SESSIONAL NOTES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9617, 15 September 1894, Page 5

SESSIONAL NOTES.

JBT TELEGRAPH.—!SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.] Wellington, Friday. That portion of the Colonial Treasurer's speech to-night which dealt) with the working expenses of the cheap money scheme was exceptionally interesting. After arguing that no new department need be set up inasmuch as the clerical staff on one of the existing departments would be used, he went on to refer to the cost of the ten valuers and 10 solicitors, saying thab he would purposely keep the figures up to the highest reasonable limit. He would set the valuers down at £600 a year each (cries of of ** Oh") which would total £6000. The salaries of the solicitors would range from £1000 a year in the larger centres to £400 in the smaller, giving an aggregate of £7000. He reminded the House that the colony was already paying more than this sum to solicitors, and went on to show that it would be far more than made up in the shape of fees. Supposing he said the £1,500,000 bo be lent in sums averaging £1000 each, carrying a fee of one guinea, £15,750 would be received by the Department (Sir Robert Stoub : "I make it £1500.") Mr. Ward persisted that he was quite right, and that there would be an excess in fees of £8750 over the £7000 paid to the solicitors. Mr. Pirani insisted that the fees would only bring in £1500, and Sir Robert Stout agreed, bub Mr. Ward, amid considerable laughter, brushed this little objection aside with the remark, "Work it out." At the conclusion of his address, however, the Treasurer reverted to this matter, saying, "On looking at my figures I find ib is £1500 instead of £15,000. This confession evoked loud laughter, whereupon Mr. Ward added, "Ibis nob ab all unusual to pub on a noughb boo many.' Again the House laughed, bub Mr. Ward still contended that the fees and salaries would be all right, as the solicitors would do the whole business of the colony, and the other departments would have to bear their fair share of the expense. ■

The Tariff and Industries Committee in their report desire to express their strong opinion that any revision of the Customs tariff must be imperfect unless the opportunity be given of acquiring the requisite information at the various centres of the colony in order that a reliable and comprehensive report may be furnished to guide the Government in suitably amending the tariff. For this purpose the committee consider that in the interests of the colony a Royal Commission should be set up forthwith bo take evidence aW te go exhaustively into the whole question and report thereon. In view of this recommendation of the committee, and the unmistakeable expression of opinion by the House and the country when the duties upon coal and breadstuffs were mooted, ib is not likely that much more will be heard of tariff revision during the present session.

The very unsatisfactory manner in which the Bills have been drafted was referred to this afternoon by Sir Robert Stout in connection with the Mining Districts Land Occupation Bill. He pointed out that, as he read the measure, ib would sweep in every education reserve in the colony, but other members explained that the clause referred to only applied to reserves in mining localities, and Mr. Guinness suggested that the words "in mining districts" had been omitted. Sir Robert then referred to another section, the meaning of which he confessed he was unable to fathom. The Minister of Lands explained, but Sir Robert responded, "That cannot be the meaning of it. It is simply unmeaning." The Knight then proceeded to state that nearly half the Bills which had come before the House this session had contained some such glaring blunder as be had just pointed out. Ministers had brought down so many Bills, and their time was so fully occupied, that they could not possibly supervise the drafting. Ib would be better if only half the number of Bills were passed. Some members seemed to labour under the delusion that if they had a bulky statute book they had done good work, whereas they may really have done a great deal of mischief.

In his speech on the second reading' of the Shops and Shop Assistants Bill last week, the Hon. W. Jennings said that personally he was strongly in favour of clause 9 as printed in the Bill, because he believed that if local bodies and boroughs were nob allowed to settle the day for themselves it would cause a great deal of difference of opinion, and would probably bring about the downfall of the measure if not adopted. Saturday, he was convinced, would bo the day decided on by-and-by. If hon. members were willing to allow local bodies to settle the matter for themselves it was only a question of time when all would fall into line, and Saturday would be approved of.