HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5467, 4 October 1878, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Thursday, October 3. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m. Petitions were presented by Messrs. Bryce, Sheehan, Russell, .Tohnston, and Bastings. NOTICES OF MOTION Notices of motion were given by Messrs. Hobbs, Montgomery, Pox, Swanson, Grey, Ballanoe, and Teschemaker. ANNUAL BALL. Mr. GEORGE, without notice, asked whether the Government intended to move the adjournment of the House at 5.30 the following day, on the occasion of the annual Assembly ball ? Sir George GREY replied that the Government would offer no objection to a motion to that effect. ° REPORT. Mr. CURTIS brought up the report of the Public Petitions Committee with reference to the £IOO,oOO of Lyttelton Harbor Board debentures, and the deduction of £157,000 of land fund raised in Canterbury.—The committee reported to the effect that the debentures were a colonial liability; and as to the £157,000, that it belonged to the local bodies. CHRRTBEY. Mr. WASON asked the PostmasterGeneral,—lf the Government are prepared to give effect to the petition of the inhabitants of Chertsey and surrounding district for postal and telegraphic accommodation ? The Hon. Mr. PXSHER replied that the matter was under the consideration of the department. THAMES WATER SUPPLY. Mr. ROWE asked the Minister of Justice when the Bill to amend the Thames Water Supply Act, 187(3, would be introduced ? The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN ; To-morrow. THAMES HARBOR BOARD. Mr. ROWE asked the Premier when the Bil handing over the foreshore at the Thames to the Harbor Board would be introduce t! Sir GEORGE GREY said he had already given notice for the introduction of this Bill. ■ MECHANICS’ INSTIIUTtS. Mr. ROWE asked the Colonial Treasurer, — If it is the intention of the Government to place any sum of money on the Supplementary Estimates for the purpose of assisting mechanics’ institutes throughout the colony 1 The Hon. Mr. BALLANOE said it was not the intention of the Government to place any sum on the Supplementary Estimates. There was, however, a sum of £SOOO sot down for public libraries. UNA GOLDMINING COMPANY. Mr. ROWE asked the Attorney-General,— Whether he will lay before this House all cor- , respondence relating to the forfeiture of the. Uu» Goldminiug Company's lease at the Thames, and the subsequent charge of rent for the same ? The Hon. Mr. STOUT replied that the Government had no objection to lay this corrcapondenoe on the table. , SCHOOL OF MINES. Mr. ROWE asked the Attorney-General,— If the Government intend this session to take any steps to establish a School of Mines in the North Island? - The Hon. Mr. STOUT said that if anybodv in the North Island undertook the establishmeut of u School ,of Mines the Government .would assist, but it was not their intention to . establish a School of Mines themselves.

AUCKLAND MECHANICS’ INSTITUTE. Mr. WAKEFIELD a4ced the Minister of Justice,—Whether there is any truth in the statement made in the New Zealander on the 2nd October, that the provisions of the Pubhc Libraries Subsidies Act, 1877, were violated so that the Auckland Mechanics’ Institute illegally obtained £175 “ at his special request 1 The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN said there was a doubt aa to the legality of them-'nay being paid over* but it was expected that the matter would bo put right this session. »BTITION OP THOMAS FRANCIS SI'DOKOUGH. Mr. BRYCE asked the Minister o£ Lands, —Whether the Government will give effect to the recommendation of the Waste Lands Committee on the petition of Thomas Francis McDonough ? . The reply of the Hon. Mr. Stout was inaudible in the gallery. PETITION OP JAMES LANKY. Mr. McMINN asked the Government,— What action, if any, they intend to take in the case of the petition of James Laney, reported on by the Public Petitions Committee 1 The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN said the Government considered the matter was one which ought to be dealt with by the House. If the hon. member moved, before going into Committee of Supply, that the Government should be requested to take action, and the House passed the resolution, the Government would act upon it. NATIVE LANDS HILL. The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN intimated that he intended to move the second reading of the Native Lands Bill on Tuesday next. railway reserves sale bill. The second reading of this Bill was postponed till next day. LAND TAX BILL. • The Hon. Mr. BALLANCE moved that the report from the committee be agreed to. Mr. WAKEFIELD said he had given notice that he should move ti e recommittal of the Land Tax Bill, in order that he might procure the elision of all features that were antagonistic to its principles. As the Bill stood at present, pastoral lands and land leased from the natives would bo - rated to the same extent as though they were freehold property. The Government were practically going to tax a very limited and struggling class out of all proportion to other people. It would amount to a deliberate breach of faith with men who had leased lands from the Crown, who had t o previous notice that this tax would be imposed; neither had those who had leased native lands any warning of what the Government intended to do in tie matter. The tax would be a most unjust one. It was unworthy of the Ministry to concur in a provision that would press most unfairly and unjustly on a certain class of people. After some remarks from Messrs. Manders and Fitzroy, The Hon. Mr. STOUT said there was no reason why this Bill should be re-committed. The question had been fully fought out, and it would only be a waste of time to re-commit the Bill. He considered that there was no injustice whatever in this tax. The pastoral tenants had to pay nothing for improvements and stock, and they could well afford to pay this tax. In fact, the pastoral tenants were very well off. He believed that if the Land Bill had come on this year instead of last, they would have been made to pay 30 or 10 per cent more than the rent which they now pay.

