48 ; noes, 11, The question was then put,—That the debate be adjourned till this day fortnight. (Voices : This day six months.) Sir ROBERT DOUGLAS said there would be no probability of a BUI being brought in this session if the debate were adjourned for a fortnight. Under the circumstances he begged to move that the debate be adjourned until that day six months. The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN hoped the fortnight’s adjournment would be agreed to. The resolution left it open to the Government •either to bring in a Bill this session or next, and he hoped the adjournment of the debate for a fortnight would be agreed to, in order that the subject might come up again, Mr. McLEAN remarked that it was very amusing to see two of their supporters getting the Government out of a scrape by one of them moving the adjournment of the debate, and the other moving its adjournment for six In reply to the Speaker, Sir ROBERT DOUGLAS withdrew his six months’ amendment. Mr. PYKE said he could not understand the position taken up in the House by the Minister of Justice. Did the Government intend to bring in a Bill this session ? If they did not, what was the use of encumbering the Order Paper by adjourning the debate for a fortnight. If they did not intend to bring in a Bill this session, why didn’t they say so at once ; andii they did, why did they not make known their intention? He desired to know what the intentions of the Government really were. He wished to see the matter shelved, and for that reason he would move that the debate be adjourned till that day six months. 1 The amendment was lost on the voices, and the motion for the adjournment of the debate for a fortnight was agreed to. EEEFTON. Mr, REEVES moved, —For a return showthe money value of stamps sent to Reefton for the years 1875, 1876, and 1877The motion was agreed to. NEW3IARKET. Mr. O’RORKE motfed, —That, in the opinion of this House, the present system of charging tolls at Newmarket is unfair, and ought to be abolished forthwith, in pursuance of the powers conferred upon the Governor in Council by section 5 of the Counties Act Amendment Act of last session. Mr. TOLE seconded the motion. The Hod. Mr. SHEEHAN said the Government could not concur with the resolution. After some discussion the motion was negatived by 30 to 10. THE MURDER AT WAIAPtf, The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN stated that m this case the law had been allowed to take its. full course. The body of the murdered woman .was allowed to be exhumed for purposes of post-morion examination, but the doctor had been tapu’d, and the coroner had to take his evidence through the window. (Laughter.) ROBBERY BY MAORIS. .The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN,stated that one of the Maoris engaged’in a series of robberies on the West Coast of the North Island had been arrested in Te Whitt’s district. REGULATION Off MINES BILL. Some discussion ensued on the first order of the day being called for the committal of this Bill, the Hon. Mr. Sheehan expressing a hope that the'Bill would be withdrawn, and next session the Government would bring in a Bill dealing with the subject. The order was discharged from the paper. PARNELL RESERVE BILL. The House went into committee on this Bill. The Bill was reported to the House with some immaterial amendments. It was then read a third time and passed. WASTE LANDS COMMITTEE. Order of the day No. 6 was referred to the Waste Lands Committee for a report. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. Mr. BEETHAM moved, —That, in the opinion of this House, an Engineering Depart ment should bo organised to act in conjunction with the Survey Department, to undertake the work of laying off the necessary lines of communication through Crown lands, and such surveyed sections as have not hitherto‘been provided with roads ; and that in all cases where sectional survdyy are to bo undertaken, , the necessary engineering survey shall precede the work. That, as a direction to engineers, this House considers that, a grade of one in fifteen &bould*be the minimum fixed by regulation, unless the consent of the Chief Engineer or the local organisation has been previously obtained. The discussion was interrupted by tho dinner adjournment. LAND TAX BILL. On the House re-assembling the debate on this Bill was resumed. # Mr. HUNTER first referred to tho Financial Statement. He commended the paragraph announcing the simplification of the public accounts, and expressed a hope that in future they would bo further simplified. Tho progress qf national education, too, was a good step forward, but that progress must bp accelerated if we were to become a great nation. That there should have been a surplus of £77,630, and that the revenue

