PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5470, 8 October 1878, Page 3

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, v okday, October 7. The Speaker took the rhdrat 7.30 p.ra. PETITIONS, ETC. Petitions were presented ny Messrs. Hobbs and Moss and the Speaker, and several notices of motion were given and reports brought up from sessional committees. PUBLIC LIBRARIES AND BOARD 3 OP EDUCATION. Mr. HOBBS asked the Government, —If it la a fact that the Boards of Education, in distributing the grant (or public libraries, have the right to dictate .what books shall bo purchased by the committees of public libraries ; and further, if they have the power to'compel them to purchase from any particular bookseller ? The Hon. Mr. BALLANCE said the Boards had the power of handing over cither money or books. DRAINAGE BILL. Captain KENNY asked the Premier, —If it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Drainage Bill next session ; and if bo, whether he will have the measure prepared and circulated during the recess among the agricultural societies of the colony ? SirGEORGK GREY said the Government were collecting Inf mnation on the subject, and proposed to introduce a Bill next year. NEW BILLS. The following new Bills were introduced and road a first time :—A Bill for the Construction of Railways (Hon. Mr. Macandrexv) ; a Bill to Equalise throughout the colony the Tees charged upon Publicans* Licenses (Mr, O'Rorke). THE BEER TAX BILL. Mr. WAS ON hoped the discussion would at once be brought to a close. * Mr. PYKE complained of the Government having taken the course they had done, because the Bill was entirely just, and there had been no complaints from anyone but the brewers. Had the Government treated their supporters fairly—not regarded them as persons to be ordered about—and taken them into their confidence, the division would not have been lost. It was no victory to the Opposition, still be felt he had been hurt and injured by the Government having struck their colors at the first shot. He was prepared to follow his leader

Mid shot and shell Into tho . , . jaws of boll. (a laugh)—but was not prepared to follow blind leaders. He wished to ask this : Had the Government told certain supporters of the Government that they did not care for the Bill, and that they could vote as they pleased? Was that true, or*was it not? If it was true, then a cruel treacherous blow had been struck, and half tho party would desert them. If a categorical reply were not given, the Government would remain under the imputation. He hoped the Bills would be withdrawn, and that the Estimates would be passed through, and the House dismissed; then let the Government prepare measures more in accordance with the wishes of the people. They had secured to themselves as much degradation as any Government could secure in one session, and the sooner the cession was brought to a close the better. The Government and the Opposition were demoralised, and the country was troubled, not knowing to whom to look with confidence. Mr. BARFFsaid the Government had been guilty of great want of tact, and he objected strangly to the statement made that morning in the Government organ, which said that tho*e who voted against the Bill did so under compulsion. That was untrue, and tho Government should not have allowed that statement to emanate from their organ, because it was untrue. He explained the reasons why be bad voted against the Bill. Mr. RALLA.NCE ear l this was the first check the Government had received, and it was but an accident that that bad occurred. He denied that the measure was ill-conceived or unpopular, and in proof of this referred to the fact that no petitions or protests had been received from the Government, but opposition had simply sprang from the classes mainly affected by it. He expressed great sorrow that the joint stock companies tax was to be dropped, and said if such a Bill bad not been brought forward then the land tax would have been regarded to a certain extent in the light of confiscation. , However, it bad gone, but he denied that the hon, member for Clive (Mr. Orin nd) had been a true prophet, because the backbone of the Ministerial policy —the land tax—had been left untouched. It had been said he had stated tbo Government would stand or fall by this measure, but he never said anything of the kind, and the iteration and reiteration of this was not founded on fact. No doubt these measures were part of the Government proposals, and he had asked the House to consider all the measures as a whole. He quoted his remarks on’ this point when moving the second reading of the Land Tax Bill, and also in reply, when he said that if the House deprived him of this beer tax they must give him £20,000 from somewhere else. He would now tell tho House what cmrae the Government proposed to take. The Opposition had taken credit for the rejection of the measure, and the Government were going to give them an opportunity of affirming that, on tho amendment of the hon. member for Manawatu, which must be put before the Government would withdraw the measures. In reply to Mr. Pyke, he would say this, that tho Government bad never told anyone they did not care for the measure, nor had they authorised anyone to say such a thing. That was the fact. Nor had the Government token a course inconsistent with them honor or with their right to continue to occupy their