MONDAY.

Waikato Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1867, 24 June 1884, Page 2

MONDAY.

The House resumed at 2.30. Sir Geo. Grey resumed the adjourned debate on the question of the gumfield leases. He had been charged by Government with having, while acting as Superintendent of Auckland, been a party to the granting of a lease over a large area of gumfields country. He had to-da,y received from Auckland the papers which showed that he had not, as alleged, been a party to the transaction. Tim whole negotiation took place between the Commissioner of, Crown Lauds and the Governor-in-Council. These documents showed that he. had been xinjubtifiably blamed by Ministers. He had that d.iy received a telegram signed by sixteen diggers asking him to do all in his power to prevent the issue of lai ge leases in these fields. Ho complained of the conduct of the Minister of Public Works in threatening that in consequence of the action taken in this and other matters against the Government that he would have his levenge by unseating at least three members who had, voted with him. As a mafter of fact, Mr Mitchelson took his seat upon the Land Board, the very body who had to judge as to th|g illegality of this transaction. On his par^ such conduct was most reprehensible. It was outrageous that over and over again persons of this sort who had wrongfully acquired wealth had found their way on to thebe boards Mr Dargaville also complained of unfair dealing in the administration of these guinficlds on the part of the "Waste Lands Board of Auckland. ] Mr Rolleston said that when these large leaser weie provide J for, the Whole administration of the waste lands of Auckland rested on the Superintendent and thjl Waste Lands Commissioner. It did nofl proceed from the central government, but* waspmely the lesult of onsort between the Supoiintendent and the Commissianer. ' In thetie circumstances it was absurd to say this was not the action of the Superintendent. The motion for the production of papers in connection with the gumfields, was agreed to. The House then went into Committee of Supply. The resolution for £43,000 out of the consolidated revenue for honorarium) was put. Mr Holmes moved that the amount b« reduced to £21,000. He argued that it would br* xvnfair to rate the full amount of the honorarium, seeing that the session had not exceeded eleven sitting days. The average duration of a session was three months, and the proposed reduction' was only fair under the chcu instances. Mr Peacock seconded and supported the amendment. He argued that the honoraihim should not be looked upon as pay foi^ faervice-i, but bimply as a refund for necciß sary outlay. They had not expended onefouith of the normal period of an ordinary session. The amendment was negatived on the voices. Mr Hurst moved that the amount be reduced so as to make the honorarium £100. Mr Seddon said that this proposal for reduction came from wealthy n.en. He had ne\ er known these men to leave the surplus amount in the hands of the Treasurer, or ever give it to charitable institutions. It was a contract made with members that they should be paid £210 per .session, and the full amount should be paid. He cautioned the supporters of the reduction that they would not catch five votes mote by these sham proposals of theirs. Col. Trimble spoke in support of the amendment. He was in favour of payment of members, but under the circumstances he thought £100 sufficient. The House adjourned at 5 30. J The House resumed at 7.30 p.m. H In Supply, Mr Fish resumed the debatj on the reduction of the honorarium, whicM he opposed. The amount fixed was reall^ settled by law. Those who did not « ant 1 the full .'itnnunt nml not take it. ! Mr Mo-s objwd t" the rcdiiof-iou. 'IV i lio'ioiaviuin w.i- iii j ce'-..trv topiovcut luoun- | poly ol political pow ci by rich members of the House. I Major Atkinson admitted that members rather lost than gained by sitting m Parliament. The amount of the honorarium should cover all expenses. He thought £150 a sufficient sum to do this. They should not be paid for their services. The House had never affirmed th<u principle of paying members. As the sessiofl was only three Ayeeks instead of thre? months, the reduction should be accepted. Sir Geoige Grey opposed any reduction. He thought it would be a breach of faith not to pay the full amount. Major Hairis would support the reduction if Ministers, also reduced their salary. Mr Stevens .supported the reduction, and thought £150 per ses&ion sufficient to pay all expenses. . They .should not be provided with public money to push their elections. Mr Swanson thought that if the honora2him weie paid at all, it should be raised by a .special tax. The House divided, when the amendment for reduction was negatived by 25 to 35. J The following is the division list :—

Ayes — 25. Atkinson Locke Beetham Mitchelson Bryce Newman Buchanan, W. C. Peacock Cadman Pearson i > Wck Postlethwaite Fulton Rolleston Hobbs Shepherd Holmes SteveuS Huvbthouse Swanson Johnson, C. J. White, W. Levestam, Wilson

- Noes— 3s. < I Bathsrate Larnach. , I Bracken Macandrew -, I Brtnyn, J. & Mackenzie, F. I Daniel McKenzie, Jl > m DeLawtour . . Montgpmery V Dodson • -' Munro" ' A Feldwick O'Calkgban f\ Fish ' Petrie \ I Fifczjye^'ald Pyke , L George Seddon' " , » L (ireen, J. • Shaw . I " ' Grey Sheehan , ' I Harris '< Steward"' ' '- J I ' • Hutchinson i ' Tawhai *" " ( * 1 J.0y09; - i "'.'■ ThomsoriltH. :, ", , Kelly,,, --. rK ■< Thomaoo, J, W. I