of this small colouy should have reached £4,445,000, was a cause of congratulation, as was also the fact that the train had been laid in connection with the inscription of our stock, from which great benefits would no doubt accrue. The reference to the furtherance of the native schools scheme met his approval; and iu speaking on the native question, a question which had assumed so great an importance in the past, he could not forbear giving credit to his late friend, Sir Donald McLean, the previous Native Minister. He was a thorough self-denying stateman. Perhaps he was not perfect—who among them could claim perfection ? But he was withal a man of whom New Zealand might be proud, a man who, when ho had attained a position which might have entitled him to take his ease and comfort, had not withhold his talent from the country. He had stuck to the helm through troublous times, and bad greatly benefited the country by his gentle and humaue treatment of the natives. It was to be hoped the present Native Minister would follow in the steps of his predecessor, and while careful of the interests of the Europeans, would treat the natives with that consideration which they deserved from tho manner in which they had treated the Europeans in the early days, at a time when they were weak and numerically small. Now, coming to the proposals of the Government, ho would at once say he would support the Land Tax Bill; but in doing so he wished to refer to ®b« little point. It was constantly said that certain classes in the community had received great advantage by the acquirement of land; for which they had given no adequate return. He was one of the persons who had acquired land, and he might say in passing, not from the natives, for he had purchased all his land from the Crown, and had given good money for it—money which had been hardly earned ; and those who wera in New Zealand in the early days only knew how hardly money was then earned. People nowadays hardly imagined the difficulties the pioneers had to contend with. It was a matter of life and death with them ; it was a matter of two meals a day, instead of four or five which they now enjoyed, and of going to bed at sunset to save candles and fire. In those days men had to work hard for 2s. 6d. a day, and flour was at times £llO per ton ; for years it had been £BO, and for years and years it had been full £SO a ton. Now, as to the effect of the reduction of taxation by the remission of Customs duties, he would point out what would be the effeefcinhisown case. For some years past he had used 6fcons 10qr. 31b. of sugar, on which he had paid duty to the amount of £6l Is. Bd.; in future he would have to pay one-half, £3O IDs. lOd. Of tea he had used 10821 b., on which he had paid duty to the amount of £27 la,, and in future he would pay £9 os. 4d. less ; of flour he had used 12 tons, on which he had paid £1 per ton, and on which he would have to pay nothing in future. Then on wire he would save £22-10s., on paint £ I 125., and on woolpacks £3 13s. 9d. In all he had been paying £135 ss. lid., and would by the reductions save £79 6s. lid. Well, the land tax on 30,000 acres at in the pound would amount to £62 10s., so that he, as a landowner, one of the class on whom new burdens were to be ensfc, would absolutely save £l6 165.11 d. There was another point he wished to draw attention to. The population of the colony was 453,818, the present rate of duty on tea was £84,000, under the reduction it would be £66,000, and it was said that under the present duly the rate per head of tea duty was 35.-? BXd. Under the new rate it would be 2s. ssd. That was true, but the tax did not fall on the whole population, but merely ou the wages earning adults. Assuming these to be one-half the population, then they would at present pay 7s. 6d, per head, and ss. per head under the reformed tariff; and assuming them to be one-fourth, then the rate per head of the tax on tea would bo 16s. and 10s. respectively, according to the present and proposed tax. So with the sugar duty. The revenue at present was estimated at £137,000, less the proposed reduction, £68,500. Supposing all the population—men, women, and children—paid, it would be at the rate of 6s. OJd. under the present, and 3s. o£d. under the proposed tax. But if one-half only paid the tax, then the rate of tax would be 12s. Id. and 6s. per head respectively ; and if only one-fourth paid it then the duty would be 245. 