THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Southland Times, Issue 1773, 29 July 1873, Page 2

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.) «. Wellington, July 25. In the House of Representatives, Mr O'Conor gave notice of a motion for the reconstruction of the constituencies. In reply to a question by Mr Murray, Mr Yogel said that the Government had no intention of introducing a Landa Improvement Bill, or a Bill enabling Road B >ards to borrow money. Mr Webster asked — To what authority are Crown Lands Commissioners subject in their official capacity ? Are the Provincial authorities justified in interfering with the action of the Commissioners in administering the Land Acts ? He said the positiou of the Commissioners was unsatisfactory. They were more or less independent, being subject to no control whatever, and they owed no allegiance to either the Provincial or the General ' Government. It was necessary to prevent local influences from being brought to be.ir upon them. — Mr O'Etorke replied that the Commissioners were appointed by the Governor, subject to the direction of the Secretary for Crown Lands. Their dutias were comprised in the Land Act of 1862 and the Provincial land laws. A Comm ssioner was ex officio a member of the Waste Lands Board, and sometimes Chairman of it. The Provincial authorities had no power to interfere with the action of the Board, or with the Commissioner, without local authority. — Mr Webster enquired whether the Provincial authorities would be justified in using their influence to compel the Commissioner to wrest the land laws for Provincial purposes ? — Mr O'Rorke replied that they would not be justified in doing so, unless they (the Provincial authorities) were supported by the law. In some Provinces — Auckland, for instance — the Commissioner was entirely a Provincial officer. The Imprest Supply Bill for L 250,000 was passed through all its stages. Mr Bradshaw asked if the Government intended to establish telegraphic connection with Tapanui and.Switzers. — Mr Yogel replied that he was not in a position to give a distinct answer to the question at present. The cost would be about L4L3O. The Government would consider the matter. Mr Bradahaw a>ked whether the Government proposed to refer the report of the Mining Conference, held at Lawrence, to the Goldfields Committee. — Mr Yogel replied that the report had been received, and would shortly be laid on the table. Mr Yogel moved the second reading of the Telegraphic Cables Subsidy Agreement Ratification Bill. He said that delay in the matter was inexpedient, as there was no probability of the Imperial Government immediately acting on the resolution adopted by the Intercolonial Conference. The Imperial Government had made strong representations to the Colonies not to grant monopolies to companies for a number of years. They could not advise the granting of such as the existing communication between England and Australia was subject to frequent interruptions, and the tariff was high. The Imperial Government, and the Governments of Queensland, New South Wales, and New Zealand were anxious to have an alternative line. The Indo-European Companies were largely interested in a new line. The Indian Government were willing to extend their lines so as to meet a new line, and concessions had also been secured from the King of Siam. Queensland, New South Wales, and .New Zealand proposed to bo

