ADDRESS IN REPLY.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume III, Issue 296, 7 August 1875, Page 2

ADDRESS IN REPLY.

SIR GEORGE GREY’S SPEECH. He gathered from the address; fit the proposed address, now that- hb had perused it, that the Governn)ent intended, ,to pass, a new constitution, under which thepeople of New Zealand were in future to he governed, and also understood that thc Gotdrriment, intend to introduce a new Representation Act during tlie present session. He gathered thpt from his Ejicelfency’s speech, but wished to be upder no misapprehension, and desired, the Government to say definitely whether that was their intention. Sir Donald McLean admitted that it was the intention of the Government. ’ " Sir George Grey continued? He considered that to be a distinct affirmation on the part of the Government that they believed the prdsent Parliament did not represent! the people of New Zealand ; that wai the only inference drawn ; yet they sought to force upon the people a constitution jnadedjy Jthose who'dicfiSl’ represent tFe’ ifikabithnts of "New Zealand, A more monstrous proposition was never made. Before the constitutional measure was passed, they must have each district equally represented;, they would have no pocket boroughs. There would not be three members for one district with one for Another district bf eljual size, and Some none at all-. He maintained they must give each district a proper share to act justly and fairly towards the people of New Zealand and allow a. return of representatives proportionate! to population. In such circumstances it would be monstrous to, meddle; with the Constitution that the people of New Zealand enjoyed. What was the result of this unequal representation? That the gentlemen occupied the Government benches did not represent’ the people of the country. The hon. member for Titnaru (Mr. Stafford) had told them it was impossible for the House to get a better Government. The Hon. Mr. Stafford said it would be impossible to get a Government more thoroughly expressing his opinions.

Sir George Grey continued: This was what Parliament had come to. The member for Timaru told them that the whole object of the people should be to return men to give expression to his views and opinions. Was this for what they had struggled to return Governments and Parliaments, to represent the views of one man ? It was not so ; and gentlemen who occupied the Treasury benches did not in any way represent the constitutencies of thb Colony. They might take the Premier for example. He was placed in the Upper House on the nomination of the Ministry of which he was now the head, and this was done to serve a purpose, and such was the nature of the changes taking place that it was difficult to foretell what would be the next move. They might perhaps have the Member

for Titnaru next to adorn the Ministry. He would be glad to see such a Idmnge. Who would pretend that a person so nominated as the Premier could possibly represent the people ? Not being required to be a wealthy man, as is usual in the Upper House at home ; not being required to give any to' asßfire people that he would endeavof-'to hand ttbwn to posterity those institutions, on the sustenance of which depended the welfare of the country ; what interest could such a person have in the country ? Neither the. Ministers nor the Upper House represented the people. With such representation, the present was no time to impose a constitution on thb of Nbw Zealand that was utterly abhorrent to them. , Parliament was about to expirq;. it did not, as was admitted by Ministers in the address before the House, properly represent the people of New Zealand, and they would be faithless to their trust, faithless to the people, and faithless to the country, if they impqsed this constitution ion them. The people would have no choice if the House forced such a constitution, and most unfairly their righty would be denied them. It was one of the most wicked attempts that had ever been made to rob the people of their rights. The Governor had committed himself to a line of policy from which he could not recede. His assent to all the measures submitted must be a certainty. In such peculiar, circumstances the Assembly should pass such an Act a,s would delegate to the people the duty of choosing under what constitution they would be governed. A new basis of representation -should be fixed; and let Ministers lay before the country their proposals, and Whatever the country chose he and his party would assist in carrying out the people’s expressed wishes... If the Government would not accept the suggestion and persisted, they would find they were - who would riot submit to it, and he firmly •believed they would bd right in .resisting such unlawful proceedings. It would be unlawful according to constitutional law that powers once granted to the people could not be taken aWay Uxcept by that Legislature which granted the powers. Would men whom I have seen make magnificent farms from bleak barren sterility whom I have seen achieve great worlt in defiance of all obstacles—who have made the wilderness blossom as the rose, and: the earth to team " With £opulation, —will those men, I say, Wf j ifr iw tjip powor of posterity, while' firaising them on the one hand fori the Work they Have donh) on the other to curse them for having forced upon them a constitution, which sinks them to misery P Will no voice cry aloud. to aririounce to them what is taking"jilace ? Will rio apostles go forth and convene meetiii§b' Ithi‘dughgiye the people an explanation' of the circumstances under»which they are to live, so that they may consider well the change that_iB forced upon them? Will no person cry aloud, and tell them that until they life fairiy arid truly sented by representatives, chosen by themselves to consider this 'subject, they ought not-to consent to such an alteration of the form of government liridbr'Which thdy Arib' to IiVO, and that they, will takeTio form of government frotn stfch A General Assembly as now exists ? I tell Ministers that if they will do what I, ask.(hem to do—if they will allow thd people of this country to< have a ftrie and fair voice in their future destiny—they will Dave np more loyal supporters than mytelf; and 1 say T also, that once the poriular ? wil} lyis been declared,lwillfajthiully, honestly, arid truly Work to miike the