2d. and 12s. Id. respectively. It must not be imagined that the Customs duties fell equally on all. He calculated he paid sugar duty at the rate of £6l Is. Bd. yearly, so that 2243 persons paying at the same rate would pay the whole duty. Tea duty he paid to the extent of £27 Is. yearly, so that at a similar rate 3105 persons would pay the whole. Butting the two together, and striking an average, 2508 persons paying at the same rate as he paid would contribute the whole of the tea and sugar duty. He would be very glad to join in the reduction, not because ho anticipated there would he any real benefit to the working classes, but because he believed it would sooth feelings, and do away with class prejudices, if any existed. He should vote against the beer duty, for he thought the Government should not be directly interested in the sale and consumption of . intoxicating liquors, and also because he thought it was better for working men to drink good wholesome beer rather , than spirits. Besides it was inconsistent, when they were reducing taxation, to put taxes on this article. H© should support the remission on grain, as he was a thorough freetrader. In Victoria there was such a tax, and who paid it but the consumer ? The same remark applied to timber. He should be glad to see that duty remitted. In reference to the boot and shoe tax, he approved of the alteration, as be did not think it fair to tax the finer article which could not be produced here. He was utterly opposed to the joint stock company tax, because it was the policy of the country to welcome capital into its midst. It was unfair to impose such a new tax, because it would certainly cause men to hesitate before they embarked in new industries. The result to the Treasury would be insignificant.. As to the ad valorem duties, he did not think there had been so much less paid as seemed to be thought, and he was under the belief that a large class of persons in the country, the importers, had been unjustly treated by the accusations which had been thrown about so freely in the House, Replying to he pointed out that' the price paid for the Courthouse site, Lambfcpu-quay, had included the buildings, which a competent architect had valued at £SOOO, and that would reduce the price on which he had calculated the rateable value at 6«. Bd. per foot. He hoped the hon. member was not justified in his fears that there would be more taxation ou land. Land could not bear more than a fair share of taxation. He referred to a financial statement made by Mr. Murray last session, which ho declared to have been made without a regard to accuracy, and greatly to the detriment of the credit of the colony, almost as much so as those statements which were once made by Mr. Rees, and which had been proved to be without foundation. More money was wanted, and would have to be borrowed, and such statements should not be made, though the present state of tho revenue was a complete reply to them, The Attorney-General the other night had made a remark in regard to the negotiation of loans depreciatory of the efforts of Sir Julius Vogel; but that was scarcely warranted, for tho Agent-General had taken the precaution to prepare the capitalists for the loan, in order to secure a favorable negotiation of the loan by demonstrating tho sound condition of tho colony. He had taken •every precaution, and thought at first that Messrs.* Rothschild’s influence should be secured, but then fell in with the Idea of his colleague that tho Bank of England should be entrusted with the loan. As to some remarks from the hon. member for Wanganui (Mr. Bryce) os to Conservatives, he claimed to be a consistent Liberal. He had always supported the party of progress. He had been almost a Radical, yet by some process he did not quite understand he had been converted by some of his opponents intoahorrid Tory. Ho had always been an opponent of Mr. Stafford ; but ho was sorry to hear that gentleman assailed, and hoped some of his old supporters would stand up and do battle for his fame. Referring to the allusions which had been made to Sir Julius .Vogel and Mr. Moorhouse in regard to tho railway policy, ho thought Mr. Mebzies, who was an ardent supporter of railway construction, should have been spoken of. He deprecated the belauding certain men of New Zealand historical fame at the expense of others. The fact was there , was no such thing as a new era in our history. The history of New Zealand was one continuous page, arid such men as Edward Gibbon Wakefield, .Dr. Featherston, Sir George Grey, Mr. Fox, Sir William litzherbert, and others, who had laid the foundations of tho colony, should be remembered. Mr. SEYMOUR said tho proposals of tho Government disappointed tho House and the country, because they did not tally with the professions of the Premier and Mr, Macandrcw last year, who then declared for a property, and income tax, and a reduction of Customs duties tq the extent of £350,000 ; nor with the stump oratory of tho Premier. A much bolder policy than that brought forward was expected, and a much more simple