seats. Why, he found it was one of the commonest things in English parliamentary history. It was quite common for statesmen to find that particular parts which were not in accordance with the popular wish., were withdrawn. He instanced the case of Mr. Lowe's match tax, which was withdrawn in obedience to the popular wish, and also tho course taken by Sir John Bussell in 1848, when be proposed tho increase ot the income taz:from fid. to 7d. Then, in 1706, Pitt proposed a duty on succession to landed estates, and tho treatment that received was very similar to what had occurred in this case. The third reading was negatived on a division by two, and on the next day the Government announced that they did not attach any importance to tho division, and the Opposition did not suggest they should resign. There were several other instances of a similar character. Now as to the financial view of the case- The Government were not going to ask the House to reinstate the amount in the shape of taxation. Many suggest?' ns had been proposed. It had been said there must be fresh taxation, and some had proposed that the Customs Remissions Bills in another pla*« should be withdrawn. The Government did not consider there should bo fresh taxation proposals at this late period of the session. They did not think it possible to give them proper consideration, nor did the circumstances warrant the House being called to give attention to a new scheme of finance; and therefore they wore „ not prepared to bring down new proposals for taxation, nor did tho Government think that measures passed in the House ahbuM be intercepted in another place. They hoped and believed they would bo passed. Then the question arose how were the Government to get this £40,000. Hon, members would remember that in tho Financial Statement ho had referred to tho item of harbor defences—£44,ooo—the cost of which, although it was proposed to defray out of revenue, might fairly be charged on tho Public Works Account. The harbor defences were not only for the present, but for all time, and it was only from a feeling that tho Public Works Recount should bo relieved from as many charges as possible, and that there was sufficient revenue to spare, that that proposal was made. The Government would lose £30,000 by the beer tax, and £IO,OOO by tho Joint Stock Companies Bill, and £BOOO by the timber duties repeal, bo that in all the amount would be between £40,000, and £50,000, and the removal of the cost of the harbor defences on to tho Public Works Account would equalise matters. He might state in regard to harbor defences that stores had been ordered from Home to the value of £25,500, and the report by Sir William Jervoia and the Board of Engineers, !□ London, showed that about £19,000 would be required for erection of guns, See. The whole of this would not, of course, bo required tbis year, but the £25,000 would be required before next June. The proposal of the Government, then, was to transfer that £44,000 from tho ordinary Estimates to tho supplementary public works estimates. Did they estimate the receipts of tho unexpired financial year, or the actual receipts for tho September quarter, tho Government might bo justified in assuming that the excels of revenue, not only over that of last year, but over the estimate* for Iho present year, would provide the required sum; bub they considered it would bo more safe and prudent to • take- the course ho had proposed, In conclusion, ho had to say this—that the Government would bo quite prepared to justify to toe country at any time their aoHoo TO

this occasion, and they w mid have u«> diffi- , culty iu doing that even from the fact that, apart from any other bu-iuess, they had passed the Electoral Bill and the baud Tax Bill—two of the moat important measure* ever pissed iu one session. Still he rau-t admit he gre.'uly regretted the loss of thi* Bill, because this was the only direc ion iu which a tax could fairly be levied t>* make up the deficiency occurring in the duty on spirits. If the House aud the country would not accept a beer tax, and the revenue on spirits kept at the present low ebb, then a heavier tax ou property must be imposed. .i. Dr. WALLIS was glad the beer tax had gone, but approved of the action of the Government, and condemned the Opposition. Captain RUSSELL criticised thespeech of the Treasurer, and said in reference to the example quoted by the hon. member —Mr. Lowe, the Liberal Cabinet at that time had a large majority in the House and the country, and not a following the members of which were continually rising and complaining that the Government were the most wretched set of men that had ever been on those benches. He also referred to the doctrine of tho Treasurer, that a colonial industry must ho specially taxed in order to make up a deficit in the Customs revenue. Mr. JOHNSTON had very few words t# say in reply. He might remark that Mr. Lowe had not withdrawn a tax after a hostile division had been taken, aud after the Government had been struggling for three months to get their measures through, aud then had got them through in such a form that the persons who had supported them were troubled in their mind as to how they could ap logise to their constituents for tho Government measures. Mr. Hamlin the other evening had sighed, “ Why did the Opposition not oppose some other Government measure, such as the Electoral