FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 26th, 1869. EVENING SITTING.

Southland Times, Issue 1173, 29 November 1869, Page 3

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 26th, 1869. EVENING SITTING.

The Council assembled at 7 p.m., when the minutes of preceding day were read and confirmed. NOTICES 01? MOTION. Mr Basstian, introducing the motion calling "the attention of the Government to the necessity of readjusting the rn:iin and district roads in the Aparima district," said that the ro:ids laid out upon the charts were become useless, and he would ask that steps be taken to re-lay tlie roads in tke A parima district. _A.t tirescnt the sebh)ers hacL )ihble or no communication with the main roads. He might say there was no road to the Longwood .Ranges from that district ; the road 3 which had been laid off had been purchased. The work asked for was a matter of necessity ; he would, however, leave it in the hands of the Government. Mr Caldeb said the matter would be attended to. Mr Daniel moved that " the Government lay upon the table the report of the Chief Surveyor, together w ith the plans for deviation of road from the upper ford of Jacob's Eiver, .Aparima district, to the main road at Gummie's Bush, and flour mill, such report having been directed to be made in the last session of this Council."

Mr Caidek laid on the table the report asked for, which, was read. Mr Steuarfc's motion relative to the cheep bill was ordered to stand over.

ADJOUENED DEBATE OX MR CALDER'3 MOTION. Mr Jott^-stox resumed the debate on re union by stating that the topic had passed through all the stages of groat questions. lie had opposed it at first himself', but was now forced by the exigencies of the Province to seek relief in re-union, which seemed to him the only remedy. In his opiniou, the revenue and expenditure figures showed clearly the absolute necessity for an alteration, and he considered that the only remedy was re-union. He proceeded at great length to enforce these views. Mr LUMSDEN said the vast resources and revenues of Otago had been freely descanted upon, but it did not follow that annexation was to secure to us similar benefits. He contended that all that would be done must come from our own resources, as was evident from the statement that a separate account should be ! kept. He objected to denuding ourselves I of municipal privileges, and dwelt on the | peculiarity of Southland's geographical position as a reason for separate political ac'ion, and the management of our own local affiirs. He complained that in the advocacy of re-union the position of the province had not been fairly put, and instanced the loss said to have been sustained on tho Bluff Harbor aud Inverc ir<rill Railway, the greater portion of which he considered should have been charged to capital. Mr TO3HACK had been are-unionist for eight years, and he knew many other settlers had long been favorable to the scheme, so that it was wrong to assert that the idea was a new one, or heing too hurriedly pushed to a climax. The proposal had been introduced to public consideration so long back as 1860, afterwards more definitely to the Council in the following year, by Mr Holmes, and had more or less formed the subject of debate and cogitation amongst thoughtful people ever since. He considered the New Provinces Act a great blunder, by offering opportunities for cutting up the country into innumerable petty states, a system which he regarded as inimical to the commercial prosperity of the colony, aa well aa politically demoralising to its inhabitants. He quite concurred in all that was said by the other side about the great natural resources of Southland, and it was that these might be developed he was anxious for re-union. The causes of existing difficulties were not of recent origin ; it was in 1861 the province received its deathblow, when works were undertaken altogether beyond the capacity of the district. The proposals to borrow on our railways he considered absurd, and saw no hope of relief in any other method than by annexation to Otago. Mr Webster complimented Mr Tosha^-k on the fair way in which he hid put the case- He complained, for himself and others, that they had been denied the means of obtaining reliable information by the refusal of the committee he had asked for. He had obtained such information as was within his reach, and was of opiuion that by capitalising the debt of £35,000 we could go on. He spoke hopefully of the future, and in the absence of convincing arguments, must vote against the motion. Mr M'Gillivray, in the course of a most elaborate and well-digested speech, drew a picture of. the present condition of the two provinces, and concluded by asking the anti-unionists to supply a remedy which would make the prospects of the province brighter. Prom all their difficulties, he poiuted to Ofcago as an open door, when they had only to enter to find relief. Mr Basstia^" propo?e3 an amendment, deferring the c of the matter uutil after the meeting of the Otago Council next month. The Hon. Dr Menzies seconded. Mr Calder opposed the amendment at length, going over the arguments of those who supported it. Afc the close of his remarks he pointed to an empty treasury as an absolute necessity for deciding them. The delay proposed in the amendment was not the decisive action required, besides there being neither reason nor fairness in it. Mr Daniel also briefly opposed delay. Messrs Joiinstos' and Daniel opposed the amendment, as did Messrs M'Gillivray and Kinross. Mr Steuart objected to the matter being hurried, particularly as a full statement of assets and liabilities had not been furnished. He condemned the Commissioners' Report as a special plea for re union, and held that if the province was like a patient in the last stage of disease, it was not this remedy that should be applied, when there were others to try first, and time should be allowed at all events to test their effect. Mr Bell would support the amendi ment unless the original motion were amended. He had been returned by a constituency favorable to re-union, but was not prepared to have the matter forced on. He moved the adjournment of the debate until 12 o'clock next day. Mr Webster seconded, and after much irregular discussion tho adjournment was put and lost, their being ayes, S ; noes, O- Some desultory conversation ensued, aaA u\lima.\:e\y on $nrkhep moilon by Mr Bell, the debate was postponed, and an adjournment took place at halfpast twelve, until noon of Saturday. SATURDAY, 27th NOVEMBER, 1869. The Speaker took the chair at inon. The minutes of the previous sitting were read and confirmed. Mr Bell resumed the debate on Mr Basstian's amendment, which he supported on the ground of being desirous of further information. He was followed on the same side by the hon. Dr Menzies, Messrs Lumsden, and Webster. Mr Macdonald opposed the amendment, and a division was called for. The numbers were, ayes, 7 ; noes, 11. The amendment was therefore lost.

The Sheep Ordinance,,.. Amendment Ordinance, having been read a first time, and made an order of the day for the next evening sitting, the House adjourned to Monday (this day), at 7 p.m.