tax too, for prior to the collection of any money the Courts of Law of the colony would be fully engaged in endeavoring to disentangle the maze represented by the Bill. He predicted that the tax would not yield the amount expected, and all sorts of difficulties in arriving at the valuations. Regarding tho Public Works Statement by the light of the finance scheme of the Government, he was led to believe a monstrous injustice was about to be perpetrated in respect to a large portion of the colony. Laud iu certain districts not worth £1 au acre was to be taxed as if of the value of £1 ; and for what purpose ? To make railways in certain favored districts. The provincial districts of Marlborough and Nelson had been broken faith with by the new scheme of the Government, and he was compelled to vote against the Bill, not that he was in favor of the amendment of the hon. member for Geraldine. Mr. MONTGOMERY complimented the hon. member for Egmont on the ability he had displayed in traversing the Government’s scheme of . finance on a previous night, but should not follow bis example. He should speak as to the new taxes, and if he differed from the Government he would not bo understood as withdrawing his confidence from them. The exemptions in the Land Tax Bill did not meet with his approval, and he reminded the Premier of his declaration last year that there should be none, a declaration supported by Mr. Macandrew, He believed from that statement that there would be a general tax on property, and a sensible remission of duties on the necessaries of life, and was disappointed. He learned .now that it was desirable to tax land in order that the unearned increment could be got at. He regretted that statement, because be thought the unearned increment principle was totally inapplicable iu these colonies. Though not caring much for what Mill or any other person unacquainted with the affairs of the colony contended at Home, he quoted that writer to show he contemplated taxing the increased rent of land, the increased income, not the present value, and did not approve of any retrospective action!’ There were, two classes in England—tho landlord and tenant. Here there were no such classes, but only the freeholder class, and therefore the circumstances were entirely different. Cobden took the same view, thinking that as the landlord had got rid of the responsibilities attaching to the land in feudal times, he should contribute to the revenue of the State ou the basis of the unearned increment, in lieu thereof. He quote I against taxing the unearned increment, and condemned the basis of taxation of “unimproved value” as impracticable. As to the plea of the prevention of the aggregation of large estates, if that was the policy let it be. understood. There was a good deal in that theory, but do not let it be mixedup with the revenue question, because the two things were quite distinct. He approved of a tax ou property, and an easing of the burdens on the wages classes, because he thought the former had received the greater benefit from the construction of public works. He defended an allround tax if it were levied in a common sense way. As to the ad valorem duties, he agreed with a good deal that had fallen from the hon. member for Wellington City (Mr. Hunter), and he disapproved of tho beer tax because it would fall chiefly on the wages classes. The joint stock companies tax would be unfair in its operation. Companies turning over a million a year would be untouched, simply because they had their head-quarters at Home, while small companies, formed to take over the business of individuals, or to work up new industries, would come within the toils of the tax. The persons upon whom it would mainly fall would be the saving classes. He had no objection to the remission of the grain duty, though it might to a certain extent interfere with established industries. He should as a member supporting the Government vote for the second reading of the Bill. Mr. JOYCE referred to the speech of tho hon: member for Egmont as the criticism of one tailor on a garment made by a rival. There were faults found as to the details, but he could not deny that the garment produced was better than that which the critic had ever made. He referred in uncomplimentary terms to Sir Julius Vogel, and said the late loan had been raised in spite of him, so that he could not be of much value to the colony. Referring to the proposals of the Government, )ie objected to the remission of a grain tax, declaring himself an ardent protectionist, and attributing to protection the great commercial progress of the last few years in the colony. As to the laud tax, he thought it should have been taken to form a fund out of which to pay the local bodies* subsidies, and should have been accompanied by the abolition of the third rating power, the county councils ; still, he bel’eved in tho principle*of the Bill, which was the resumption of the land by the State—the taking of what rent was from time to time required. He supported the beer duty.