The Hon. Major ATKINSON said he claimed to have endeavored to obtain from the pastoral tenants the full amount of tent which the colony was entitled to. If it were true, asalleged by the Attorney-General, that the pastoral tenants were not pacing the amount of rent they ought to pay, and the Government believed that such was the case, then the Government was bound immediately to bring down a Bill to make them pay a proper amount. If the Government believed that the p storal tenants were not paying a proper rent, in the the interests of public morality they were bound instantly to correct that blot. The Hon. Mr. STOUT : Who is to blame ? Toe Hon. Major ATKINSON : The House and the Government. If I have been misled, give mo an opportunity of correcting any mistake. If the Government on certain information received since last year— The Hon. Mr. STOUT : T never said we had any particular information from last year. The Hon. Major ATKINSON : I believe I have imposed on the pastoral tenants a fair and reasonable rent., I was then Premier, and the Attorney-General was then in a minority. Now he is in a majority, and his Premier has been going all over the country talking about the pastoral tenants depriving the country of a curtain amount of rent to which it was entitled. It is a public scandal for any Government to repeat this statement without bringing in a Bill to impose a proper amount of rent, and even going to the country upon it. Bet them either say that they were laboring under a mistake, or not take credit for seeing this great monopoly going on, and at the same time shrink from a performance of their duty. We have been here going oni for three months, and not a word has been said by the Government about remedying this alleged iniquity. It was absurd to say th it this Bill would readjust the rent paid by the pastoral tenants. If the Government do believe that the pastoral tenants are not paying a proper amount of rent, they are bound, as honest men, to bring down a Bill to set it right. I believe this Bill is without principle, and is unjust and impolitic. It has no principle from beginning to end; but seeing that the Government were determined to carry it through X and several other hon, members have left it pretty well alone. If the Government believe that the country is not getting enough, rent from the pastoral tenants, then it is their bouuden duty to bring down a Bill to set the matter right. I believe the Bill of last year secured a fair amountVf rent; but if the Government believes the contrary, then it is their boundea duty to bring in another Bill to set it right. Messrs. Saunders, McLean, Hislop, Stevens, Waaon, Murray, and Holies ton spoke In favor of the recommittal of the Bill; and Messrs. Bees and Ballance against its recommittal. On the question being pat, the House divided with the following result:—Ayes, 34 ; noes, 32. The question of the re committal of the Bill was therefore negatived by a majority of two. * The following is the division Hat:— Avzs, 34. Balgent George (teller) Seaton Ballance ' Green Sheehan Barff Grey Stout Barton Hamlin Swanson Bastings Hobbs Takamoana J.C. Brown(telier)Macandrew Tawltl Bryce . Mandcra Thomson Cutten Nahe Tolo De Lautour O'Borko Turnbull Hitman Pyk© Wallis Feldwick Eeea Wood Fisher Noes, 82. Beetbam Johnston Rowe Bowen • ' McLean Saunders Brandon McMinn Seymour J. E. Brown Montgomery Stevens Curtis Moorhouso Tcschoraakcr Driver Murray Wakefield (teller) Fltrroy Murray-Aynsley Waso (teller) Fox Ormond Whitaker Gibbs lUchardson William* Gisborne Richmond Woolcock Hunter Rolleston The question of the third reading of the Bill was then pat. Mr MUHRAY again protested against the Bill in its present form. Mr. MONTGOMERY said that in its present shape ho should feel bound to vote against the third reading of the Bill. Mr. MANDERS said that he would warn the innholders that if they did not accept this compromise he would himself come down with something that would bo harder upon them. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Mr, SUTTON expressed hia intention to vote against the third reading. Mr. WAKEFIELD must protest against the Bill all the more strongly from what had taken place in the afternoon, when the tyrannical and insulting conduct of the Government in reference to the measure had culminated. The result of the discussion was to show a division which the Government ought to consider, especially when it was remembered that men like Dr. Hodgkinson and others had voted with the Government against their convictions, in order to comply with tho demands of party. (Hear, bear.) The minority would bo quite justified if they adopted a policy of obstruction to prevent such a Bill becoming law, and as for taunts which had come from the Attorney-General ho only had to say this : that anything ho knew of obstruction he had learned from the Attorney-General and his party last session, when they were guilty of most improper conduct in reference to the passing of the Land Bill, and then when the Legislature had passed the Bill had tried to get it disallowed by the Governor. (Hear, hear.) He went on to condemn the Government for having paid so little attention to the wishes of tho House in this Land Tax Bill, and to the demands of equity and truth, and said such conduct would recoil upon themselves. They had shown throughout a lack of that sense of justice which should be exercised by a Ministry imposing a tax, and bad only becn caroful to attempt Ur injure tho classes against whom they bad little grudges. (Hear, hear.) The Treasurer had come down and said the BUI was moderate, there was to ho nothing hat

