GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXIX, Issue 3132, 11 August 1892, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 'J'( TKSII \V. Tho 11<m*r in t it. KV.i-i'a-l t Rep!yi til* t ■ Mr Mi:(f-nre, Mr li -a-t 1,-. «•;, . will o- to r r t.> t.liH I'-Il'lu: \ • C-. u.lll ■ t, ... i d.io, .It -.I'. I I-. »i 1,1.1 M 1... ;5...v i'l V... , .- I li t -mur l-. tin.' .ir ;i a (..in-1 l.'i•• >'.".i, ami ■ if the h mi. t; ■'11 iv,i- -a'iilii-l w t. . : that reply In' -hoiid move t<i t!i >fc <-fF -c;t. Mr McUeire ni"Mid toe n<t <if the House, and said tin: I'leuiier's reply was a very uii-ai.i.-f.'ic'.iiy • nm. i-I ■ >■ u^tested thai a eomuiis-iou should be appointed t.i go int> tlio ivlin!" question. Mr Billanco said the G .verument liad never admitted it, n .r w..uld they admit it now, that t!ni b nidli >1 iers ha J any claim on Hid colony. Aftjr a long discussion tli* subject dropped. Tim interrupted debate on the motion for the rescwion of tho vote of censure passed on Mr Bryce was resumed. Mr W, P. Reeve? moved as an amendment., " That in view of the eminent services rendered to tho colony hy the undermentioned gentlemen, now no longer members of the House, it is not expedient to retain a permanent record ot votes of regret or censure passed at various times of debate or for disobedience to the chair, and this House therefore directs that in tho entries in the journals such votes relating to Mr H. 15. Curtis, Mr Vincent Pyke, Hon. J. IX Ormond, Hon. W. Gisborne, Sir Julius Vogel, and Hon. John Bryce be expunged." The debate was interrupted by the halfpast five adjournment. The House resumed at half-past seven p.m. Tho debate with reference to the removal of the vote of censure on Mr Bryce was continued, Mr Reeves' amendment being eventually agreed to on the voices. The Hon. J. McKcnzie moved the second reading of tho Land Bill. In the course nf his remarks he said he had uvre than once stated publicly that lie would ho the last man to interfere with the Crown grant when once issued, but he contended lie had a right to, propose the terms on which the land should be tiken up in future. Tho Bill allowed the cash system of purchase, occupation with right of put ullage between twelve and twenty years, and perpetual lease, and he intendud moving in committee that the lease should be perpetual instead of fifty years only. Hi hoped the House would sea that so far as possible no more land should bo secured for speculative purposes, but for the genuine settlement of the colony. Mr Rolleston congratulated Mr McKenzie in some respects, especially as he had considerably modified some of the provisions of the Bill. After Mr Iliitehison and Mr Seddon had addressed the House. Mr Bruce moved the following amendment :—"That, while in the opinion of this House the Land Bill contains some useful amendments in the existing law, and should at an early date be read a second time, tins House considers that the extent to which the Bill aims at restricting freehold tenure is unsatisfactory, and calculated to be injurious to the best interests of settlement. Mr Ballanco asked whether Mr Rolleston approved of the amendment, and whether it had his sanction. Mr Rolleston said he concurred in the amendment entirely. Mr Ball nice sa,id in that ca-.o he accepted the amendment in the spirit in which it was given, and as a motion tr i versing the policy nf the Government, they could not poasiuly accept a motion of the kind in »uy other spirit The debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr Richardson, and the House rose at 1 a.m. WEDNESDAY. The H-iiise ui"t at 2.30 p.m. Mr Riuh-irrlsi.il resumed the debits on theLind Bill. He said a fresh torn hid been given to tlie debate by the Premier deciding to accept. Mr Bruce'* amendment as a no-conlidenc! motion. The Premier might well, in his opinion, have accepted that amendment in a non-party spirit, n-< the Minister for Lands hail stated the (J.ivernment were n-it averse to freehold tenure. The Minister cor Public Works had also emphasised that, and yet the. Premier treated the amendment as one of no-confidence. If the leader of the Opposition had moved the amendment, the Premier might well be justified in treating it in a party spirit, but as it was moved by an Opposition niernber who was known to be not a-) eitrenie party men, it had altogether a different aspect. Ha did not consider the amendment as one of no-confi-dence in the Government. but he thought it very unwise to alter the laiv as relating to freehold, for the people would have freehold. Mr Lmvry slid, aft:r the speech of the Minister for Lands, lie would Btiick to tho Bill as brought down. Captain Russell strongly condemned the proposal made by Mr Mclienzie last night to grant perpetual Icaso in perpetuity at 4 per cent.. It was such a monstrous proposition thai the Bill should not be allowed to proceed further till this proposal was telegraphed frnm one end of the colony to the other, so that the people might know what was contemplated by the Government. What he asked was tho cause of Mr McKenzie's change of front in regard t-> freehold tenure. Was it simply that the Government treated Mr Bruca's amendment as one of no confidence, and they were afraid to allow their supporters to express an honest opinion on tho freehold question, and wanted to force them into the Government lobby against their own conviction. Mr T. Thompson (Auckland) would oppose the amendment. Mr Buckland said the Government wanted to steal the freehold, and when they could not do that they wished the conntry to think they allowed the freehold to remain. Mr Fish said his chief reason for rising to speak was to offer his most determined opposition to Mr McKenzies proposal to grant perpetual lease for ever at 4 per cent. If the members of tho House who called themselves Liberals voted for such a proposal, he did not know what liberalism was. Mr Taylor supported the Bill. Tho debate was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr Suobie Mackenzie contended that tho Government had done their own supporters a great wrong in treating Mr Bruce's amendment as one of no-confidence. Having made the question a party one, the Government thus forced some of their sup-pmti.'-s to vote with them against the amendment when they were really strongly in favour of it and these members would have to answer to their c mstituents for their action. He denied that the amendment was intended to be a motion of noconfidence in the Government. Messrs Mcintosh, Hutchinson, McGuire, Buchanan and Blake also spoke. Mr Rollestou thought the Government had done the country and their policy a great wrong in treating Mr Bruce's amendment as a vote of no-confidence. He of course would support the amendment and ho hoped when the division bell j rang tho members would vote for it free from party ties.