PARLIAMENTARY.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 243, 24 September 1884, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

[Own Correspondent.] Legislative Council. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19. Second Readings. In the Legislative Council yesterday the Married Women’s Property Bill was read a second time. The Pharazyn Case. Colonel Brett brought under notice Mr. Pharazyn’s conviction last Saturday for voting at Foxton. Mr. Pharazyn stated he had been advised to appeal, and asked the Council to withhold its opinion until the result of the appeal was known.

House of Representatives.

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23. Notices. In the House yesterday Sir George Grey gave notice of a Bill for the appointment of a Parliamentary Under-Secretary, and of a bill for the election by the people of Justices of the Peace. Sir Julius Vogel gave notice to move on Friday, That the ’Frisco service and the direct steamers being the quickest means of communication with Great Britain, that letters by the Brindisi route be charged one shilling per half ounce. First Readings. Sir George Grey’s Bill relating to contempt of Court was read a first time. Public Revenue's Bill. The Public Revenues Bill (No. 2) passed through all its stages. The Financial Debate. Mr. Holmes resumed the debate on the Financial Statement, criticising at great length the speech and conduct of Mr. Wakefield and answering Major Atkinson in no measured terms. Mr. W. F. Buckland characterised Mr. Holmes’ speech as simply an attack on Mr. Wakefield and Major Atkinson, instead of a discussion on the financial statement. He contended that a reduction of the education capitation would land school committees in a world of trouble.

Mr. Bevan said the financial statement was the best that had been delivered for the last five years. Mr. Bryce considered the proposal for the reduction of the Armed Constabulary unwise, and held there would really be no saving whatever in relieving the sinking fund.' He regarded the financial statement as leading to the borrowing of one and a-half millions. The objection to the property tax arose solely from the fact that it aimed at mortgages.

Mr. Ballance defended the financial statement, denying that it was a fact that Sir Julius Vogel would not be guided by his colleagues. On the contrary, the financial statement had been considerably amended in deference to Sir Julius Vogel’s colleagues. The Government felt convinced of their ability to restore prosperity to the colony, faith in which had of late become stronger.

Mr. Rolleston held that the reduction of the property tax would simply be so much gain to the money lender. He considered the Financial Statement committed the House to much more borrowing than even one and a half millions. He complained that little provision was made for bona fide settlement, and predicted that the land speculator and monopolist would soon be operating in their midst.

Mr. Montgomery said the Financial Statement showed constructive ability unequalled by anything the House had seen for the last five years, but complained of the reduction in the Education vote, and of the question of local government being remitted to a Royal Commission.

Mr. Hursthouse considered the Financial Statement held out strong temptations to borrow at least ten millions, and if that was the boasted moderate policy he failed to see what an extravagant policy meant. He predicted that within six months they would see the Treasurer comfortably settled in England. The debate was adjourned till to-day. The House rose at 12.30 a.m.