moderation, implying that th® Premier was a visionary, vicious person, land the Attorney General was a communist, but he was modera e. (A laugh.) -The Premier was to find the majority, the Native Minister brains, and the Treasurer the moderation Why, there was nothing moderate in the Bill at all, but there were in it pr iposals to injure every class in the cowimumty against whom the Government party had a grudge, and the Bdl would inflict the greatest possible injury upon the best interests in the community. The aim of the Government seemed to be to do aa much harm as they could, in order to bring a certain class into subjection. Ho could never believe that the Premier would over have consented to injure the colony as was now proposed, else be would never have assisted to put him in office last year. Still he blamed the Attorney-General and Mr. Enhance (the new'iniquity of the Ministry) for these crude bad .measures. ( I ear, bear, aud laughter.) Had Mr.Larnach remained in the Ministry there would have been a far less dangerous policy brought down. In fact, the Government would never have got into office but for him. (Hear, hear.) He hoped that every honorable gentleman who recognised the wrongs of the Bill would vote against it. Mr. McMINN approved of the principle of the Bill as it was introduced, but there were several points in the Bill now to which lie strongly objected, especially the exemption up to £SOO, and the exemption of native laud, aud he thought the Government would have been but courteous had th#y accepted the proposal of the honorable member for Geraldine to go into committee on the leasehold clause, which had been discussed in the afternoon, especially when so many members wore in favor of it. The Attorney-General had been very unwise in his action. He hoped the Bill would be improved in another place. He was very much inclined to vote against the third reading, and it was only his faith in the Premier which would cause him to give his vote in favor of the Bill. He could not show his devotion to party more than by voting for the Bill, for the details of the measure were completely opposed to what he thought right and just. Mr. FITZROY had come down to the House this sea-ion determined to support the Government, but he had been unable to do so on account of the absurd measures brought down. He had always regarded the measure as unfair, in that it imposed a class tax, but ha had voted for the second reading in hope that the exemption clauses and other objectionable features would be eliminated in committee, but the Bill was rushed through at a late hour of the night by a trick of the AttorneyGeneral and the Treasurer. Mr. Stout bad promised to bring in a new clause dealing with certain matters which were objected to, but they had refused at the last moment to redeem their promises. That afternoon the House had been humiliated and degraded by the conduct of tho- Government, who had deliberately broken the pledge of the Attorney-General to introduce a new clause in reference to the Crown tenants. Ha should vote against the third reading.

The Hon. Mr. STODT denied that he had given any pledge to relieve the Crown tenants of taxation, but he had agreed to provide that they should not have to pay a high rate of taxation when they were liable to be turned out of their-holdings at a day’s notice As to the hon. member for Geraldine, he had made a’ characteristic speech, but the Government .were not surprised to see him in opposition. The House pretty well knew the reason. Anyone who could change his opinion as that hon. member had done could not be expected to support any Ministry long. The hon. member for Selwyn (VTr. ’ itzroy) had said he came down to support the Government. Well, the Government did not ask him for his support, and could do very well without it, for it was not worth much.

Mr. WOOLCOCK must support the third reading because of the main principle of the Bill, but still it was about the worst Bill that could have possibly been brought down to impose a land tax. As to the runholders’ clause, it was simply a clause not to tax their land but to impose £20,000 or £30,000 additional rent on the Crown tenants. He thought that the House should set its face against such trickery, and he hoped th*t in another place the Bill would be rid of this monster evil.

