HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Press, Volume XL, Issue 5859, 24 June 1884, Page 3

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Monday, Jxnra 23. The House met at 11 o'clock, TEtB DUTY OV WABDXBB. Mr Coholly said, in reply t* Mr Feldwick, that no warder had ever been dismissed from the Auckland prison service for his refusal to flog a prisoner. Warden were required to administer such punishments, but as to whit would be dene in the event of their refusal he was not prepared to say. Mr Moss, on a motion for adjournment, protested against warders being compelled to do this w«rk. If it was necessary to administer such chastisement he would suggest that the Judge, Magistrate, or even the Minister of Justice, was the proper person to do it. It was monstrous to say that a warder should chastise a prisoner in that way, and afterwards be entrusted with the charge of him. Messrs Fbldwick and Daniels denounced the infliction of such punishment.

Mr Conollt said this was not a question as to whether oz not such punishments should be inflicted. The only question was, as to who should inflict the punishment. In England, and in this colony too, the punishment wae invariably administered by warders. The alternative proposition was as to the propriety of appointing a public flagellator, &c. He confessed that a proposition of that kind had never entered his head. The punishment was only inflicted in the case of brutal and disgusting offences, and he did not see his way to have it abolished altogether. Sir G. Geet inveighed against the injustice done to warders in this matter; it appeared to him the height of injustice. It was only reasonable to ask that a person should be got upon whom this as well as other duties might devolve. Mr BoLLKsroN denied a statement made by Sir G. Grey that Mr Conolly was mainly responsible for the measures under whick this punishment was provided for.

THI GUM UUSBS. Mr Bollbbtow explained that, on inquiry, he. found tbat no proclamation had been issued in the name of Sir G. Grey as Superintendent of Auckland re the gum-fields leases. He found, however, that all the correspondence on the subject had passed through the office of the Superintendent. In reply to a question, The Hon. Mr Kolustom said he would withdraw the statement made that the leases were provided for by Sir G. Grey as Superintendent of Auckland, still he held to the fact that they were so provided for by an efficer under his immediate control. On the motion of Sir G. Gbbt, the debate was adjourned. NEW H3OEBHH. Mr Locke (East Coast) was introduced by Coloael Trimble and Dr. Newman, sworn in, and took his seat. TOEBBB FOB BAILWAT FUBPOSZS. A long discussion took place on the relative merits of Australian and New Zealand timber for railway purposes. Mr McDonald produced samples of totara and jarrah submerged for different periods, showing that the former was much more durable. Mr HußsrHoufea said this might be the case if the timber were submerged, but not if used for railway sleepers. Australia took ten times as much timber from us as we took from them. Mr Tawhia said an unlimited supply of t puriri was available in bia district. ! Mr Mitchblson promised to make enquiries, and after further discussion the matter dropped. The motion by Mr TurnbuH to have all Orders in Council gazetted was withdrawn after discussion.

The House resumed at 2.30. KTJKABA ELtTDGH CHANNEL. Mr Skddon moved that certain alterations should be made in the regulations of the Kumara iludge chanael. He com* plained that a variety of hardships and inconveniences irere imposed upon miners who used the channel. Messrs FitzGerald and Monro spoke in support of the motion. The Hon. Mr Eollbston said that the regulations could not be altered, but promised that the hardships and complaints would so far as possible be remedied. The motion was negatived. . THE GUM FTBLD I.KASKB. Sir Gxobgb Gbzt renewed the adjourned debate on the question of the gem field leases. He had -been charged by the Government with having while acting as Superintendent of Auckland been a party to the granting of a lease over a large area of gum field country.. He had that day received from Auckland the papers which shewed that he had not, as had been alleged, been a party to the transaction. The whole negotiation took place between the Commissioner of Crown Lands and the Governor in Council, and these documents showed that he had befn unjustly blamed by Ministers. He had that day received a letter signed by sixteen diggers asking him to do all in his power to prevent the issue of large leases on the3e fields. He 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 revenge ly unseating at least three members who had voted with him. As a matter of fact Mr Mitchelson took his seat upon the Land Board—the very body who had to judge as to the illegality of this transaction on his part. Such conduct was most reprehensible, and it was notorious that over and over again persons of this sort, who had wrongfully acquired wealth, had found their way on to those benches.

Mr DabgavtMiß also complained of the unfair dealing in the administration of the gum fields on the part of the Waste Lands Board of Auckland.

