PARLIAMENTARY.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume I, Issue 33, 19 August 1867, Page 3

PARLIAMENTARY.

(from our special correspondent.) Wednesday, August 7, The interest felt by the public in the progress of the debate on the Local Government Bill was nearly equal to what it was last night. In fact as far as the ladies were concerned, the interest manifested was greater, their gallery was crowded as soon as the house opened at 5 p.m., and they kept their places until the adjournment of the House at 12.30—a seat of patient endurance that very few of the gentlemen who attended in the Stranger’s Gallery were equal to. A SCENE IN THE HOUSE. The Hon. Speaker of the House had to interpose his authority to stop the wrathful and unparliamentary language of an Hon. Member to-night, I do not know if the matter deserves any particular notice if it had not been for the fact that the opposition is at present without any acknowledged leader. Mr Dillon Bell who had a question to ask and returns to move for which the government opposed, the Hon. the Commissioner of Customs, Mr. Richmond, was so very unfortunate in his speech as to say that Mr. D. Bell was only moving for those returns “ with a view of emharassing the Government.” For Mr. Richmond to say that the consistent and Hon. Member Mr. D. Bell would do any act whatever with a view of emharassing the Government was a monstrous imputation of a base motive and an imputation that he wood not gently submit to. When therefore Mr. D. Bell began his speech in reply, he commenced in a low tone quite inaudible in the Gallery. When however he mentioned the base motive imputed to him by Mr Richmond he did S3 in a voice that startled the whole house, with its loud, its angry, its intensely passionate tone, nay more it had an extraordinary effect upon the Hon Gentleman himself—exciting him more and more, much in the same way that the war dance excites a savag 3 to fury ; or opposition, unchecked and uncontrolled voice of a scolding fish-woman. Sir. D. Bell, used such language to Mr Richmond that the Hon. Gentleman was induced to ask the Hon the Speaker to interpose his authority, which was done, and the Hon. the Speaker having cast oil on the troubled temper of Mr 1). Bell, the House resumed its usual quiet order. Mr D. Bell however announced at a later hour in the evening that he would for the future be opposed to the Government, an anouncement which amused members on the Government Bench who appeared to think that he had taken no new step in that direction.

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL. Mr Vogel resumed the debate on the Local Government Bill, and if the amount of amusement afforded to the House be the measure of its usefulness it was also the most excellent [i Mr Vogel strongly opposed the measure, because it gave to the General Government the power to proclaim and otherwise call into existence Local Road Districts which ought to he left entirely optional to Superintendents and Provincial Councils.

Mr Heaphy, in opposing, the Bill said that if it passed it would he the cause of leadingcountry people to discuss politics, when they ought to|be employed in growing potatoes. Let your correspondent draw your attention to the utter contempt in which some country representatives hold their constituents because they happen to be only, hard working industrious settlers spending their time in growingpotatoes and other necessary labor, therefore there can be no men among them capable of understanding the Bill, and even if they could understand the measure it would he a dangerous thing to allow country people to have any Local Government, Hon. Snobs of the Heaphy class undestand all about where a road is wanted much better than an honest farmer that gets his drays, his horses, and his bullocks hogged every winter. No, no, the farmer must attend to potatoe culture and leave these sort of things to the Heaphys, the Dillon|Bells,land;the B unny’sjof the house These gentlemen know how avericious and how stupid country people really are at least such is the character that some country representatives have given to their constituents. The Wellington press will take no notice of it and Hon Members have the privilege of amending their own speeches before appearing in the columns of the New Zealand Hansard therefore they will take care of themselves in that quarter, this consideration induces your correspondent to give more prominence to this matter than he would otherwise have done.

Mr. Stevens supported and Mr. Dillon Bell in very forcible language opposed the Bill because it would place it in the power of unprincipled and avaricious paupers to prey upon their neighbors. Let country people mark well that expression and also let them look but look in vain for a report of it in the city newspapers. Mr. Dillon Bell also opposed it because it would not give votes to men of wealth in proportion to the amount of their rateable property. lie would rather he taxed by the Provincial Council because as in that body he would he able to protect his own interest. If this Bill become law he would buy no more land to be placed in the taxing power of those Road Boards, and he believed gentlemen would also be prevented by the Bill from investing their capital in the purchase of land. At half past twelve the House adjourned on the motion of Mr. Richmond.

