DEFEAT OF THE PROTECTIONISTS (BY TELEGRAPH.—SPECIAL REPORTER.) WeLlington, this day.

Te Aroha News, Volume V, Issue 229, 19 November 1887, Page 1

DEFEAT OF THE PROTECTIONISTS (BY TELEGRAPH. — SPECIAL REPORTER.) WeLlington, this day.

TiifcßE was a trial of strength in the House yesterday afternoon on the question whether or not the tariff should undergo, revision during the presentVs&ssion. This was not really the question' ftiised, but it was indirectly the one upon which the decision was taken, and theresult was that the protection - i&ts who at c insisting upon the revision this session were defeated by 11 votes. The question came up in this \vaj\ The Petitions Committee reported on the petitions of Hopkins and 1,045 others, residents of Auckland, praying for a revision of the tariff this session, and recommended the question to the consideration of the Government. Mr Moss then moved, " That the report be made a first order of the day for Thursday evening." The effect of this would have been to raise a debate on the whole question on Thursday, and Mr Moss contended that otherwise the matter would be shelved. Colonel Fraser seconded the proposition, and a debate followed in the ordinary course. Amongst those who took part were Messrs Monk, Fish, Turnbnll, Reeves, Tanner, Levistam, G oldie, Seddon and Beetham. Mr Monk took occasion to explain the position of the Auckland members who had been acting in conjunction with the protectionist. He, in conjunction with Messrs Thompson and Goldie, took the initiative in calling the protectionists together, but he observed that the matter of revision of the tariff was to be used for other purposes, and that there was not sufficient time to secure are-\isionof the tariff. Though stionglyin favour of help being afforded to local industries, he believed il would be a more desirable course to adopt the Premiei*'s promise that he would frame the revised tariff during the recess. Other speakers disclaimed any intention of making protection a party question, and Mr Rees made a humorous allusion to the fact that four Auckland members were always a stumbling-block. Allusion was also made to the fact that it was quite impossible to expect the Government to introduce a tariff that would give satisfaction when only two of their number \\ ere protectionists. Mr Goldie took advantage of the opportunity to define his position, and stated that while ho was returned to support protection he also came pledged to retrenchment, and to keep Sir Julius vogel out of power. He left the meeting because he feared that active hostility to the Govern men t was contemplated. If Major Atkinson did not keep his pledge, he would vote next session with the protectionists to thiow out the Government. Mr T. Thompson made explanation to the same effect. Mr Seddon introduced some excitement into the discussion by accusing Mr Monk of being a talebearer, and carrying information from the protectionists' meeting to the Premier before the deputation could reach him, but Mr Monk and Ministers indignantly denied the charge. Credit was given by one speaker to Auckland for the frustration of a clever move on the part of the Opposition to turn the Government out of office. Mr Moss's amendment was then put and lost by 47 to 36. - The following is the division list : — Ayes, 47 : — Allen, Anderson, Atkinson, Barron, Beetham, Bruce, Carroll, Cowan, Dodson, Duncan, Fergus*, Fi?her, Goldie, Graham, Hamlin, Hislop, Hobbs, IVard, Jackson, Lawry, McKenzie (Mount Ida), McKenzie (Clutha), Marchant, McGregor, Mitchelson, Moat, Monk, Newman, O'Conor, Ormond, Peacock, Pearson, Pyke, Rhodes, Richardson (Mataura), Ross, Russell, Samuel, Seymour, Taipua, Tanner, Thompson (Marsden), Thompson (Auckland North). Valentine, X\ hyte, Wilson, Withy. Noes, 36 : — Ballance, Blake, Buxton, Cndman, Feldwick, Fish, Fitchett, Fitzherbert, Fraser, Giey, Grimmond, Hutchison, Jones, Joyce, Kelly, Kerr, Lance, Larnach, Levestam, Loughrey, Moss, O'Callaghan, Parata, Reeves (Inangahua), Reeves (St. Albans), Richardson (Kaiapoi), Seddon, Smith, Steward, Stewart, Taylor, Taiwhanga, Turubull, Vogel, Walker, Ward. Pairs : For — Peecival, MclCenzie, McGuinness. Against — Hall, Fulton, and Menteath. The protectionist's are gratified at the result. They say,r.&hey have exhausted every means of ixaviflg.'.the, question dealt with this session, but that the division proves that, with assistance of those protectionists who ar^'now voting with the Government from party; motives, they -will have sufficient numbers to secure a revision of tariff satisfactory to the local industry interests next session.—