Mr Bolmston said that when these large leases were provided for the whole administration of the waste lands of Auckland vested in the Superintendent and the Waste Lands Commissioners. It did not proceed from the Central Government, but was purely the result of consort between the Superintendent aud the Commissioners. In these circumstances it was, ab&urd to say that this t* as tot the action of the Superintendent. The motion for the production of papers connected with the gum fields was agreed to. IN STJPPIiT. The House then went into Committee of Supply. The resolution for 4543,000 cut of the consolidated revenue as honorarium was put. Mr Holmeb moved that the amount be reduced to .£21,000. He argued that it would be unfair to vote the full amount of honorarium, seeing that this session had not exceeded eleven sitting days. The average during a session was three months, and the proposed reduction was only fair under the circumstances. Mr Pbacock seconded and supported the amendment. He argued that the honorarium should not be looked upon as pay for services, but simply as a refund for the necessary outlay. They had not exceeded one-fourth of the normal period of an ordinary session. The amendment was negatived on the voices. Mr Hubst moved that the amount be reduced so as to make the honorarium jglOO. Mr Skddon said that this proposal for reduction came from wealthy men. He had never known these men leave the surplus amount in the hands of the Treasurer, or even 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 more by this sham proposal of theirs. Colonel Tkxhblb spoke in snpport of the amendment. He was in favor of payment of members, but under the circumstances he thought .£IOO sufficient. The House adjourned at 5.30.

The House resumed in Supply at 7.50. Mr Fish returned the debate on the amendment for a reduction of tfee honorarium. He contended that the stun as fixed had virtually the force of law. They had framed a Bill last eecaicn whick was thrown out in the other House, he beliered because it proposed to lower the mm payable to inexobeni «f thstbr&ach. H«

thought the- ram should be embodied in an enactment, and the sum fixed at £300. He would give them a fair challenge, and say. that those who voted for the {larger sum should get it, and those who voted for the smaller sum get the lesser amount. Mr Most said the object of the honorarium wae to maintain the independence of the members, and that could only be achieved by making the amount suitable for such a purpose. The whole question resolved itself into this : did they want a property qualification in their members ? If that principle was to be affirmed, then they would throw the representatives into the monied classes, and they knew what that meant. Look at the disqualification under which members rested. They could enter into no contract with the Government for own pecuniary behoof. They could accept of no payment as commission, and in many other ways they were at a disadvantage as compared with other persons. What they had to guard against was the double honorarium, but that was a question which affected the next Parliament. He had all along voted against the seduction of the amount, and on the other hand he had voted against its increase.

The Hon. Major Atkinson admitted that members of Parliament lost pecuniarily, instead of gained, by being members. He thought the amount should be kept at the lowest rate. What was wanted to be prorided against was a loss against the lowest scale, so that the poorest man might be put to no inconvenience, while the richer class would pot be provided against any 'loss they might sustain. It had always appeared to him that £150 waa enough for that purpose. The balance of argument was against paying anything for these services. He thought it was most undesirable to do so, or they might induce a most undesirable class to come forward. Had the Bill of last session been carried they would only have been entitled to about £100. Again, the House had never acknowledged the of members definitely. Hβ differed from members in that respect. All that had been affirmed was that members should be recouped their actual expenses. In that case having only been a few weeks instead of months in session, it was only reasonable that they should, accept the lower rate.

Sir G. Qbxt said that he did not agree with the previous speaker. Instead of a loss, members of Parliament made a great gain. It opened up to members the highest political honors and rewards. Viewed in that light the doors of Parliament should be opened to all classes, rich and poor. That could only be done by making reasonable provision for those who entered Parliament. It was most desirable to tempt men to enter Parliament by the prospect of these great prizes. Between New Zealand and other colonies there was no similarity. In Melbourne, Sydney, and such like place* there were great facilities for members. Here, however, the case was different. No man could personally benefit himself by coming to Wellington. He, therefore, concluded that the .£2lO was small enough for any man. Again, there was the contract view of the question to look to. The Bill of last ■ession having been passed, they were bound to act upon the principle of that Bill. Had they been kept here five or six months no more would have been paid, and members were bound to make their arrangements accordingly. It would, therefore, be a breach of contract if the amount were reduced. Again, they had to look to the fact that a great contest was about to be entered upon—a contest against wealth, and it was therefore necessary they should be prepared for the contest. Major Habbis said that during the next two months Ministers would be bnsily employed promoting their own elections, and yet they would take the full amount of their salaries. If they would teduce their salaries he would be prepared to vote for the proposed reduction of honorarium. Mr Sthtbns supported the amendment, contending that .£l5O per session was quite sufficient to receup members their outlay, whereas the higher enm was calculated to introduce the professional politician among them. It had been argued that they had to enter upon contested elections. Those who would oppose them had to do the same thing, and it was only fair that they should enter upon the contest on equal terms co far as public money was concerned. Mr Swakson looked upon the honorarium as a mistake. As they were to have payment of members he advised| them to levy a special tax for the purpose. That would be the fairest way to test the question.