Mr. BART* )N, after the closing remarks of the last speaker, must express his opinion. He denied that the runholders were being improperly treated, and asserted that they were complaining, by their mouthpieces in the House, because now for the first time they were about to be taxed in proportion to their wealth. It was said the runholders would have to pay £27,000 a year under the-BilL Well, if that were so, what did the miners pay ? Why, £85,000 in gold duty and £65,000 in license fees —in all £150,000. The gold produce amounted to on© and a quarter millions a year, and the wool yielded three millions and a quarter. The depasturage licenses only amounted to £91.000, so that while three and a quarter millions paid £94,000 one and a quarter millions had' to pay £150.000. Was that class taxation or not ? And yet the runholders grumbled to pay a paltry £27,000. He went on to say that, in the past every article which was used by the poor was doubly taxed, while those used by the runholdiog rich were taxed as lightly as possible. The country now was getting what it had long asked for/ a change in the incidence of taxation, a change from the shoulders of the poor to the shoulders of tho rich. (Hear, hear.) The complaint of the runholders was that they were liable to have their run* spotted ; but had the runs ever been spotted ? (Hear, hear.) No; if a man showed his face on the runs he was immediately raced to the Land Office, and if ho got there first he did not get what he wanted, because the clocks at the Land Office were not alwavs true. (Hear, hear.) He went on to say that the hon. member for Grey Valley had let the cat out of the bag. The thing was to be “worked” in the other branch of the Legislature, It should not be done in. another place. The country would re-echo that, and the House would reecho it, aud “another place” would not do it. The day had gone by for that, and so had the day gone by when it could be stopped from passing through “ another place” further on. Mr. WOOLCOCK said he had merely hoped • it would be remedied in another place, Mr. BARTON accepted the explanation, but said the effect of the bon. gentleman’s speech was the same. It would put the House and the country on its guard; it had given time to sound the toscin, and the hon. gentleman and his party might rest assured that their hopes and expectations would not be so fulfilled.

Mr. GIBBS pointed out that 5£ all the wool produced in the country was produced on the properties of the runholders, and if the £94,000 was all the runholders had to pay in the shape of taxation, then there might be some force in the arguments of the hon. member (Mr, Barton), But such was not the case. There was a good deal of indirect taxation paid by the pastoral class, and the greater part of the wool of the colony was produced on freehold land, bought and paid for years ago. He then went on to object to the exemption clauses, the freedom of improvements from taxation, and other features, towhich he had taken exception in committee, and intimated his intention to vote against the third reading. Mr. HODGKINSON must vote for the third reading with very great reluctance, because there were two very serious blots in the measure, the exemption of properties uo to £SOO and the taxing of freehold and leasehold properties alike. However, believing a land tax in any form necessary, and having no desire to place the Ministry in a minority, ho would vote for their Bill, He would support them because he wished to see a reconstruction of the Constitution of the country, and if they did not carry out that ho must consider him* eelf an independent member. Sir, BOWEN said the Bill was a part of a patchwork policy, and could not be justified on principle, ‘ It was nob a tax on land, but a tax on tho class forming tho backbone of the country. (Hear, hear.) It would be difficult of administration, because a novel and Impraoticablo basis of taxation had been adopted, and the proposal to tax leasehold and freehold alike was scarcely credible when coming from a Government; and in reference to that the action of the Government in burking discussion that afternoon had been highly improper. As the Bill was faulty in principle and in detail he should vote against tho third reading. Mr. HUNTER should follow out his avowed intention of supporting the Bill by voting for the third reading, although ho was sorry the Government had not seen their way clear to put the Bill in committee in order that a glaring injustice might be remedied. Ho pointed out that Mr. Barton’s assumption tha* the- runholders produced all the wool of the colony was absurd, and thought tho runholders were, hardly treated fairly by some hon. members. Tho class was of great value to the colony, but nevertheless it waa fast dying out. Ho should vote for tho third reading of tho BUI. ' ' ,• Mr. WHITAKER also should vote ;for the third reading, though he greatly objected to come of the details. He condemned the wild (speech of Mrv Barton, and cald lio c\i«'

dently knew little about the miners and , their taxes as he did about the woolgrowcra j and their -taxes. The whole of the gold djity was returned to the districts in which it arose j

