THE DEBATE ON THE RAILWAY RESOLUTIONS.

Southland Times, Issue 730, 30 September 1867, Page 2

THE DEBATE ON THE RAIL WAY RESOLUTIONS.

"Wednesday, 18th Sept., 1867. The hon member for Oreti (Mr Cuthbertsoi*) moved an amendment on the " Kesolutions" to the effect " that the House resolve itself into committee for their consideration," on the ground that certain alterations and additions were required. The motion was negatived on a division in spite of the speaker's expression of a wish to address the House on the subject. On the resumption of the debate, Mr Caldee, expressed surprise at the action of the hon member for Oreti who had assisted to affirm the principle of the " Resolutions" in the last Council, and had besides said that he was willing to see the Northern Line completed even by a large sacrifice [of land]. That was further than he (Mr Calder) was prepared to go. Yet with this statement let them contrast Mr Cuthbertson's remarks about the Bluff line — that it did not pay — aud that it was not advisable to incur more expense till it did. Where was there consistency in this ? Both publicly and privately the hon member had said he was favorable to the allocation of land, yet under a cloud of words he had tried to get out of what he voted for and supported. If that was the consistency of the hon. member, he (Mr Calder) did not envy him — he might keep it as far as he was concerned. He (Mr Calder) believed in the right of each to oppose measures consistently — not by the giving of a partial support with the one hand while thrusting down with the other. From the time that he (Mr Calder) first entered the Council he had never supported any measure in such a way, but ever directly opposed or supported according to his convictions. In his opinion the conduct of the hon. member was anything but fair and straightforward. [Mr Cuthbertson here rose to a point of order, and characterised the hon. member's remarks as a deliberate attack on his personal character. He said— "The hon. member (Mr Calder) constructs hypotheses on false premises l>7 jju&iog in, my sioutk I

never made use of. If such, conduct is carried on I must ask leave of the House to explain the matter in its true light."] Mr Calder continued — The hon. member in the last Council, supported the completion of the .Northern line with iron rails — there was no insinuation in that, or in a simple allusion to his public remarks. i There was nothing personal in this, or he (Mr Calder) would apologise ; but . he really did not know what he had said to require it. The hon member's re--marks led to tha inference, that, he "did not now wish to see the allocation of land effected — he must know thatjiojpersonal animus existed by what he (Mr Calder) had since done in that House.; Insinuation or defamation in any way was his abhorrence, and : — Unless his abatements were at variance with his acts — he credited every member with sin-; cerity.;. As •to the gauge — if a . Royal Commission were appointed, which he was made a\va,re of for the first, time,—there would be some delay." For his own part he had always held that payment in land was an injurious mode, : believing that no contractor would give 20s worth of work for an -acre of land. Another thing struck him forcibly, and the hon member for Oreti brought it out fairly — that . although the work was a desirable one, if [the manner 01] its construction was to be beyond the control of the Council he should oppose it, although he had great confidence in the gentlemen at the head of the G-overnment. He had not, however, such confidence as to induce him to deliberately place in their hands such an amount of land to deal with absolutely. He would not vote for the resolution ; he thought that thereby his right of control as a member of the Council would be forfeited. He would suggest that to the resolution be added the words of the next motion on the order paper (to tha effect that conditional contracts be submitted to the Council) as there could then be no fear that they would be bound to any particular mode of construction. If the Government made it clearly apparent that nothing could be done to bind the province until the Council had been fully informed, he would support the resolution — but not otherwise. Mr Armstrong asked, and obtained leave, to strike out that portion of the resolution referring to the gauge for the Northern line, and to add the clause as suggested by Mr Calder. Mr Cuthbertson remarked on the strictures of the hon. member for Invercargill on his action in reference to the '' resolutions." . He objected to the literal construction that had bedn placed on the fact of his voting for tbe amendment [in the previous Council] alledging that he did so as the choice of two evils, and that if parliamentary practice had been adhered to, and the amendment, when carried, had been afterwards put as a substantive motion, he should have voted against it. It was well known when the amendment was passed that these were his views, and he made bold to say that his action on that occasion deceived no member of that Council. He would quote the hon. member's (Mr Calder) own words, " that when gentlemen made large professions of integrity, the world had long since learned to attach a right value to them." They had simply voted for that amendment to avoid worse. Had he (Mr Cuthberfcson) not distinctly reserved to himself — publicly — the right to consider the mode of completing the line? Now he. intended to support the resolution with the caveat that no censor of public and private morals should hold him committed to every detail. Such throwers of personal imputations ought to be banished from that House, no good could result from their presence. In wishing for the question to be referred to a committee, he wished for full discussion. Mr Armstrong thought that the hon. member for Oreti had another course open to him. He might have proposed another amendment. Dr Hodgkinson differed from Mr Cuthbertson in his ideas of political morality and although he thought it quite right for a member to .vote, for what he deemed to be the least evil, that having done so he should be abide by the result. Mr Lttmsden said the chief danger to guard against was the committal of the province to contractors before sufficient information was before the House. The "resolution" was passed as amended.