Mr. BRYCE said no doubt it was last year decided that there should be a change in the incidence of taxation, but there was never any intention that the Premier's special view should be brought forward, and if the resolution of last year was to be departed from he he should object to any reduction of Customs duties. If, however, was to be a reduction there must be a corresponding increase in another direction, because the colony required all the revenue. The taxation bore a very small proportion to the revenue, a large amount coming from the land and loan, which ought not to be. and could not be depended upon. As a matter of principle he believed in an income tax, but experience in other countries taught that there were many practical difficulties in the way, such as fraud. The proposals of the Government did touch the sources of income, such as joint stock companies, and it was that tax alone that would make the land tax ■ palatable, because it would show the landholder that he was not specially picked out for taxation. Indeed, if the joint stock companies tax were thrown out he should join any combination to strangle the Land Tax Bill. Under present circumstances he should vote for the Land Tax Bill, though he could see it would involve hardship on certain localities, and though he saw great inconsistency in giving subsidies to local bodies and then reducing their sources of revenue,-as a laud tax must do. He disapproved of the proposal of the;. Ministry to refuse aid to local public works, because even railways would not obviate the| necessity for roads and bridges, and the prin- ! ciple of returning part of the land revenue to the land must be maintained. In reference to the proposed basis of taxation, he thought improvements should not be exempted, and that the present basis could not but be eminently unsatisfactory. . Ho put several imaginary cases in support of his contention. It. was a popular cry “You must not tax industry,’' but if industry was' not taxed there would bo' nothing»to tax. As to the beer duty, neither the brewers, the publicans, nor the public had a right to complain ; iu fact, general opinion seemed to be inclined to a tax of Bd. instead of lsd. The brewers wove, highly protected, : more highly protected than any other manufacturers ; the publicans had nothing to lose, and the public could not object to pay a tax on’ a luxury. Mr. STEVENS twitted Mr. Montgomery and Mr. Bryce on their Utter inconsistency in attacking the Government measures so severely, and then announcing they would support them.. Their action might be explained by sentimental reasons, by their affection for the Government, but could not be justified by any argument. He now held the same opinion as ho did last year/ that the country could not afford reductions in its revenue and that when • free education had been granted _ them, the : working classes could not with justice demand; relief from taxation. , He quite admitted that; if further taxation were required property: should bear it.' He had always regarded realised property as the reserve which mighty bo. fallen back upon in case of financial necessity. He confessed he could not understand the Government policy in that, while it had taken, the Land Fund last year to obviate the necessity for taxation, they were this year, according to tho Public Works scheme, taking part, of the land revenue, and making up the deficiency by a land-tax; nor could ho understand on what principle tlie Government acted in continuing the subsidies from the Consolidated Fund, and then replenishing the Consolidated Fund by taxing : the land. It would be much better for the local bodies to be left to get their revenue direct from the laud. He went at some length into alleged inconsistencies in the administration of the Land Fund and the subsidies, and the anomaly of putting on a vexatious tax upon land, in order to bo able to pay subsidies to tho local bodies to be spent on the laud, a large amount being wasted in collection and redistribution. Ho thought the Government would do well to accept the amendment of tho hon. member for Geraldine, As'to, tho Land Tax Bill it had been pulled to pieces bo much that there was nothing new to bring forward, and ho could only say ho agreed with every single objection which had been urged against it. He objected to the exemptions up to £SOO, to the non-taxation of improvements, and mentioned instances in which the exemptions would act unfairly. Jio was strongly in favor of the valuations pf the local