equally responsible for a guarantee of five per cent on £1,000,000. The cost of cable was estimated at £1,200,000, and all receipts over £1200 would ero to reduce the guarantee. The tariff was very favorable. New Zealand's annual liability was limited to a third of £50,000, tUe guarantee being paid only while the line was working. The Queensland Parliament had approved the proposal, and the New South Wales Government also approved of it, and would shortly submit it to their Parliament. The receipts from New Zealand, in the first instance, would not cover the expenses, but would do so in a short time. New Zealand could not afford to be left out in the matter. The steamers from Australia were uncertain in their movements, and great commercial inconvenience would be caused if she were left out, as large financial transactions were constantly being carried on by cable between London and Australia. — Mr Pearce asked whether there was any filed time for laying the cable. — Mr Yogel replied that it would be completed as expeditiously as possible. The Government were prepared to modify the Bill so as to make the period distinct. — Mr J. E. Brown asked where the shore end in this Colony would be. — Mr Yogel •aid the Government had undertaken to pay L6OO towards the cost of surveys, the Governments of Queensland and New South Wales each paying an equal amount, and a vessel was being prepared in Australia for making the survey. The French Government were anxious to pay a share of the guarantee, if the line were carried to Norfolk Island and New Caledonia, but the New Zealand Government declined the proposal. The New Zealand Government proposed that the shore end should be laid on the south aide oi Cook Strait, as the business on that side was the largest. The exact point of the shore end would be about Gape Farewell in Nelson. — Mr J. Shephard proposed that the second reading of the Bill should be postponed until after the' delivery of the Financial Statement. — Mr Bunny and Mr White supported the second reading. — Mr Yogel, in reply to a question, said that New Zealand would be responsible for its share of the guarantee if the cable to Australia were interrupted, the other Colonies being similarly situated regarding the Singapore end of the cable. — The second reading of the Bill was agreed to, and it was ordered to be committed on Thursday next. Mr Yogel moved the second reading of the Provincial Council Powers Bill. He said the Bill was intended to grant the Councils power to constitute courts of judicature, and prescribe their proce dure, having power to deal with scab disease, the sale of liquors, the sale and impounding of cattle, thistles, the making and repairing of highways, levying and recovering rates, and boundary fences. Tie Boundary Bill was similar to the new Education Bill in not being applicable to the whole Colony, but it was j optional with the Provincial Councils to bring the Act into operation. The Bill was not meant to extend the powers of the Provincial Councils, or to increase their permanency, hut simply to confer necessary powers. Mr Bunny referred to the 19th section of the Constitution Act, which defines the subjects on which Provincial Councils have no power to legislate, and said it therefore mi^ht be assumed that the Provincial Councils were empowered to deal with subjects not herein specified. Difficulty and doubt were experienced by the Provincial Councils, caused by the tinkering of the General Government. Why should the legislative functions of the Councils be limited to £500? The Act should have specified the matters on which the Coun cils were empowered to legislate. It would be better to deprive the Councils of their legislative power, or else not interfere with the many subjects on which the Councils were already empowered to legislate, and which were not mentioned in the Bill. It would be much better to leave minor matters to the Councils, giving them full powers. — Mr 'vYetote 1 ' considered the Bill to be retrospective, and also to indicate a change in the policy of the Premier, who was formerly a centralist. — Mr T. L. Shepherd considered the granting power to impose penalties up to £500 was dangerous, as the general feeling of the country was against extending the powers of the Councils.— Mr Seymour thought a middle course was open. He advocated a permissive system. Certain Acts being contended to be ultra vires, rendered the defining of the Act necessary. — Mr Cuthbertson supported the Bill, but advocated that the £500 limit should be reduced. He referred to the doubts regarding the validity of certain Provincial Acts, and the necessity of validating the powers of the Councils. The subjects mentioned in the Bill might be extended. — Mr Fox said the Bill did not grant new power to the Councils. They already bad power to enforce Provincial Ordinances and impose penalties. — Mr Gillies approved of the object of the Bill, but it did not go far enough. The subjects included in it were already legislated upon by the Provincial Councils. The Bill greatly increased the powers of the Councils in some respects, and in others curtailed them. With regard to the doubts as to the powers of the Councils, the Bill did not settle them. In fact, it converted doubts into realities. The Bill should have declared what the powers of the Councils are. The Provincial Councils' Powers Bill of 1866 created in abilities, and this Bill did the same. The second clause conferred powers which were actually prohibited by the Constitution. The Councils had no power to create Courts. After further discussion, the Bill passed its second reading. The Insolvency Bill was read a second time. In the Legislative Council, the Government, on the motion of Mr Sewell, promised to produce such papers regarding Sullivan's murder as would not interfere with matters pending. i

F The Assaults on Constables Bill, and : "Water Worka Bill, were read a second 1 timo. » July 26. 1 Mr Reynolds moved the second reading ' of the Marine Surveyors Bill, which was . carried without discussion. i Mr Rolleston, in moving the second reading of the Canterbury Width of Tires Bill, suggested that it might be 1 made applicable to the whole Colony. ; The Minister of Public Works sug Bested that it should only apply to parts with metalled roads. > Mr Cuthbertson thought the House • should enable the Provinces to legislate • on such a matter. i Mr Reynolds supported Mr Cuthbertson's proposal. Mr T. B. Gillies explained that it was beyond the powers of the Provinces tc pass Bills providing penalties. Mr Bunny said that if the Bill applied to the whole Colony, it should be per- ' missive, and could be brought into operation by Provincial proclamation. The Bill was then read a second time. In Committee, Mr Thomson obtained leave to introduce a Bill for the purpose i of raising money to carry out certain public worka at the Clutha. He would i postpone his remarks till the second reading. The Bill was read a first time. The Canterbury Cathedral Square Bill has passed through Committee. Mr E. J. "Wakefield made his annual motion for a return of all sales and leases of land by Natives to Europeans. He spoke for an hour, and emptied the House. Mr Richmond drew attention to the state of the House, when it was found that there was just a bare quorum present. Mr Wakefield then resumed. Mr Parata opposed : the motion. The Native Minister would refuse the return. He said the House had no right to call for returns of private transactions. He offered to furnish returns of all Government dealings. Mr Murray supported the motion, which was lost on a division by 2 to 27. Mr Wakefield's motion for a nominal return of officers in the Defence department and Constabulary force was carried. Mr Header "Wood's motion for any further correspondence in re Mr Russell's complaint agaiaafc Mr Beekham, E.M., was carried. Mr Rolleston moved that a respectful address be sent to His Excellency the Governor, requesting that he would furnish copies of all unpublished despatches sent by the late Governor and the ActingGovernor to the Secretary of State respecting the recent Ministerial changes, together with the replies thereto. The Ministry promised to supply them as soon as His Excellency has assented. Mr M'Gillivray has given notice that he will ask the Government whether they will extend the telegraph from Riverton to the Orepuki goldfields. Mr Murray has tabled a motion for the production of a balance sheet of the Immigration, Public Works, and Defence and Other Purposes Loans. Mr Cuthbertson has given notice that he will ask whether the attention of the Government has been directed to the insufficient character of the public buildings at Invercargill, particularly the absence of accommodation for immigrants, and what steps the Government intends to take in order to supply the requisite accommodation. The Sheriffs Amendment Bill provides that where a Sheriff is not present at the sittings of the Supreme Court, his duties may be performed by any person appointed by the Court or Judge.