measure adopted by that popular will successful. They began to-night by saying' that they do n6t follow the conclusions which must logically be drawn from their own stat©; paper. I tell them they must do it. They shall do it. The people of New Zealand will insist upon them doing it. SIR DONALD M'LEAN’s SPEECH. Sir Donald McLean said; Sir, —I rise with great diffidence to address the House after listening to the very able speech of the hon. gentleman who has just sat down, and for whom I entertain the greatest respect. In the course of his remarks the I hon. gentleman stated that this House, which really represented the people of New Zealand, had not power to frajje a Constitution Act for itself, or to establish a new form of government. Sir, I at once deny that by introducing this measure we are endeavoring to limit or contract the powers pf the people. On the contrary, we are extending them —extending them to an extent which the people never had before. So far from deriving the proper man of his freedom or rights, we are giving him greater privileges. At all events that is the object we. have in view, and I can only say that is the full determination of the Government, knowing that they are supported by law—knowing that they are supported by the evidence of facts which have come under their own notice, and knowing also that they are supported by public feeling outside this House to give effect to the resolutions passed last session. It-is all very well to say, “ Make an appeal to the people.” Haye we not appealed to the people ? Has riot the question been before them ever since 1858 ? And the result is that after a certain number of years after the New Provinces Act was passed, the feeling. of the people from end to end of the Colony has been that the provinces should be abolished, and that I can

assure my hon. friend is the fixed and firm determination of this Government. They will not swerve from it in the slightest degree, and I am certain that they will be perfectly successful. I happen to know the feeling of the people of the Colony. I have travelled a good deal amongst them. I can say with confidence, that to see the state of the various; outlying districts under the cmitralisedjioliejr of the Provincial Governments wouldihduce any man of common sense to ssy that the time is come to abolish' provincial governments, and to give to the people of New Zealand that freedom and those powers which they have not hitherto possessed. Are we going t<j. allow those out-settlements to languish and suffer ? Ai*e they Dot the support and back-bone of- the towns? By what is the country made prosperous ? What are its resources, and whence are those ' resources drawn ? Ajwra thriy not drawn’ from the interior 'the country, and each district requires a local practical government which shall give the means to form its roads, to erect its bridges, arid to carry out the works necessary -to develop its resources. I would venture to allude to the province of which my hon. friend is Superintendent, and ask him what has been done there for the out-lying districts? Have not funds contributed by the country districts to the province been , expended in the centres of population, while the districts themselves are allowed to suffer? To say that the people of these districts would join in the perpetuation of such a state of things is to assert what I must deny. I assert that the people will be much more contented and will take a much greater interest in their own local affairs when they find that this Government is going to help them. However much the hon. gentleman may deny that this Government represents the people, I hold that we are here, representatives in this House, representatives of the people of New Zealand, and when we decide that we shall carry out any measure which .will be for .the interests of the people we shall do so whatever may be tho opposition offered by the hou. member. MR. Stafford’s speech.

