THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. SATURDAY, AUGUST 10, 1878.

Thames Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2960, 10 August 1878, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. SATURDAY, AUGUST 10, 1878.

In tho House of Representatives yesterday afternoon Mr Woolcock gave notice to move that the Government introduce a bill dealing with payment of members. —Sir George Grey gave notice to move that on Tuesday next the House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole to consider the Pensions Bill.— Questions were asked re accidents on the Nelson South West Goldfield and appointment of a Mining Inspector for the district; whether Government intended to restrict Chinese immigration.—The Hon. J. T. Fisher promised that a parcel post would be established in a few days". —Some other questions of a local character were disposed of, and the House went into Committee on tho Fraudulent Debtors Bill. —The Civil Service Act Amendment Bill was committed, and two other Bills were read a second time. '

Commenting on Mr Seymour George's Bill for abolishing the Gold Duty and reducing the Miner's Eight fee, the special correspondent of the Herald at Wellington displays an unpardonable ignorance regarding the position of the local bodies and the Government, and the gold duty as local revenue. The correspondent says:—

There are objections likely to be started to Mr George's proposition for reducing the fee on miners' rights. Local bodies, he said, should have the power of such reduction, as they receive the benefits. It was replied to by Mr Sheehan, that all miners' rights fees were the same all over the colony, and it would be a mistake to make alterations. There is another argument, that every shilling of reduction a local body might make, it would lose another in the shape of subsidy. The same argument is applicable to the proposal contained in Mr George's bill, read a first time to-day, for the abolition of the duty on gold. That, too, goes to local bodies, and helps to swell the amount on which a subsidy is granted from Government funds for local purposes. It is not likely the bill will pass, but as a goldfields member, Mr George is shewing his desire to benefit his mining constituents. It is not necessary to refer to the miners' rights fees, as all money.received from that source in this district goes to the Native owners of the land; but, even where the miners' rights fees are paid over to local bodies, the sums so received are not subsidised ; neither is the gold duty. During the session of Parliament that Abolition was passed and the Financial Arrangements Bill was introduced, it was proposed to place the gold duty and other golddelds revenue on a par with local rates, and subsidise to the extent of pound for pound. This was never done, however, and it isdiftlcult to account for the Herald's special falling into such an error. From the remarks attributed to Mr Sheehan we imagine the Government intend throwing the responsibility of abolishing the duty on to the shoulders of goldfields communities. [A telegram received from a correspondent proves this to be correct.] .-

A cobeespokdbnt writing fiom Wellington says : — " The Thames Borough will be a considerable gainer if the gold duty is abolished, and the rating of mining property is substituted for it. I have seen a statement which shows that the Borough's share of the gold duty is about £1500 a year, and that according to the last valuation the rates from miniug property which now escapes taxation would amount to £1100. On this latter sum there would be payable a subsidy of pound for pound, making the sum receivable by the Borough from rates on mining property £2200, against £1500 now accruing from gold duty. lam under the impression that the results would bo proportionately favorable to the County—in fact to all local bodies now deriving revenue from goldfields."