The Hon. M*jor ATKINSON considered a laud tax thoroughly unsound in principle in a young -country., All the hon. gentlemen who favored tho tax drew their arguments from the condition of things in an old country, where laud was a special commodity, and was dealt with specially. That was not so here. Land was here treated and trafficked with 'as ordinary property, simply for the purpose of making money; and it was absurd, while we had 26,000,000 of acres of land to sell, and were endeavoring to induce people to come out and settle on the land, to tax that land. Tho land tax would hurt most the struggling farmers andthe yeomanry, while the rich man would escape altogether, as had been shown by the figures used by Mr. Hunter in tho debate on the second reading. The tax would not touch tho speculator, because it was too small; he would* not care for Jd. in £IOO, but it would be very hard on the small farmer who had twothirds of his land mortgaged. He should vote against the third reading. Mr. WASON entered a final protest against the Bill, because it did not meet tho views of the people, aud was only forced through the House because Government supporters wished to keep the Ministry in office and not because the House generally approved of the Bill. He charged the Government with having feared to bring down a scheme of taxation which should touch the rich man.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE thought the hon. member for Egraont illogical. The exemption would benefit tho struggling farmers, and the large landowners, whose property had been increased in value from £2 to £2O an acre, would be called upon justly to pay a share of the taxation. The reduction of Customs duties would also equalise matters.

Sir GEORGE GREY defended himself from the charges that had been levelled against him in connection with his recent tour through the colony, and said there was nothing disgraceful in endeavoring to impart to his fellow colonists the result of the experience he had gained in the colony, and he had conceived it his duty as Premier, the real Governor of the country, to make himself acquainted, with the wants of the people, and the best way of curing the evils under which the colony was suffering. There was nothing disgraceful in doing his duty, aud he should continue to so act. He denied that ho had deceived the Canterbury runholders, or that he was treating them unfairly; and condemned the action which the House last year had taken in reference to the runs. Every child in New Zealand had suffered, and he challenged Mr. Rolleston to meet him at Christchurch and discuss whether Mr. Rolleston’s conduct had been fair to the people of Canterbury in reference to these runs and land administration generally. (Heir, hear.) If tho honorable gentleman did not like Christchurch, he would meet him in Wellington, or any part of the colony. (Hear, hear). If the hon. gentleman would get someone to move that the action of the House last year was proper the Government would give opportunities to have the matter discussed. He defended the expediency of the land tax by referring to the miseries flowing from the aggregation of the large ducal estates in England, which mostly had been obtained by robbing the charitable and educational institutions of the country, and said, compared with th'a conduct, the conduct of the savages of this colohv would compare most favorably, because the> oat of their poverty had given up large tracts of country for religious and charitable purposes. Large estates had been improperly acquired under the rule of the late Government, and the owners of these would be taxed in proportion to their wealth. It was untrue that the land tax would aot'ijnfairlylia districts not benefited by public works, because lands not benefited would pay very little taxation. The principle of taxing the unearned increment was just, aud he had letters to show that statesmen in England were watching us,and waiting to gain the benefit of our experience. When in England he bad started a Land Reform League, and in that was assisted by Mr. John Stuart Mill and others, and he believed that the course of a few years there would be a great revolution in this matter in England. The exemption of improvements was thoroughly justified in a new country, where the object was to tax the results of industry,' but rather tho holding of large tracts of country ; and it was also just that what was necessary for the sustenance of a family should not be taxed, whilst anything beyond that should at once be taxed. To be entirely just, the Act declared that no man however rich should be taxed on that which was necessary for his support. No injustice was done to the Crown tenants, because the * tax would remedy the partiality stiown to them in past years, when they were allowed by gridironing to shut up whole miles of frontages so as to prevent small capitalists ever getting on to theland. The tax appealed to the hearts and sympathies of tho country, aud hon. gentlemen opposite were afraid to appeal to the country on the subject. The Bill would give new life to New Zealand, and remedy such injustice as selling land at 2s. 6d. an acre, eighty and ninety thousand acres, to friends of Governments. The Bill proposed to give common right to al, aud the people would have their rights. The scales had fallen from the eyes of the people, the time of regeneration had come ; no more would the old state of things return. It would be the land for the people in future, and not the land for certain privileged classes. He knew that by his conduct he would forfeit the affection of some, but still he felt that the affection of fch6 many was worth striving for, aud he knew that, although he was now charged with trickery, he would not always be so regarded, and he knew that when he and his colleagues were dead and gone these words would be repeated and appreciated, and in view of that reward he cared nothing for present obloquy. (Cheers.) Mr. ROLLESTON expressed the feeling that anyone attempting to follow a speaker with such rare oratorical powers as the Premier must necessarily appear at a disadvantage, but still he must say a few words in defence after what had been said. He had never complained of the Premier exercising his right to visit different parts of the country, and he had never shown, and never would show, a disinclination to meet the Premier or any other man before the people, but what he did complain of was that tho Premier bad at Christchurch and other places told halftruths, and all know that half-truths were worse than untruths. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman spoke of what might have been the case had the runs not been shut up fur ten years by the legislation of last session, and had said that ;had the legislation not taken place hundreds of smiling families could have bean put upon these lauds/ Why, ho charged the hon. gentleman and his colleagues with neglecting to put tho families on tho land. The runholders could not prevent it, and the legislation of last session specially provided for settlement, and ho distinctly charged the Premier and his colleagues with negligence in administering the settlement of the country. The families tho Premier spoke of could at onco be pub on this very land. Then why did be not do it, iusfcead of Sir GEORGE GREY: It cannot be done. Mr. ROLLESTON —It could be done if the Premier aud his colleagues did their duty. There were sections in the Act of last session under which the Government of the day might lay aside blocks of councry to -be settled on deferred payment, and the runholders had hot tho least power to prevent it. Tho Premier knew full well, that the pastoral tenants bad no security of tenure. Their tenure could bo determined at any time, and tho laud might be proclaimed iu blocks under tho deferred payment system. Why then did not the Premier bring out his hundreds of families, and set them down •on tho land instead of absolutely neglecting the settlement of the country. How much better it would be to do that than to hurl charges against a certain class, and to misrepresent the law to persons who_ know nothing of tho law, in order to deceivethem. (Hear, hear.) Such conduct was unworthy of a Premier, and he hurled back tho charge made against himself with contempt. (Hear, hear.) How strange it was that when a few years ago he and tho Premier wore acting together to preserve what ho believed, and still believed, to bo institutions which would thoroughly secure the rights and liberties of tho people, the Premier should have called him his friend, aud made speeches lauding hia public spirit and patriotism, when at that time he was administering tho affairs of the country iu favor of a class, Tho fact was that aa soon as they ceased to work together the Premier had absolutely turned round on him, and. declared to be bad that which was perfectly good before. (Hear, hear.) Sir GEORGE GREY: I only heard of* it during this last twelve months, (Hear, hear.) ‘ Mr, -ROLLESTON ; If the hon. member had inquired, or had oven paid attention to whaf was going on in tlio House, he would have discovered that ho (Mr. Rolleston) had endeavored all he could to put a stop to that sort of thing. He admitted that’there was a law-in force under which an improper system

