HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 135, 8 September 1870, Page 6

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

THE GOLDFIELDS PETITIONS. (From "Hansard.")

In the House of Representatives, on Tuesday, 23rd ult., Mr. Main brought up the interim report of the Goldfields Committee, and moved that it be printed. He wished to call the attention of the House to the fact that the Goldfields Committee were divided in opinion as to the precise nature of the duty delegated t6 them. By the order of reference, .the Committee were to consider Bills and petitions affecting goldfields, and report upon the provisions or principles which all such Bills or petitions might contain. Among the petitions submitted to the Committee was one presented from the residents of Mount Benger. Many of the Committee considered that this petition affected the administration of the waste lands of the Crown, and, as such, ought to have been considered by the Waste Lands Committee ; but the "Waste Lands Committee appeared to think that, inasmuch as the petition had emanated from settlers on a' goldfield, the Goldfields Committee was the proper tribunal to consider that and other cognate petitions. The Goldfields Committee had no desire to shirk their duties in respect of such petitions. They thought that, probably, the petitioners, had a grievance, and they were anxious that it should be remedied; but they were desirous to know the opinion of the House as to the duties which they had to perform. The whole difficulty was occasioned by the Goldfields Act of 1866, which contained agricultural leasing regulations, whereby miners and other settlers on goldfields were enabled to take up land for settlement. These leases were granted, not for mining purposes, but for cultivation. There were three or four other similar petitions, praying that the rentals for agricultural leases should go towards the payment of the purchase money of the land, and the Committee considered that such subjects more properly belonged to the Waste Lands Committee.

The Speaker said that when any committee was in doubt as to the exact duties which had been remitted to it, and desired instructions from the House, he should imagine the House would, without delay, instruct the Committee. The practical course to adopt, under the circumstances, would be for the members of the Committee, who knew best where the instructions were defective, and the direction in which they required further instruction, to draw out something of the nature of the instructions they required to enable them to discharge their duty satisfactorily, and submit it to the House for its approval, after which the Committee might have a more complete order of reference from the House.

Mr. Main, with the leave of the House, withdrew the motion for printing the report, and moved, That it be an instruction to the Goldfields Committee that all petitions relative to agricultural leases on goldfields are to be referred to che Goldfields Committee.

Mr. Yogel said that those who had anything to do with carrying out the Goldfields Act, and the Waste Lands Act of Otago, could not fail to be aware of the great difficulty existing with respect to agricultui'al land on goldfields, in determining where it began and where it ended. In the proposed consolidation of the goldfields measures, it might be desirable to take out the clauses of the Goldfields Act relating to agricultural land and embody them in the Waste Lands Act, or they might be put into a separate Act. With regard to the question raised, there was only one course to be adopted. In common courtesy to those two Committees, where there was any doubt as to the one to which a petition should be referred, let it be remitted first to one and then to the other, and let each deal with those portions which seemed to be within the scope of its duty, and report to the House upon them. While the provisions of the two Acts were so mixed up as at present, that would be the only course to adopt in regard to a large number of petitions which really belonged as much to the one Committee as to the other.

Mr. Cracroft Wilson, C.8., was opposed to petitions which involved an alteration in the principles and regulations governing the waste lands of the Crown being referred to the Goldfields Committee. If that were the object of the motion he should vote against it, as he considered that such petitions ought to go before the Waste Lands Committee.

Mr. Kynnersley said that, as a member of the Goldfields Committee, he objected to the Committee dealing with the petition from the residents of Mount Benger, on the ground that it was a matter solely affecting the leasing of the waste lands of the Crown, and had nothing to do with miners or mining matters or the administration of the Goldfields Act. The petition involved a very important principle, as to whether the rent should be taken as part payment of the land. It also raised the question of free selection and other land systems. It was never intended that those important questions, regarding the dealing with the waste lands of the Crown, should be considered by the Goldfields Committee.

Mr. Driver could confirm what had been stated by the last speaker. Among other things, the petition alluded to

prayed that "The Otago Hundreds Regulations Act, 1869," should be placed under the operation of the Goldfields Act. He did not think it was competent for the Goldfields Committee to deal with the petition.

Mr. Main, in reply, said he had simply moved the motion to obtain an expression of opinion from the House. If the House negatived the motion, the Goldfields Committee would not take such petitions into consideration, but if the House affirmed the motion, the Committee would gladly consider any petitions affecting the settlement of the goldfields. Motion negatived.