Bill.” Well, he would give his reasons. When he considered that every tenant of a house, every lodger, already had the franchise, it appeared to him that the Bill made but a trifling difference, and except in so far as it proposed to give a dual vote to the Maoris ho regarded it as a very good Bill, He was proceeding to deal.further with the Bill, when • Mr. DE L AUTOUR rose to a point of order. Could anything else but finance be discussed 1 The SPEAKER was understood to rule the hon. member out of order. Mr. JOHNSTON was merely replying to the remarks of Mr. Hamlin, and wished to say that there was nothing in the Bill to which exception could be taken except the dual vote, though hw could not at all agree with the Premier that it would enfranchise 70,000 persons. He then went on to criticise the speech of tho hon. member for Wellington City (Mr. Barton). That hon. gentleman had taken up a most peculiar position. He said he voted for the Bill for this extraordinary reason, that he looked upon the laud tax already passed as unjust, because it was a special tax, and thought this beer tax was a kind of compensating measure. For this reason he voted for the Bib, although he believed it was not a good Bill. His argument was that two wrongs made a right, . • Mr. BARTON : The hon. member entirely misrepresents rae. Mr. J* &HNSTON would leave the House to judge of that. The hon. member for Auckland City East had thanked the Opposition forreject big the Bill. Well, the Opposition could not but appreciate the thanks of tho hon. member, but what was of more value t«> them were the thanks of the country, which they had,certainly earned. The Hon. the Native Minister had been pieced to sav there was no chance of hia being “sent for” ou account of this motion. He htd not brought forward the motion with that idc‘, but because he saw it was a class tax, a tax which would fall on the working man, and which would take ouch out ©f the pocket of the taxpayer, while it would render a comparatively small sum to the Treasury. But he would say this—if ho , ever were permitted the honor of taking a part in the administration of the country’s affairs, the Government to which he belonged would at any rate have common respect for the constitutional rights of the House. Ho would ver/ture to say that the Premier of that Government would not, in the presence of the House and his colleagues, carry on a consistent course of dissimulation in pushing on a Bill through the Legislature, and then, when the Bill w;ts through both Houses of Parliament, ask the Governor to veto the Bill—would not, in fact, get the Bill out of the possession of the Clerk of Parliament, and then put it aside, in the hope of its not being discovered until the Parliament wag prorogued. The Hon. Mr. SHEEHAN : That is not a fact. The Bill never left the possession of the Clerk of Parliament, Mr. JOHNS TON proceeded to say that one of the fundamental principles of Parliamentary government was that no one should interfere between the House and its decisions but the people ; and as the standing orders to protect Parliament provided that the Clerk of Parliament himself should carry the Bills to the Governor, it was not likely that the occurrence of last year would bo repeated; but the action of the Premier last year went to prove that the hon. gentleman was absolutely reckless of the liberties of the people, and would iu a moment absolutely trample them under his feet if it suited him so to do. Nor would any Government of which he (Mr. Johnston) was a member cause bogus names to be put on an electoral roll, and then dismiss the revising officer, to prevent objections. Mr. SHEEHAN : We did not do so. Mr. JOHNSTON : Members of the Government did it. Mr. SHEEHAN: Nor members of the Government. Mr. JOHNSTON believed that some of the claims to vote were in Mr. Sheehan’s handwriting. Neither would he consent to subsidising Government newspapers out of the funds of the colony, nor to railways being constructed without the authority of Parliament,; nor would he be a party to making certain statements as to what would be done if a Bill were defeated, and then when it was defeated retire from that position saying in effect with the Yankee orator, “ Them’s my opinions/ gentlemen, but you know if they don’t suit they they can bo changed.” Ho had no desire to press on the question when the Bills were to be withdrawn, and should ask leave to withdraw hia resolution. (No, no.) Well, if there were objections, the Opposition were not going to be Mich babies as to fight against a thing which had no existence, and the Government could do as they pleased. After a few remarks from Mr. Joyce and Mr. Hursthouse, the Bill was read a second "time, and then, on the ra >tion of iMr. Ballance, discharged from tho Order Paper. COMPANIES INCOMES DUTIES BILL. This BUI, on the motion of Mr. Ballance, was discharged from the Order Paper, CHARITABLE INSTITUTION®. Mr. .STEVENS, on the motion that tho House go into Committee of Supply, moved,— That it is expedient that the House should be informed in what manner and under what authority the administration of hospitals and other charitable institutions will be conducted pending the next meeting of Parliament. He explained shortly his views on the matter, and wished to know, the intentions of the Government. The Hon. Mr, BALLANCE eaid tho vernment wished to deal with the whole question on some