of purchase had grown up- a system fraught with mischief to the public interest. Ho found that in force when ho came ipto office; but what did he do ? He did not go prating about the .wrongs of the human race, that the rich were defrauding the poor; bub he at once sent down a memorandum to the Provincial Council on the subject, requei-ting them to pass resolutions which would prevent .that sort of thing in the future, and prevent the abuses which had sprung up. And now as to the runholding class having done this sort of thing, why it was a well-known fact that there were only one or two ruuholders who had done it, and they found they had acted very foolishly, and had suffered for it. Therefore the remarks were not at all justified, and he objected to orations like that at Christchurch, which only tended.to set-class, against class. It was a position wholly unworthy of the Premier to go about the colony inflaming the passions and prejudices of the people, and setting class against class, as he had been ■ doing. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Rolleaton) was willing to go before the people of the country here or anywhere else. He had lived in the colony and was well acquainted with the people’s manner of thinking, and he was quite sure that the people were perfectly capable of estimating at the true value the half-truths, the nonsense, the utter twaddle which the Premier was in the habit of talking. He instanced some remarks of the Premier at Akaroa to show, that by a kind of half truthful address he had endeavored to insinuate that while he had been unable to find a lady in the Courts of Europe he had been successful in finding a lady in a cottage in New Zealand. (A laugh.) Sir GEORGE GREY : That was said to a meeting of Christian friends. Mr. ROLLESTON : That was the sort of nonsense the Premier talked. He had great faith in the common sense of the people, and was sure if they were not so completely led away by tbs eloquence with which he spoke and the respect which attached to him in consequence of the positions he had held in the colony, the Premier would be laughed to scorn for the rubbish he talked. (Hear, hear.) He did not complain of the Premier going about the colony; he had a perfect right to do so; but he had no right to go about the country preaching petty disloyalty to his chief after he had endeavored to get the representative of the Crown to veto the decision of both Houses of the Legislature. (Cheers.)

Mr, McLEAN denied that the late Government had ever dealt improperly with the laud of the colony in favor of their friends, and intimated that ho should probably in a day or two bring something before the House to show that the present Government had scarcely clean hands.

