PARLIAMENTARY

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 6, Issue 1825, 28 October 1884, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY

[By Telegraph.]

In the Legislative Assembly yesterday afternoon, tho Trustees Executors Agency Company Act Amendment Bill was read a third time and passed, The Council went into committee on the East and West Coast Railway Bill in clause 4 authority to construct railways. Mr Ricimond moved the words " by Arthur Pass route" be struck out which was agreed to, and words "by such route as the Governor in Council shall determine," substituted, In clause 5 the Governor may contract to take over and work railways in consideration of receiving on per centage proceeds, Mr Waterhouse moved that the clause be expunged. A division was called for that tho clause stand part of Bill, Ayes 10: Noes 23. The clause was struck out.

In clause 6, that the Governor and Company may have running powers oyer each others lines, the words "provided no such agreement be for a period of more than one year" were inserted on the motion of Mr Waterhouse.

In the House yesterday afternoon the City Electorates Bill was read a first time.

The Premier moved that Government business take precedence on Thursdays for the remainder of the session, which was agreed to. Sir G. Grey moved the adjournment of the House. He purposed bringing under notice a statement made by the Premier on Friday night. He considered the remarks of the Premier on that occasion were quite uncalled for and as quite subversive of freedom of debate. He desired to obtain some explanation from the Premier.

Mr Stout said there was undoubtedly a preponderance of North Island members in the Legislative Council, and consequently it was evidently their intention to pass only measures which benefitted that Island. If the Government policy was to be interfered with in another place they would either have to resign or take some steps for checking the action of the Legislative Council. He thought it peculiar that no member of the late Government had replied to the statement, He certainly failed to see what explanation was required.

Mr Bryce thought if the Government had such a strong objection to the Council rejecting Bills sent up they should state how they intended to prevent the Council exercising its undoubted right. If the Government intended to bring the Council to its senses by punishing the House it would be most unfortunate for the House. The hon. member had undoubtedly great power, but he ought not to curtail the freedom debate.

Mr Levestam considered the Council only acted within prerogative in rejecting the Bills, Sir Julius Yogel considered the statement of the Premier clear, and foiled to understand how it had been misunderstood. The Public Works Statement brought down certain proposals for the construction of certain railways and the Government finding the policy likely to be altered had a perfect right to make the statement that was made so that the Council should understand that a Government policy was not a piecemeal one, but desired to bring the colonising of the country to state which was left some years ago, and for that reason th e Government desired to show that they were alive to the requirements ofth 0 )

whole colony and not to any particular portion, and seeing how startling was tho danger of the colony of drifting into localism, the statement read by tho Government had been framed. As much as the Government desired a short session, their duty to the country demanded the statement, The Government were determined that no one part of the colony should suffer to the advancement of the oilier, This was the explanation he had given, Mr Barron thought explanations unsatisfactory and considered the council acted within their right in opposing the Dsstrict .Railway Bill. Mr GRiGGconsideredthe action of the Government showed irritation on their part quite unjustifiable for the Government to assert that Council had rejected Government Policy Bills this session for Railway Bill referred to was the only Policy Bill which the Council had thrown out,

Mr Brown thought the Government had acted justifiably. Mr Wakefield combatted the assertiou of the Premier that colonising has been dead for some years, He was quite opposed to spending money all over the colony because it was decided to construct reproductive works in certain districts, He opposed the assertion that the depression existed or would exist if money was spent in one district and not in another. He failed to see that the council had been precipitate in rejecting tho Bill, There had boen hasty legislation in the House, and had Government seen fit to amend the Bill before it went to the other House the Bill might have passed the Council. The statement of the Premier certainly did appear as if the Government intended to hold out a threat of dissolution if they did not agree with the whole of their proposals.

Mr Turnbull said the Govarnment found the industries of the country in a paralysed condition, and felt assured if the proposals of the Government were not agreed to by the House things would be very much worse. He regretted that the Council had rejected the very keystone of the Government policy. He would support the Government, There was no other course to pursue than to again appeal to the country if this Bill was thrown out. Mr Rolleston thought the older members of the House should enter a strong protest against the statement of the Premier. The House had been told that the Bill was to encourage colonising the country, but he would assert that it was to encourage private companies. It was absurd for the Government to say they would go to country on the District Railway Bill. The Premier and Treasurer knew better than to ask for a dissolution. He considered the country owed its thanks to the Council for their action. Mr Seddon supported the action of the Government.

Mr Shrimski as one who opposed the Bill thought the House should give the Government fair play. Mr Sutter was surprised at the action of the Opposition, considering they had endeavored to smuggle the same Bill through the House in a former session,

Mr Thompson- said the obscurity of the statement was intensified by the speeches of the Premier and Treasurer. Sir G. Grey regretted the words of tho Premier, they were pure threats, not only to the House but to the Council. The people of the country were to have a new tax imposed upon them by persons interested in the Bill without even having an opportunity of saying a word on the subject. Let the matter be put before the country and not allow it to be put in the sudden manner it had, He for this reason, thought it their duty to bring forward a motion for adjournment of the House as he considered that threat a most unwarrantable one and calculated to interfere with the rights and privileges of the House. More especially as the Premier and Treasurer were interested in the Bills referred to,

The Premier desired to explain he was so far interested in one of the Companies as being solicitor to it, and therefore declined to vote.

Sir G. Grey considered the purchase of these railways now would be a very injudicious act, especially as the Bill was brought down solely for the purpose of relieving wealthy persons who constructed these railways in order to improve their property, He had taken the present action at the instance of several leading members of the House who were convinced that the Premier had taken an unwise course in making his statement.

The motion of adjournment was lost, The Bankruptcy Amendment Bill was read a third time, and the Police Offences Bill was reported on. On consideration of clause 13, Mr Seddon moved that the Bill be recommitted with a view to amendment of this clause which deals with Sunday trading, but was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment. The House resumed at 7.30. In the Police Offences Bill on the question that the amendments be agreed to, the ayes were 29 and the noes IG. The Bill was read a third time and passed. The Road Boards Amendment Bill was read a second time. The House went into Conmittee on the West Coast Settlement Reserves Amendment Bill in Clause 2. New clauses, giving extended power of confirming leases for new leases added to the Bill was reported with amendments.

The House went into Committee on the Land Act Amendment Bill. Clmise 5, dealing with repeal sections 75 to 95 Land Act 1877, was, after discussion, retained in the Biil.by 59 to 16. In clause 5, which repeals seotion 9 of Ladii Act 1879, was, after a long disotission, retained by 30 to 21. Clause 7, after a long debate, was agreed to on the voices, Clause 8 was put and agreed to.

On clause 14 being put Mr J. McKenzie moved that progress be reported, which was lost on division, ayes 17: noes 23. After further' discussion the clause was . agreed to, Clauses 15 ,to 20 were also agreed, to, after which progress ,was reported, and the House went into Committee on the Life Assurance Bill, when progress was reported. The House rose at 3 a.m.