THE LOBBIES. [BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH, OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.]

Waikato Times, Volume XVI, Issue 1397, 16 June 1881, Page 2

THE LOBBIES. [BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH, OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT. ]

Sir J. Vogel. YV'ELLThGTON, La3t Night. i In the Upper House a motion was carried for a return of all moneys paid Sir Julius Vogel for his own purposes since he joined the (Government in 1860. The return is not yet finished, but I have authority for saying that the total amount is between £27,000 and £28,000, or at the rate of £20^0 per annum since 1869. That sum includes all amounts, such as salary, commissions, travelling allowances, etc. The loturn was asked for under the impression that it would disclose the fact that he had fleeced the colony of at least double that sum.

Edgar v. Montrose. I have ascertained from the Court authorities heie that the delay in the case Edgar v. Montrose is due to the bungling of the Waikato Court. It has been adjourned at least half-a-dozen times in consequence of these irregularities. They are ready to take the evidence here now ; but in consequence of the fees not having been paid by defendant, the matter is being allowed to remain in abeyance. The authorities here man el at the whole proceeding, and appear to be altogether at a loss to account for such extraordinary work. Attention, however, is being directed to the affair.

Local Government. To-morrow Mr Murray moves—" That in the opinion of this House local government is conducted under great disadvantages : first, fiom deficiencies in the sysfcem ; second, from the local funds for payment of rates to effect local improvements being absorbed by General Government taxation ; and third, from the counties having been deprived of the 20 per cent, land fund (except in the case of New Plymouth) ; and that the Government bo requested to bring in a bill this session to remedy the above cause of compl.unt and others which may be established.

The Address-in-Reply.— Mr Wakefield on Sir George Grey. The debate on the Address-in-Reply, whioh closed yesterday afternoon, disclosed points of unpoitance as. well as significance. The fiist tirade this session of the member for Thames may be passed , over \\ ithout comment. Neither his style nor His veracity can be said to have 1 improved ; his manner continues as unctious as ever, and his statements and deductions quite as unreasonable and unguarded. After two years piofound silence the member for Geraldine again took a speech in hand, Ins remarks being directed in reply to the adverse criticisms of Sir George Grey. To my mind, no man handles G-rey more effectively than Wakefield ; ho first strokes hun with biting sarcasm, and then proceeds leisurely to demolish his arguments one by one. Hitherto Sir George Grey has been m the habit of firing off hih shots and then letre.itmg from the House, so as to evade the odium of any speech which may happen to follow in reply. On Tuesday evening, however, he letamed his place, evidently spellbound with the ling of Mr Wakefield's voice. Sir George when not actively engaged Jus a way of slouching down under Ins hat. Before Mr Wakefield had done with him on Tuesday he had well nigh droppod down bodily into the uowii of the hat. Opinions are divided as to Mr Wakefield's real motives in the tone of speech he as&umed. The following from this (Wednesday) evening's Wellington Pott describes pretty hilly, I believe, the diversity of feeling existing on the point: — " The opinions formed on the speech of Mr Wakefield last night are various. It is thought by some that he is> bidding for the vacant portfolio in the present Government. Others are inclined to believe lie has been put forward as an advance agent for Mr . Ounoml, and others again are under the impression that he is sitting upon a piovcrbi.illy Parliamentary rail, and only waiting to see how things turn out befoie deciding on which bide to alight. The Government party, however, believe that, notwithstanding his criticism of Government actionb in legard to local government and detention of tlio Maori prisoners, they have no fiimer supporter than Mr Wakefield. It is said that the member for Geraldine •pitched into ' the 'knight of Kavvau,' because he anticipated him in regard to local self government. Certain it is that there were two Richmondb in the field, and then views weio identical in regard to local government. Mr Wakefield's speech, however, is considered to hare been ,1 remarkably good one. Of course the attack made on (Jovemment re local government has brought that subject prominently before the public mind, as more than one speaker yesterday dealt with the subject, and as a matter of course all sort of things are in circulation. I give you the followiugfor what itis worth. It is thought by some Government supporters that Government having omitted all mention of local government in the "throne speech " they cannot now very well come down with a proposal of thenown motion, and it is just possible a committee will be suggested to consider the matter and press it upon the Government, and thus help them out of a dilemma. One good will be the result: Local self-government, as you know, is iv. a most confused btatc, and this debate will no doubt be the means of rousing them to a sense of their duty in the matter.