PARLIAMENTARY.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2594, 14 July 1881, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wellington, July 12. MANAGEMENT OF RAILWAYS. Mr Oliver moved —“ That a Select Committee be appointed to enquire into the management and working of the New Zealand railways, and to report their opinion on changes which may

appear to them desirable to introduce. The Committee to consit of Messrs Wood, Ormond, Kelly, Shepherd, Saunders, Bunny, Richardson, Wright, Macandrew, and the mover.”

Mr Hall spoke in support of the motion, stating that Government felt sure valuable information could be obtained through that channel, which could not, be had from the ordinary official sources.

Mr Macandrew thought the question a large one, and one which would take up the attention of a Committee for months. The whole subject was one which would have to be gone into elaborately to do any good. He would not, however, oppose the motion. Mr Richardson thought the subject was one which should be dealt with exhaustively, and that the opportunity for doing so would be far too short. Committees of this sort were calculated to disorganise a service, Major Harris moved an addition to the motion empowering the Committee to deal with the. grievance of railway employees in the North Island in not being paid the full salaries promised to them.

Mr Wood would not oppose the motion ; at the same time as the proposal stood, he did not expect much good would result from it. Mr Gisborne adopted a similar view, giving it as his opinion that to do any good a Committee would have to prosecute it enquiries all through the recess.

Mr Saunders agreed in the opinion that the Committee could not possibly do the work efficiently in the short time placed at its disposal. Mr Murray thought the whole question was one of administration, and ought to be dealt with by the Government itself. To do the work of the railways efficiently they ghould be dealt with by a Boaid apart altogether from politics. Mr Oliver said that after the opinions expressed during the debate he thought it would be judicious to withdraw the motion.

Motion and amendment withdrawn REDUCTIONS IN POLICB”FORCE.

Mr Stewart moved —“That a Committee be appointed to enquire into the reduction and removals in the police force of the colony during the last twelve months, to consist of Messrs Colbeck, Harris, Pitt,~Hirst, Shrimski, and the mover.

Mr Rolleston hoped the motion would be rejected, as if the House interfered in such matters, that interference would tend to disorganise.the force. It was a disagreeable duty thrust on Government, but it had to be done. In the civil police £IO.OOO had been saved, and in the A.C. £40,000. Such being the case, he hoped the House would strengthen the hands of the Government in a matter of this kind. The motion was negatived by 38 to 30. LAW PRACTITIONERS BILL. Sir George Grey moved the second reading of the Law Practitioners Bill It was an, effort to establish the rule of the United States where there were fifty millions of people speaking the same language as ourselves, and where it had been found to work well. The Bill left it to the Judges to test the learning of the applicant for admission. It was in the sense of a character of freedom to New Zealand. It w r ould enable men -from any calling to study for the law, devoting their evenings to study. In that way many eminent lawyers had arisen in America, and then, although many of those who studied did not succeed in passing, the study would nevertheless be beneficial to them and to the community by educating men. The Bill proposed the traditional trammels connected with conveyancing would be broken through, and a more reasonable system adopted. Mr Hall sympathised in the object of the Bill, and would be glad to see the motion carried, but it seemed to him that the Bill, as framed, left too wide a latitude to a single Judge. If a man had a good knowledge of law there was no reason why he should not be allowed to practice it. The examination was much more important than serving a number of years in an office. It left too much latitude which should not be given to a single Judge as to the examination.

Mr Eeeves pointed out that the Judges, not a single Judge, were to prescribe the examination. A single Judge might only conduct it. Sir George Grey thanked the Premier for his remarks, but concurred with the view expressed by Mr Eeeves.

The Bill was read a second time. On the motion for a Committee for this day fortnight, Mr Sheehan pointed out that fully half of those who at 5.30 p.m. had voted against an adjournment had not come back to the House, and half of those who had were going away immediately, It was a mere show going on with business under the circumstances. The motion for a Committee that day two weeks was carried. THE GOVERNOR'S INVITATION. Mr Hall moved the adjournment of the House. He explained that the Governor had made arrangements for the first time to entertain Members and the public of the city generally, and under these circumstances. he hoped there would be no objection. Mr Pyke objected, complaining that it was another attempt to rob Members of their private business day. Messrs Eeeves and Wallis also objected to the adjournment. The House divided on the motion for adjournment—Ayes, 30 ; Noes, 13.