The Hon. Mr.. Stafford said: Sir, when my hon. friend, the member for Cheviot, in words wjiich I envied him, eomplimeirted this on the accession to its jpembers of a gentleman distinguished over ail parts of the British Empire, a name is a household word in this country, he, perhaps, but feebly foresaw the <effSct iwhich that gentleman’s return to the House would have upon our deliberations this Session. He has shown that s we amongst us now a new gladiatori, whose sword is not only dfawn but 5k extremely keen. # The hon. gentleman has attempted to draw from an expression of mine that Twas arrogant enbugh to suppose that the pebple .pfi New Zealand would be content with such a constitution as would suit my feelirigs, »ud that that was what this great • Constitutional Assembly called together to consider. I say that the hon. gentleman, possessing such genius as he does, knows that nt> such arrogant utterance issued from thy lipfe. I defended legitimately., I. .think, and nof without a precedent, the attftudd which 1 think is right during the present session to take vyith regard .to her Majesty’s Government on those benches. I stated sinceriety that, composed as this House now is, I did not think there could be found in it a set of men ito occupy tkose< fcefiches who would so faithfully give effect to my opinions, arid thrise inedhdi'es which I believe to be necessary, , gentlemen who now form the Government. What do we all come hCro for if it is not to support, as far as we can, the furtherance of those measures we thirik are for the interest of the people of the country. When I find a set of gentlemeri, who, in my humble opinion, are going in a direction which will conduce to the interests of the country, is a charge of arrogance to ■ be thrjowp against me, because I say I will support tnem as I believe in their K line of conduct ? That is the attitude I took,-' considering the constitution of this House, recognising the legislative ability to be found in it, and recognising the fact that there are on the benches of this House gentlemen as well fitted to administer the affairs of a country as any colony of the age of New Zealand can hope to have. Yet I recognised also that between tho>e gentlemen and myself,—and aifc-ig them I would certainly includlWlie hon., member for Auckland City West, * —there are at present fundamental differences of opinion which justify me in opposing their accessions to power and in supporting those who will prevent their doing so. The hon. gentleman has insisted that it is absolutely unlawful to proceed in the direction in which the Ministers propose and invite us to allow them this session. Amongst these he referred to what has taken place in the recent creation of the dominion of Canada. It is perfectly true that, when the lale fundamental constitutional changes were imposed on Canada, they were only imposed after the agreement of the several British Colonies in North America, who sent delegates to London to confer with her Majesty’s Government in drafting a form of government; but the hon. gentleman forgot a very significant instance, which I am astonished he should not have bered, bearing in mind the relation between the recent Governor of that place and himself, lie forgot to say

that the Constitution of Jamaica was taken away from it by the Imperial Parliament, withotat in sfcy way consulting t!>e people, because it was believed that the colony had got into such « taess that no government elected by the people could carry it on. The very fact that the late Governor of Jamaica associated with the hon. member for Auckland City West in the Government of this Colony, ought I think to have recalled to his mind that precedent of the legislature of a country having its power taknn away without the people being consulted! The hon. gentleman, with rather more warmth than I think is-usually the custom qf this House, in alluding to the other branch of the legislature, proceeded to comment unfavorably on the composition of the Legislative Council, and stated that the Legislative Council had on the people of the country without their having been consulted on the subject. I would ask the hon. gentleman, responsible as he is for the inception of Parliament under the Constitution, and that of-this Colony in 1852, whether he consulted the people of, the country when he recommended the manner in which that > Legislative Council should be-created; whether he nailed the people together; whether he invited expressions of public opinion when in his closet in the cottagerwhich was once designated as Government House in this, town, he sat down, and without assistance or advice, wrote that recommendation in direct opposition taa self-const! t uted political association ucal led the Constitutional Association of Wellington, fami Whs to those when members of this i I House who where then inhabitants of New Zealand? Whether he did not burst on the people of New Zealand with a constitution under which he tranquilly, and without consulting any of them, proposed that they should in future be governed; and when it fejj to that hon. gentlemen’s lot as her Majesty’s representative in New Zealand to give effect to that Parliament Constitution, winch, without consulting with its inhabitants, he had imposed upon the Colony, how did he give effect to it? Why sir, he unwittingly, as I ean well believe, gave by his action on that occasion the most deadly stab to the system of Provincial Government? I may, I think, chum to be able toi interpret the intention and the words of that Constitution Act, and as I read it, it means that certain local and isolated centres of population should have the means of.self-government without dictation to, or interference from, persons from without. And how did the hon. gentleman act in giving effect to that system ? Why, sir, in his closet, with a set of parallel rulers and a pencil he disregarded the, whole growing wants and requirements of the then Sartially or altogether unsettled istricta, and he parcelled this great Colony out of the dominion of six small fishing villages, which, in some instances, contained but 700 inhabitants, men, women, and children. He ignored altogether the now flourishing Province of Hawke’s Bay. He ignored altogether the Province of Taranaki, for that province was no part of the hon. gentlemmi’s recommendation when he sent home his Constitution Bill. How unfortunate has been the career~of~the Province of Tarumki, 1 owing to circumstances j which it could not control ;owing, jo native difficulties, arising in many instance , as myhofi. friend the Native Minister has said in parts outside the (Province, and which culminated there. That . Province, I admit,, has not been a favourable specimen "of the Provincial system, but, I. ask, peoplje of that place with the difficulties they have undergone, and the suffering they have endured, would they have preferred to have been tied, as the hon. gentlemen proposed to tie them, to the people of the city of Auckland ? and yet, sir, we have now the great champion of -the rights of the people of New Zealand getting, up in hislplace and telling us that we, who also represent those people, afteh years and years of waiting in this chamber,, are not com- £ petent to give an opinion! as to the ' form of constitution so WOll and so wisely as that bon. gentleman, alone and unaided in his own eloset, was able to do some thirty years ago. Sir,. V W0 have outlived that. I took occasion in my place, in speaking of an analogous subject last session, to draw attention to the resolutions which led to the consideration of the question on the present occassion, to say that aa old colonists ef the country, we had outlived the necessity f o- that chamber practise, and that doctrinal constitutionalism which might have been very well some twenty-fivp or thirty years ago. Sir, I could not help admiring the hon. gentleman’s attempt, ingeniously and fervently expressed, toimpose upon this House, and through it upon the country, the idea that there was no ' freedom to any of the English speaking race, unless they had the provincial form of Government. I that the onus probandi remains with him, and those who follow him, to prove that that is the case, I ask him are the inhabitants of the United Kingdom, are the inhabitants of those other great, colonies in these seas that have Reprt - sentativetf and Constitutional Government, of opinion that they are slaves without that birthright, as the hon. .gentleman called it, of freedom because they have not got Provincial Governments and provincial systems ? Sir G. Grey: I never said such a thing. I did not mention the word provinces; the hon. member has entirely mistaken me. The opinion of the law officers forced me to divide