bodies. As to the unearned increment, nothing better could be done with it than shut it up with the Trenairor and the AttorneyGeneral, and let the three it out as they pleased. No practical application could be made of it, and however defensible the principle might bo on politico-scientific grounds, it was not on business grounds, and the sooner they descended to business the better. He crilised several details of the Bill, notably the enormous powers proposed to be given to the Governor in Council, and expressed surprise that gentlemen who had so vigorously denounced the Governor in Council should give that body such powers. He also objected strongly to the arbitrary powers proposed to be given to the commissioner to be appointed under the Act. Another provision which would work iu a cruelly unjust manner was that by which the freeholder should pay the tax, especially in cases where the leases had been granted at a nominal rental years ago; so also would . that which provided that the Crown tenant should pay as a freeholder ; so also the provision which would compel the mortgagee to pay the tax. The effect of the joint stock companies tax would be to discourage associated capital, a most lamentable result to bring about, whatever were the means used. Nothing could be fairer than an income tax ; but besides the ordinary objections, there was this objection to be urged against it ; that men would .court the payment of it, and would pay larger sums than was their right to pay, iu order to establish their credit. Still it might be regarded as the fairest possible tax. He condemned the partiality of the Government in remitting the grain duty while retaining that on timber ; and bo'opposed the beer duty as unnecessarily harassing. As a social friend, and a political friend, of the late hon. member for Timaru, he had heard with deep regret an imputation cast upon the reputation of Mr. Stafford, a man whose reputation belonged to the House as much as to himself. He was not acquainted with the circumstances, but of this he was sure, that hon. gentlemen had done nothing derogatory to hia high position as a public man. (Hear, hear.) In conclusion, he would say this, that had he desired to see the Government turned out of office he would wish the Bills to pass through tho House just as presented; but he wished to see them remain in office, and hoped the Bills would be amended in many directions, if passed at all, which he should vote to prevent. Mr. MOSS, after referring to the amendment, said ho had taken out figures from the Financial Statement which showed that out of £1,946,000 contributed in the shape of taxation to the revenue only £130,000 was contributed by property"; whereas in England, where the State had not improved property by large public works, one-twelfth of the total revenue was contributed by property. In New Zealand £1,270,000 yearly was taken out of revenue to pay interest on moneys spent in increasing the value of . property. That showed there was a necessity for an alteration in the incidence of taxation. He heartily supported the Bill, and said when it was followed by a house tax, a tax on. improvements, and an income tax, he should also support those Bills.

Mr. TURNBULL supported the Bill because the present sources of revenue from the waste lands were fast diminishing, and it was wise to find new modes of raising revenue before the old ones suddenly failed. And what more proper tax than a land tax could be levied ? In what could money bo invested ultimately but in land?—and was not the fact that the land of the colony was responsible for the debt of the colony fully set forth by the hon, member for Egmout long before it was proposed to levy any tax ? The land purchasers were therefore aware qf it. He quoted figures to show the responsibilities cast on the colony by the public works, which mainly benefited property, and contended that land should bear a portion of the burdens. He opposed the beer tax. Mr. REEVES should support the land tax, butt? regretted the Government had not been bolder, and brought iu an income and property tax at once. He opposed tho beer tax, and supported the joint stock companies tax, except in so far as it applied to mining companies. Dr. HENRY approved the principle of the Land Tax Bill iu that property was to be taxed, but would have preferred that it should be accompanied by an income tax. He objected to the beer duty, and would support the joint stock companies tax if there was an exemption of the first 4 or 5 per cent, profit.

Mr. TTTZROY said the Government scheme of financial reform had caused great irritation throughout the country for the sake of getting some £15,000 a year, and the Treasurer had gone out of his way to relieve certain classes of the community at the expense of other classes. The land tax partook of the nature of a class tax, and was laud already had many burdens to bear. It was admitted that farmers formed the backbone of the country, and this tax would bear very "severely on them, because, the remissions on tea and sugar would not benefit the small holders to any appreciable extent, although it would please the large holders. He objected to the beer duty, also to the joint stock companies tax, partiou-, larly to the latter, as it would fall mainly on the struggling farmer who had to go to these companies for assistance. The grain duty remission should have been accompanied by a remission of the timber duty. In place of the medley scheme of the Government, he would have preferred an income and property tax. Mr. SWANSON should vote for the second reading of all the Bills; but they would have' to be greatly amended or he would vote against the third reading of every one of them. Ho complimented the hon. member for Grey Valley (Sir. Woolcoek) tor having been the first member to have brought up this