EVENING SITTING.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2994, 19 September 1878, Page 2

EVENING SITTING.

The House resumed at 7.30 to-night. ■ THB CONSTITUTION OP THE UPPEB HOUSE.

Mr Curtis" proceeded to more, bis series of , resolutions', with. a view to amending the'constitution of-the Legislative Council.". He-:said if the House approved, of these resolutions it Would be the duty .of the. Government to embody their principles; in a bill which should be [introduced in the other Chamber. A misapprehension had. got. abroad, namely, 1 that he introduced the resolutions in consequence of some recent appointments to the' Legislative Council. He denied this. He had contemplated this actionforja long time. It might be argued there was no immediate cause for such a change as proposed, but he repl ed that it was po time to raise and discus's such a question as this, when members were seated by, a conflict between the Houses —an occurrence he ventured. to say which was inevitable." This was the proper time, when the minds of members were in such a state as to enable them to approach the consideration of such calmly. He thought the system of nomination as at presentconducted should now be abandoned, and. placed in the hands of the representatives of the people. .. He argued that, at present, the Legislative-Council was- no.t in that positiou of independence which was desirable, on account of the tendency to appoint members to " the Legislative Council as a reward for political services. He quoted the Attorney-General's article in the Melbourne Argus, in which that gentlemen says that the Council was a -creature of the Ministry of the day, and he therefore claimed the support of that hon. gentleman for his proposals. He quoted the constitutions of other colonies to show that a property qualification for a seat in the-Council was not a.general practice, and that it was time this colony abandoned the property qualification in place of intelligence and experience.' The hon. gentlemen explained at length his proposal regarding the prevention of dead" locks by a majority of two-thirds of both Houses, as a united body in deliberation, and also other provisions. . Dr Hodgkinson, who seconded pro forma, asked why should they have, a second House at all, unless it was like the Senate of the United States, which wa«| a model worthy of imitation.' The hon: gentleman went at great length into the question. Had the Legislative Council j

of this Colony been worth anything, they would not hare been in such debt, and their constitution would not have been ewopt. away, and the sooner the Constitution of the Council was revised and maae sounder the better.

The-Hon. E. Stout said before such a radical change there ought to be some dissatisfaction with the constitution, and the mover admitted there was none. To proceed with such a question now would really invite a collision with the other House. So long as they had a bicameral system it ought to be constituted as at present. He entirely opposed an elective Chamber, -which would only prove a curse to the colony. Being a private-members' night he would not take up the time of the House, and would move the previous question. • .

. Dr Wallis, while agreeing that. <he Legislative Council required reform,:c6nsidered the resolution went a very short way towards that. \lf ""there had not hitherto been any collision between the Houses it was more the result of, accident than anything else. He agreed with the necessity of two Houses, but said the seats should only be fora limited time. He considered the present mcd&of appointment was much the same, thoujfn rather better than being appointed by ballot of the House. There was already too much work before the House, so he hoped the motion would be withdrawn.

Mr Pyke thought' nothing could be more detrimental to the interests of the colony than to have a second elected House to deal with money bills on an equality with the Lower House, the only issue of which must be a deadlock.'. .He would vote for'the previous questions Mr Saunders concurred in the idea that the' best time to approach the consideration of such a question was when there was no immediate cause for the change, and while admitting the necessity fora change in the Constitution he disagreed with the..mode proposed. He thought ; thecolony could not follow a,better example, in.- regard •to Legislative Councils than that of South Australia. ' By leaving the election of members of the Council to the House of Representatives, they would be bringing - too muoh party spirit into play. '.'. '"' '' " Sir E. Douglas pointed' oat the neglect of the Government in not .making their appointments according to, territory, the consequence of which was that questions occasionally arose concerning localities, and respecting which .no one in the .Council knew anything. -$, „ ,• „..;•.. ■-, The motion was rejected, on the Voices.