the whole colony into provinces. The Chief Justice gave his opinion to that effect. Mr. Stafford : I can only say that having had, as this House will admit, considerable experience in the affairs of this colony, and having especially given very great and earnest attention to all questions that might be considered to be of a Constitutional character, I am not aware of the special opinion to which the hon. gentleman, nor still further am I aware how or why any such opinion was called for or evoked. However, sir, the hon. gentleman pleaded thathe was helpless in the matter ; well, we have not heard from him whether Ae .tffigka tfo was right or wrong in the matter. He states he could not help himself. I can reinember a constitution imposed upon this country by the Imperial Parliament equally without any previous consultation with its inhabitants. A Constitution which conferred very , large representative powers upon the people, but which that hon. gentleman took upon himself the responsibility of suspending, although instructed by letters from the Secretary of State which accompanied it. to bring,itjinto operation within so many months, because he thought that it was not then fitting to the circumstances of the country. .Therefore,'! can • only infer l that when the hon. gentleman ruled out New Zealand in the manner he did, perfectly regardless of the growing wants of the different great parts of the country which could ouly be governed under the Provincial Legislative and Executives, he agreed that it was not illegal or he would have taken; similaraction with regard to what was especially his own bantling, the Bill of 1852. The hon. gentleman went on to warn this House that it did not represent the people of New Zealand because, forsooth,; the Ministry, wisely. as I think, were of opinion that, previous to the pext election, which.is near at hand; and will probably ' e'daue before this House meet again, there shoqld be 7 a reyisiqn of the existing representation of the country. We have had, as we all know, successive redistribution ; of the representative power almost'incessantly, from the first meeting of this Assembly ; but has it been thrown in the teeth of any existing Assembly at the time that we were not competent to deal with the affairs of the country, because changing circumstances —owing to an influx of diggers in a particular place, or. the arrival of immigrants in some other place —had slightly disturbed the numbers at’’the centres of popular ”11011, and that we were to fie debarred ipso facto, from that moment, fromconsidering any large or important question ? Why, the thing is perfectly absurd! Where is it to end if we are never to be allowed to consider the public affairs of this country because, since the last election, there have been some two or three tnousahd people added to one centre of population, „or attracted from another ? The hon. gentleman’s argument will not hold water. I will go further, and ask him if it were to be acted upon, if wewerealways to consider that—on every occasion when a large question came before us —because a change of representation might be judiciously and wisely made, we were to defer dealing with it ? To -■whom jsifr proposed to pnlrust tips .power pf,■ distributing the govyrniqg power of New Zealand?—not to the people of New Zealand, but to this very Assembly. The hon. gentleman will nof trust ui to consider qaattefo of importance to tie country, ofit ie will trust to this very session to determine the governing power, of New Zealand shall' refer. ; I cbnvict him of a most illogical inconsistency in that. He did not say the word, but he really meant, this “impotent ” House might, if they saw fit, distribute for the future the repre-t sentation of the country, so as to make almost every member of it .a legislator for life. The hon. gentleman shakes his head. The hon. gentleman tried to make it appear that tijif “ moribund expiring Pariiaifient, words which I think have already been used a hundred timea in the f ew days the House has met, must expire by effluxion of time —so rapidly that any measure submitted to it must be so hurried through that no time can be afforded for its due consideration. This is July, and the House does not expire by effluxion of time until .March. Will it be contended that this does not afford sufficient time to give ample consideration to any important measures that may be brought before us ? The hon. gentleman must have omitted to refer to those very gazettes, issued' under his own authority, which determine the time at which ’ the Parliament shall expire by effluxion of time. The hon. memberasserteil—l do not know upon what grounds—that had the members of the British Parliament been aware that they were giving power to this legislature ,to abolish the provinces there would have been weeks of debate before their assent would be given. .1 only wish the British Parliament would give weeks of debate to any question affecting New Zealand. We find that India, with .millions of her Majesty’s subjects constantly living under the shadow of an impending war, or just seeing the conclusion of one,' has so little command of the attention of the members of the British House of Commons that it is with the greatest difficulty /Parliamentry whips can get a House .together on the day on which the Secretary of State for India makes a. statement with regard tothat partof her Majesty’s dominions, and yet the hon. gentleman states