question of taxation, but was surprised he had not followed the party who were giving effect to his idea. He then criticised the Joint Stock Companies Bill, generally approving of its principle, and the Land Tax Bill, denouncing the exemption of improvements as “ the most utter piece of nonsense ever conceived by any man calling himself a statesman and declaring strongly in favor of an income tax, and a tax on carriages and other outward and visible signs of wealth. Mr. GREEN observed that the measures alleged to bo cardinal points of the Governinentpolioy had met withthogreatest opposition from all sides of the House, and all the Ministers 1 themselves were not pleased with them. He, thought the Bills should be allowed to go into committee, and should'vote in that direction, but he opined the Bills would come out of committee in such a state that the Government would not know them. No doubt the House and the country had a right to be, and undoubtedly were, greatly disappointed with the measures. The House then (at 1.15) divided on the amendment of Mr. Wakefield, with the following result :—For the amendment, 7; against, 40. Those who voted in favor of tho amendment were Messrs. Wakefield, Stevens, McLean, Gibbs, Hursthouse, Atkinson, and Gotten. After twenty minutes bad been wasted in the discussion of a point of order as to whether the Colonial Treasurer had a right to speak again. The Hon, Mr. BA.LLANOE rose to reply. He condemned the announced intention of some members, to emasculate the Bill in committee, as unconstitutional, and said tho Government would resist. As to the beer tax, it was a recognised principle that nothing should be sooner taxed than alcoholic liquors, and as such beer had a right to be taxed, more especially as the large consumption of it had decreased the revenue by 'reducing tho consumption of English beer and spirits. The declining revenue on those articles must be compensated for, and if the House threw out the Bill the whole of the financial proposals of the Government would be upset, and tho money must be found elsewhere. As to the reference of the hon. member for Christchurch City, it was understood from tho hon. member' for Egmont that Mr. Stafford was to receive tho Agent-Generalship if he pleased, and Sir Julius Vogel could have a commission toioouvert the loans. No agreement was made, but that was understood. The Government had not appointed Sir Julius Vogel as agent to convert the loans because ho was in treaty to accept the directorship of tho Broomhall Settlement, and -tho Government did not desire to trust him with such powers when his position was uncertain. Tho Government was under no obligation to Sir Julius Vog;el, and under constitutional rules, an officer like that should retire with the advent of a now Government. Sir Julius. Vogel would bo continued in office while ho continued to perform his duties properly, but the Ministry would not play second fiddle to an Agent-General. It would not be dignified to do so. It was a strange fact that the persons who now sought do advance their party ends by the name of Sir Julius Yogel once denounced him, and in the session of 1875 so far threw him over that he had to appeal to friends to stand up for him. (Mr. McLean; No.) • That was so. The Treasurer then defended himself from complaints by Major Atkinson as to having taken £70,000 out of loans in aid of revenue, e,ud aai<l £62,000 had boon taken

out of revenue which might have been taken out of loan, so that the one thing more than balanced the other, if certain other sums disbursed from revenue were also considered. He justified a number of increases on the Estimates on the ground that they were rendered necessary by the increase of population and the extension of services. As to the Land Fund, there was no clashing between himself and the Minister for Public Works, the one estimate was made in view of the other, and both estimates would be realised, in proof of which assertion he went into the particulars of the various estimates. In reply to the hon. member for Akaroa, he said he would like to hear a definition of property ? That was the difficult question. He admitted the difficulty of the non-improvement bash, but thought it a committee point, and he might refer to the fact that it was the basis in Ireland at present.. The object was to get at men who bought property and did not improve it. As to the objection, that poor men were the principal shareholders in the joint stock companies, he did not believe such was the case, but rather the opposite. As to the alternative, an income tax, the colony was not yet prepared to face it. The alterations in the tariff were proposed with the object of increasing the commerce of the colony by ridding the tariff of a number of items. The remission of tbe ’ grain duty could not affect the farming industry, because we were an exporting country, and it was desirable to cultivate free trade. The measures must be, looked at as a whole, as a financial policy, and if any of the items were struck out compensating revenue rpust be found. The BUI was then read a second time, and ordered to bo committed on Friday. The House adjourned at 2.5 a.m.