Thursday, August 9, 1867. Mr Reynolds moved that the “ Regulations of Elections Amendment Act, 1867 ” be read a second time. This Bill proposed that voting should be by ballot. Mr Travers strongly supported the Bill, hut

he would go much further” than the Bill, he would stop all canvassing. . Thr pretentious and egotistical gentleman carries, much weight with the House,, and he frequently lectures hon. members, in fact he never permits himself to lose an opportunity of giving a lecture which is always received with the submission' of a whipped school-boy. Mr Hall argued that the vote of an elector was neither a right nor a privilege, but a trust imposed upon him to be exercised for others. as well as for himself. He distinctly said that the persons for whom those trusts were exercised bad a right, to know how they were exercised, and if vote by ballot were granted to electors, he would move, that members of Provincial Councils and of the General Assembly be also protected by the ballot. Mr Main replied to Mr Hall, in fact Mr Main and Mr Hall always do reply to each other. These hon. gentlemen always pay the utmost attention to one another’s speeches, and as soon as one sits down, the other rises. Therefore Mr Hall’s doctrine of providing the protection of the ballot|to members could not' fail to bring Mr Main to his feet with his usual alacrity. Mr Main said that voting by ballot had been tried in the French Legislature and was found not to answer. He also ■ said that voters had a right to know how their representative voted, but no one had any right to know how the voter himself voted because he represented no one. , .

On the following day the bill was lost by 22 to 20 without a debate. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL. The interest felt by the public out of doors was manifested as much to-night as on the two previous nights, and the ladies as usual kept their places after more than three-fourths of the gentlemen had left the stranger’s gallery. The ladies had all taken their seats before 7 p. m., and. retained them until 2 a.m.

Mr J. C. Richmond resumed the debate. His tone was calmer and more serious than any previous speaker, with perhaps the exception of Mr Fitzhcrbert. Sir Richmond took a more elevated and more general view of the question than any other speaker either before or after him, hut as it is impossible to render a general view of questions so interesting as only superficial and particular views are to a large audience, his speech made a less impression on the House than the mere declamation of some others had done. lam sorry that I cannot venture to occupy your space with the phiiisophic problems that lie said are occupying the minds of men in all parts of the world, but yon can reprint it from Hansard at some future time, for it is a thing that will keep, and can be applied to any other question that may be brought before the House oil any future occaaion. He defended country districts from the stigma cast upon them by Mr Vogel, who charged such institutions of being likely to promote jobbery. He also defended country people from the slanderous attack made on them by Mr Dillon Bell. After Mr Moorhouse, Mr Ludlam, Mr Borlase and other speakers had addressed the House and Mr Stafford had eloquently replied, a division took place at 2 a.m., with the following result: —Ayes, 27, Noes, 36. Mr Bunny and Mr Ludlam voted with the ayes, and Messrs Borlase, Brandon, Harrison, Taylor and Watt with the noes, and Mr Fitzherbert paired on the occasion with Dr Peatherston, and so the Bill was thrmvn out. Tuesday, August 13.

The Government having made the passing of the Gold Fields Act Amendment Bill a ministerial question, it deserves some notice on that account. The purpose of the measure is to protect Gold Field officials from the effect of the squabble betweei i the rival governing powers —General and Provincial. Mr Vogel opposed it at great length as an interference with provincial vested rights to govern the Provinces, but he was not prepared to move an amendment, although he would give his voice against the second reading. Mr 1). Bell opposed and Mr -Richmond supported the measure. Mr McAndrcw threatened the colony with a revolution of the people of Otago if the Bill passed. Some other members having spoken, the motion was put and carried.

CORPORATION BILI. Mr Hall moved the second reading of this Bill which was agreed to without any strong opposition. The reception this bill met with in the House was,so entirely different from what the Local Government Bill met with that your correspondent was led to reflect upon what could have caused the difference. Are the towns better represented in the House, than the outlying districts, as the great territorial lords of the colony as they are called opposed the former measure. Is it a fact that the country districts are mostly represented by them ? It appears that it was that class of representatives in combination with the Provincial officials that defeated that measure. The Medical Practitioner’s Bill was debated at great length in Committee, The Provincial party wanted to give the Superintendents the power to appoint the Boards. Sir D. Monro the Speaker of the House, took the most prominent part in suggesting amendments in the Bill. Wednesday, August 14. Mr Travers moved a resolution to transfer Legislative and Executive control over the following departments of the. government in the colony viz., police, gaols, hospitals, lunatic asylums, and harbors, to the general government, with power to delegate the administration of those departments to the Superintendents and Executive Councils of the various provinces. This resolution was strongly opposed by Messrs Moorehouse and Vogel, and half-supported by Mr Hall. The debate was adjourned until the following day, when in consequence of the strong opposition offered, it is expected to be withdrawn. MAORI REPRESENTATION BILL. Mr McLean moved the second reading of this Bill, and explained that it provides for dividing New Zealand into four electoral districts, each district to return one representative. The North Island to have three districts and the Middle and South Island to be one district. The motion, after some discussion was put and carried. Perhaps no other question that was ever brought before the House received such a general and warm support, no one with the exception of Mr Moofhouse raised any objection to the measure and he ultimately agreed to it. What will the Aboriginal Protection I Society say to that ? .