well defined principle, and they were collecting information with that object’ in view, but it was quite impossible to deal with the matter this.'year. The Government in the meantime proposed to deal with the grant-in-aid on the voluntary principle. Where committees exist, pound for pound on subscriptions and donations would bo paid, and the formation of these committees would bo encouraged, because tho Government believed that was the proper mode of conducting tho administration of charitable affairs. In a discussion which followed the rival principles of State support and voluntary support were debated at length, and eventually Mr. Stevens withdrew the motion, as by tho discussion his object had been attained, Tho House then resolved itself into Committee of Supply, and the usual half hour’s adjournment was taken. On the committee resuming, Mr. Shekuan said the Government had arranged for private members' business to be proceeded with, and ou his motion progress was reported, and private members’ business was taken. INCH CLUTHA BILL. This was passed through all stages. OAMARU HARBOR BOARD BILL. ’ This Bill was parsed through all stages, DECEASED WIFE’S SISTER BILL. On a division, the House resolved, by 34 to 19, to go into committee on this Bill,—*ln committee Mr. Bowen said, while not desiring to take ap the time of the House, ho must enter his protest against tho Bill. Ho explained the reason of his opposition to tho BUI, and was followed by Mr. Babff on tho same flido, who said rtbo whole of the agitation’in favor of this measure had arisen from tho action , of legal gentlemen acting for certain families in England who would acquire by inheritance largo estates if they could but got a statute to legitimatiso' them.-—Dr.' Wallis moved an mwidmoat. to jaoteiit lawful for a man to j

niArry hw wife’s mother—(a laugh) —out the Chairman of Comrxuttde* declined to receive an amendment which would make a burlesque of the Bill.—Or. Wallis had no intention of doing that.—Mr. Reaves thought tho amendment fair, because such marriages had tdeen place.— Mr BOWEN, while regarding the proposal as a.step lower, considered italogical jtiequence of: the proposal in the Bill,—-'Mr, Bryce and Mr. Moorhouse pointed out that it win lawful for a man to marry his wife’s mother, and Mr. HUNTER objected to any more waste of time. The principle of the Bill had been affirmed, and .it was of no use moving amendments to upset that principle.—'Xhe 'Chairman declined absolutely •to put the motion.—Dr. -Wallis then moved an amendment to allow a woman to marry her deceased husband's brother. Amendment negatived. ' New clause.—Validation of such marriages contracted outside the colony.—Mr. Bowen objected to a new clause opening up such a large question being proposed without even notice having been given of it. On a division the clause was negatived by 22 to 20. Tho Bill was reported without amendment and passed. WE ELLINGTON COLLEGE BILL. Clause 1 to D passed as printed. Clause 9—Power to lease round C dlege..— Mr. Gisborne, member iu charge of the Bill, hoped that this clause, which lud been struck out, of tho : Bill by the Waste Lands Committee, would be inserted. H© explained there was about 70 acres, and that 15 or 17 was quite enough for the boys, and the balance might be leased with no detriment to the College, and with great financial advantage. In fact the money was absolutely wanted, because when provincial institutions were abolished the College lost a part of its revenue.—Mr Brandon supported tho suggestion.—Sir W, Fitzhezbbrt, as chairman of tho Board of Governors, considered the Waste .Lands Committee had acted, unfairly in striking put the clause without having called upon the governors to state their case.. He referred to the financial difficulties the governors had had, and pointed out that while-they were struggling with these difficulties in order to raise up a great educational institution, they were finding obstacles thrown in their way by persons who knew nothing of those difficulties. They had now an overdraft of £I3OO at tho bank, and if this land were let it would relieve them of a good deal of difficulty. The land was not required for recreation purposes, and if it was leased it would bo a benefit to the town and to the. institution. What was the good of the endowment if it could not be turned o good account? There, was no intention to alienate the land, aud surely the governors could be trusted in their efforts to promote higher education.— Sir R. Douglas said if the Waste Lands Committee had thought, of the matter at all they would have heard tho hon. gentleman gladly, but they had not. Their sole endeavor was to act in protection of the health of the children, knowing the ovil results that had accrued from colleges in the old country being closed. In on every* side by buildings. He thought tho governors should consider that point,—Mr, Tkosison said that according to the map placed before tho Waste Lauds Committee building sites quite close to the college itself . were to. be Ica-ed.- —Mr. Gi3 borne, as the Bill would go to tho Waste Lands Committee in another place, would see to the matter and place-information before that committee to meet objections now raised. —After Mr. Barton had spoken in support the - clausa ; was agreed to and . the Bill reported with amendments. . • Several other Bills were disposed of, and the House adjourned.