Mr. SAUNDERS approved of the main principles of the Bill, and‘felt sure whatever became of this Bill a land tax would bo imposed, but without the objectionable features the present Bill contained. He should vote against the third reading of the BUI, especially as the Government had declared against doing justice to the outlying districts, although taxation would fall heavily upon them. Captain KENNY, recognising the sovereignty of the State over the land, must vote for tho third reading of the Bill, but he felt so strongly against the exemption clause and the treatment of the tenants of the Crown that he would vote for the Bill very reluctantly. Mr. BEETHAMagreed with what badfallen from Mr Saunders, and should vote against the third reading. Mr. BALLANCE, in replying, challenged Mr. McLean to come forward with his facts, nd said the innuendo which had been thrown out was part of a course of conduct being .pursued to damage the present Ministry. He had the other day received a telegram from the editor of a newspaper in this colony stating that a certain leading member of the Opposition had telegraphed to him certain statements of a most damaging character with regard to members of the present Government, and asked if ho wou d be justified in publishing them. Mr. McLEAN : Name.

Mr. BA.LIiA.NCE replied that the name of the leading member of the Opposition was not given by the editor. He had replied, “By all means publish them all. It will be a favor to the Ministry to publish them,” (Hear, hear./ He replied to various arguments, after which the division was taken on the question that the Bill be read a third time, with tho following result :—Ayes, 42 : Noes, 19. Tho following is the division list

Ayes, 42. —Messrs. Baigont, Ballanco, Barff, Barton. Bastings, Brown, J. C (Tuupeka) (toller). Bryco, Do Lautour, Dignan, Feld wick, Fisher, Georgo, 1 (teller) Gisborne, Grey, Hamlin, Henry, Hislop Hobbs, Hun* ter, Kelly, Kenny, Mauandrow, Wanders, McMinn, Nahe, Oliver, O'ltorko, Pyke, Rees, Seaton, Sharp, Sheehan, Stout, Swanson, Taiaroa, Takamoana, Tawiti, Thomson, Turnbu 1, Whitaker, Wood, Woolcock. Noes, 19.*—Messrs. Beetham, Bowen, Brandon, Brown, J. 13. (Ashley), Fox, Gibbs, Johnston, McLean, Montgomery, Murray, Richmond (teller) Rolleston, Howe, Saunders, Stevens, Teachemaker, Wakefield (teller), Wason, Williams Pairs ;— Ayes: Messrs. Bunny, Moss, Joyce, Tole, Reeves, Gre n, Shrimski, Carrington, Hodgklnson, Wallis. Noes: Messrs. Sutton, Russell, Morris, Hursthouse, Seymour, Murray-Aynsloy, Richardson, Atkinson, Fitzroy, Driver. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. • CUSTOMS TARIFF BILL*. This Bill was*read a third time, and passedj BEER DUTIES BILL. The Hon. Mr. BA.LLA.NCK moved tho second reading of this Bill. Mr. JOHNSTON moved,—That inasmuch as the taxation proposals of the Beer Duty Bill and the Companies Income Duty Bill are impolitic in imposing an additional burden upon the wages class and special taxation upon associated capital for the development of local, industries, this Bill be read a second time this day six months. He criticised the financial policy of the Government generally, and objected strongly to this Bill, the object of which was to increase the taxes on the wage-earning class by £40,000, although nothing had been said in the Financial Statement to show that that was necessary. It was a strange fact that the price of the brewer had been raised Bd. per gallon, while the tax was only 3d., so that the beer drinkers were taxed to the extent of £IOO,OOO, while only £40,000 would be yielded to the Treasury. The Hon. Mr. STOUT objected that the financial discussion had been taken on the second reading of the Land Tax Bill. The SPEAKER knew nothing of arrangements, and the bon. member had a right to spc*k. Mr. JOHNSTON then went on to speak of the equally unfair effect of the Companies Incomes Duties Bill, and pointed out that it was practically discouraging such companies as coal companies being formed to work the deposits in this colony, and that was not a wise policy. In his district they were proposing to construct a railway under the District Railways Act ; but what encouragement had they to proceed when a Bill of this sort was brought forward ? Then there was the case of local in-urance companies. They were formed with a view to benefit the colony just as much as they were to benefit shareholders, and yet it was proposed to handicap, them as against tho English companies ; yet while it was proposed to tax these companies tho Government wantonly wore throwing away a largo sum in the shape of Customs revenue. The House divided ou the question that the word “ now” stand part of the question, with the'following result: —Ayes, 23 ; noes, 30. Atbs, 28. Ballanco Hislop Saunders Barton Macandrow Sheehan Brown, J..C. (tell.) Wanders Stout Bryio McMinn Taiaroa Be Lautour Murray Takamoana Fcldwlck Nalio Thomson Fisher O'Rorko Turnbull Goorge (toiler) Pyko Wood Grey Rees Woolcock Hamlin Noes, 30 Atkinson . Hunter Rolleston (teller) Balgent Ilursthouso Rowe Barff Johnston (toiler) Sharp Bastings Kenny Stevens Beetham Macfarlano Tawiti, Bowen McLean Teschcmakcr Douglas Montgomery Wakefield Fox Moorhouse Wason - Gibbs Murray-Aynsley Whitaker Gisborne Ormond Williams When tho result of the division was announced, Tho Hon. Mr. STOUT rose to move as an amendment that instead of the words “ this day six months” the word ** to-morrow ” be inserted, as ho believed that throe members had broken their pairs? The Hon. Major ATKINSON wished to know who the gentlemen were who had broken their pairs, Mr, STOUT : Thehon. member for Egmont (Major Atkinson) is one, the hon, member for Lyttelton (Mr. Murray-Aynsley) is another, and the hon. member for Motueka (Mr. Hursthouse) is another. Major ATKINSON; Who is your authority ? Mr. STOUT: The hon. member for Tuapeka, Major ATKINSON : I will just state what took place. The hon. member for Tuapoka (Mr. J. C. Brown) brought the hon. member for Grey and Bell (Mr, Carrington) to me, who said, “ I have been all round the House and cannot get a pair, and although I am very ill, I must stop and vbte on the Land Tax Bill if you will 1 not give me a pair.” I then said, “Yes, I will give you a pair, although I do not Uke it.” I said, “Mind, it la for Urn Taj; ’ Bill' ouly. ,r