that a country that has now Constitutional Government is likely to take up weeks of the attention of the British House of Commons. The hon. gentleman knows as well as I do, as well as we all do, that the attempt to incite any such action on the part of the British House of Commons would be futile, and absolutely ridiculous. I have no feeling of respect for the past action of Lord Carnarvon with regard to New Zealand. I sympathise with the hon. member in regard to the discourteous and unfair manner in which Lord Carnarvon behaved to the hon. gentleman, but Lean fancy what his feelings would be if he! were asked arid .-implored not to allow the people bf New Zealand to decide upon their own form of Government, and to pass some Imperial Act to tell! them now they were to wait. We have heard a great deal from the hon. gentleman, of the people of New Zealand- pf what they will do, and of what they will not do. We have been threatened in an absolute manner • which-js ,unparalleled in this House. I cannot commend the action taken by the hon. member. Ido not say that it may not be a fitting position for the Superintendent of Auckland to take, yet it is very unbecoming for a member of this house to get up in his place and threaten this House. I ask the hon. gentleman to wait for a few short days or weeks, when the people of New Zealand wlll have an opportunity of expressing their views upon the proposals of the Government. I am very much mistaken as to the action the Government are likely to ’take if they display any undue haste in forcing on these important measures. I yenture to say that at this moment the < people of New Zealand are ardently looking out for the contents of the measures they want, and I venture to tell the the. hqn. gentleman .that, before many weeks elapse he Wifi bfe surprised by the expression of opinion of the people hf NewZbaland. s lthink fob Government are taking a thoroughly 1 cousti--tutioned course.. As the oldest con-, tihuing ' inefober of Ghis House, I refuse for a moment to believe that we. are acting , Udwn%titutionally fo this matter. The subject has been constantly brought before the representatives of the people. It has been advertised by telegrams, by post, by the Press, by communications in ' ’every Way, that these measures would be submitted for consideration. The subject has been referred to even in the Provincial Councils, where resolutions have been brought down and carried for the abolition of the Provinces. ! refuse,- sir, notwithstanding the fervent appeal made to me by the hon. gentleman, to be trammelled by the imputation that I am acting, or that this House would be acting, unconstitutionally were it to proceed after due consideration had been given to these measures to carry them into law during the present session. I refuse to be plated ip the position of a mere delegate. I trust it will be admitted that 1 have always given the fairest consideration to the wishes of my constituents, and after having taken opportunities of consulting with them, after having in a manner I may say most exceptional in New Zealand met my constituents during recess, although I have not ..done during the last recess, and explained ipy views Misheard theirs, I refuse fo bh’StraPy time placed in a position in which I may not act .so long as I have the honor of a seat in this LfoUHBi acgording to the dictates of my jftdgfttent and conscience, Perish the chance of a seat in this House if I should be pdt info a pbsiwn ip which I could not express my conscientious convictions, and act according fo what I believe to be for the welfare of-this country.