The question was that the amount be reduced. The Committee divided :— Aybb—2s. Nobs—3s. Mee*rs Atkinson Messrs Bathgate Beetham Bracken Bryce Brown, J. £. Buchanan, Daniel W. C. DeLautour Cadman Dodson Dick Feldwiok Driver Fish Fulten FitzGerald Hobbs George Holmes Green, J. Hursthouse Sir George Grey Johnston, Mesars Harris W. H. Hutchison Levestam Joyce Locke KellyJ Mitchelson Larnach Newman Macandrew Peacock McKenzie., Pearson F. W. P os t 1 c- Montgomery thwaite McKenzie,J. Rolleston Moss Shepherd Monro Stevens O'Calloghan White, W. Petrie "Wilson Pyke Seddon Shaw Sheehan Steward Tawhiao Thomson, H. Thomson, J. W. Turnbull TSatt The remainder of the votes were put and passed. The House resuming, the resolutions as passed were reported. | WBSTFOBT AKD GMTKOUTH HABBOB. | Oα the motion for going into Committee of Ways and Means, Mr Mttnbo moved as an amendment that immediate action be taken for the improvement of the harbors of Westport and Greymouth. He pointed out the great importance of the coal trade. Mr Phtbib seconded the amendment. The Hon. Major Atkinson also supported the amendment. The Government was not now in a position to prosecute the work, as it would otherwise have done, but he admitted that this was a Colonial affair. A BUI was prepared, and would have been submitted but for the adverse Tote. Whether the Government retained office or another Government came in, he hoped they would take up the matter and prosecute it as a colonial work. The local coal company was greatly to blame, as instead of paying off their money they had kept it back. That was the cause of the delay in the matter. The Government recognised the importance of the work. Mr Macakdkhw said that had the Government been as earnest in the prosecution of the work as they now professed to be, they might have done it before this time. Mr Bakbon thought the amendment was too obscure. The present Government was about to cede office, and that fact of itself left the amendment vague and imperfect. Mr HuBSTHOuss moved as a further amendment—" That Collingwood be added to the amendment." The amendment was negatived on the voices. WATS AND XBANS. The House went into Committee of ways and means. The resolution was adopted by the Committee, and on being reported the Revenues -Bill was introduced, passed through Committee, and reported. KDnSTBSIAX. BTATWCBXT. The Hon. Major Atkinson, in moving the thicd reading, said that they would prorogue to-morrew. The dissolution would take ple«e, if possible, on Thursday, but perhaps it Fould be Saturday, as they had not got all the polling places fixed. Immediately that vac done the dissolution would take place. The nomination days

rested with the Returning Officers t» fix, bnb they would take place about the 16th July. The fixing of the polling day rested with the Government, and they had decided upon the 22nd July. The writs would be made returnable on the 28th, and the new Parliament would be convened on the 7th Augnst. With regard to appointments to the Upper House, the Government recognised that in its posi-. tdon so such appointments should be made, nor would that view be departed from unless it was found on the assembling of the new House that an appointment of the kind was necessary for the purpose of carrying on the Government business in the Council. That was the constitutional practice, and it was also the conditions imposed on Government at the dissolution granted in 1877. With regard to the appointment of the Agent-General, prior to the recent vote affecting ,the position of the Government the present Agent-General had been offered a re-appointment for a period of two years from the let January next, the date on which the present appointment expired. They were induced to do so from the able manner in which the AgentGeneral has discharged his duties, more especially those connected with the inscription of stock. They had not yet received any answer from the Agent-General, but still they hod no reason to believe that he would not accept their offer. This offer would not have been made could the Government have foreseen the position in which they were now placed. Begarding officers and messengers the Government had determined to pay them half salary during the recess, as was done on the last occasion.

Mr Holmes complained that tha answer given by the Premier re the appointment of members to the other House was not explicit enough. He contended that they should not, under any circumstances, make an appointment. A prohibition of that kind was imposed on th; Government in 1879.

After further discussion, the motion for the third reading was put and carried. On the motion for passing the Bill, Sir Gjeobgh Grey said that the Premier had been asked to give a pledge not to make any judicial appointment, but he had ref used to do so.. If they made such an appointment the country would no doubt take care that provision was made in future against such an abube of power. There was no law which authorised Government to make the appointment of Agent-General for a period of time. They should take it that this appointment by the present Government should not be accepted ac a precedent. The Hon. Major Atkinson quoted from Parliamentary records to show that the Agent-General had been appointed for a definite period. It seemed, to him, however that any Government had a right to re-call the Agent-General at any time. If he was recalled merely for party purposes, and when he was doing his duty satisfactorily, he would have to. be compensated. The renewed offer was Bent home the mail before last.

The Bill was then passed.

On the question of the title of the Bill, Sir Geobge Geet moved the adjournment of the House, to enable him to take further exception to the re-appointment of the Agent-General. He thought, under the circumstances, it was the duty of the Government to recall the appointment by cable message. The Hon. Major Atkinson said that the letter simply conveyed an assurance that the Government was satisfied, and that they would be prepared to recommend hie re-appointment for two years longer. The reason they proposed this re-appointment was that they had still financial operations to transact, and it was most important that the Bill should carry these. The motion for the adjournment was negatived, and the Bill was finally passed. The House rose at 1.25 until 12.30 tomorrow.