He said “all right,” and the hon. member for Tuapeka was there at the time. I appeal to the hon. member for Nelson City, who was I think, ; present, to bear me- out. This just shows what the word of the hon. member for Tuapeka is worth. ' Mr. J. C. BROWN said he only heard the first part of the conversation which had been related, and then he went away. The pairs were all written down as for and against the Government, and were considered binding Cor the evening. Mr WOODCOCK said ho was present when Mr. Carrington and Major Atkinson met, ’ and he affirmed distinctly that .Major Atkinson was strictly correct in all he bad arid. He (Mr. Woolcock) could not be thought to have a bias in favor of Major Atkinson’s view, seeing that he had voted for the Bill.

Mr. SHARP was alongside the hon. member for Egmont when the conversation occurred, and heard it all. He must confirm all that had been said by the hon. member for Egmont, and must add this, which Major Atkinson had seemed to forget : He (Major Atkinson) said to Mr. Carrington, “ What about the Beer Bill ?” and Mr. Carrington replied, “Oh, I do not care for the Bill.” (Hear, hear.)

Mr. O’RORKE wished to tell the House this, that five minutes previous to the division coming on Mr. Dignan had told him he was going home, and said he had paired with Mr. Bastings in Dunedin. He (Mr. O’Rorke) knew that to be the case, because he had seen the arrangement made in Dunedin. Mr. SHARP rose again to a personal explanation. It was true that that pair had been arranged da Dunedin,. v but on both members returning to Wellington it was considered at an end. He might add that just before the division Mr. Richmond, who was going away, wanted a pair and came to him about it. Ho went to Mr. Diguan, and Mr. Dignan agreed to pair with Mr. Richmond, and both went away. (Hear, hear.) Mr. MURRAY-AYNSLRY had, before the dinner hour adjournment, asked the hbh; member for Coleridge (Mr VVason) to get him a pair on the Land Tax Bill, as he could not get back very early. Mr, VVason informed him that Mr. Green would pair with him. That was all ho heal’d. The pair was only asked for on the Land Tax Bill, and he understood it only applied in reference to that Bill, Mr. WASON corroborated that statement exactly, and said the Beer Bill had never been mentioned. The Attorney-General should be more careful before he made the statements he had made.

Mr. HURSTHOUSE repudiated the charge of having broken his pair. He had paired with Mr. Tole simply on the Land Tax Bill. Sir Robert Douglas had arranged the pair.

Sir ROBERT DOUGLAS said that the pair was arranged for the Land Tax Bill only. Mr. TURNBULL wished to say that he had voted with the ayes under a misconception. He should have voted for tho uoes.

Mr. STOUT produced the pair paper signed by the whips onteith- r s ; de, from which it appeared that the respective sides were ranged under the headings “*For the Government,”, " Against the Government.” He asserted that the Government whips had been badly treated, and moved tho adjournment of the matter till next day. - After a few remarks this was agreed to, and the House at 12.55 adjourned.