YESTERDAY AFTERNOON'S SITTTNG. [BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.] (PER UNITED PRESS ASSOCIATION.) Wellington, 7.40 p.m.

Waikato Times, Volume XV, Issue 1246, 24 June 1880, Page 3

YESTERDAY AFTERNOON'S SITTTNG. [BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.] ( PER UNITED PRESS ASSOCIATION.) Wellington, 7.40 p.m.

The House met at 2.30 . Over a dozen petitions were presented frGm Otago praying for the retention of the bottle licence. M* Maoandrow asked if the whole of the Civil Service Commission evidence will be laid on the table ; also returns showing the nahire and extent of the contracts entered into with contractors, with whom the Middle Island Commissioner of Railways is alleged to be in partneivhip. The Hon. Mr Oliver replied that the evidence had not been received from the Commissioners. Mr Brown moved the adjournment of the House, and in doing" so insisted that it was right the evidence in question should be before the House. Mr Gisborne concurred. The report was a most alarming one, and the country had a right to insist upon knowing whether it was based on reliable data, Mr Macandrew said the reply was not satisfactory. If the report was carrect the South Island Railway Commissioner should be at once dismissed. Mr Oliver said it was presumed that some portion of the evidence would be produced, but it might not be proper to produce the whole. The Railway Commissioner had been instructed to report, and his statement would be laid on the table, Mr Speight said that this was one of the first results of Government by Commission. Parliament was entitled to have every particle of the evidence produced. He knew unreliable evidence had been read, and they had a right to know the value of the evidence taken as whole. Mr Reeves concurred. Mr Murray said he could well understand that it would be unfair in many instances to divulge the nature of evidence given. A committee should be appointed to inquire and report. Mr Turnbull thought the demand made for the evidence was somewhat premature. The Hon. Mr Hall said the whoje subject would have to be gone into when the report was brought on for consideration, and the discussion at present was premature. He apprehended that all the evidence would be forthcoming. The Commission was entitled to-, credit, instead of being reflected upon, as some members had attempted to do. The report con- j tamed many valuable suggestions,, although he would not -lie prepared to say that Government would be prepared to adopt the whole of the suggestions. Mr De Lautour complained that the report had been supplied to certain newspapers throughout the colony before it was before the Parliament. He concurred in the opinion that the evidence should be produced. . Mr Seddon contended that the action ought to be taken as an unjustifiable attempt to interfere with the Government in its first efforts towards mnch needed retrenchment. If the evidence were demanded, the names of witnesses should be supresscd. ?!r --oA.'i't quoted Parliamentary precedents, to show that it was not the practice to produce such evidence. It was a point Jeft to the discretion of Government themselves.Mr Hutfhinson d'd not see that any good end would be aved by producing the evidence, and condemned the action as an attempt to interfere with the Government in making much needed retrenchment. Mr M'Lean concurred. - The Hon. Mr Rolleaton said he had no do.ubt but the evidence, wwM be forth*

coming, and the fullest opportunity given the officers to rehut the oharges made. Sir. George Grey said the fnllest possible information should be given, as the tfeport not. only reflected on the profossional JJttf ;, also, on Jhe professional character* of several. The Hon. Mr Atkinson argued that the debato had proceeded on a false issue. No one knew, whether Government had or had not furnished copies of evidence to officers implicated by the report ; they were bound to assume that the Commission had taken every precaution to get the report bas9d on reliable evidence. Evidently it was persons, and not the Service itself, that members were solicitous about. The motion for adjournment was negatived on the voices. > Dr Wallis gave notice that he woald ask tbe Government to state at what time copies of the report were furnished for transmission to the Auckland Herald, Christohurch Press, and Otago Daily Times on Friday, evening. The debate on the "no-confidence" motion was resumed by Mr Thomson and interrupted by the 5.30 p m. adjournment.