GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 11946, 15 July 1904, Page 6

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

» ■. - ■ (PRESS ASSOCIATION TEtKORAM.) LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. THtrhsDAY, Jtjlv 14. The Council met at 2.30. POLL TAX ON CHINESE. Replying to Mr Rigg, the ATTORNEYGENERAL said that if enquiry showed, that on undue proportion of Chinese were being imported into tho colony, the Government would consider the advisability of increasing tho jpoll tax. "\ LAW AMENDMENT BILL. Tlie Law Amendment Bill, which passed tho Council last session, was reintroduced and read a second time without debate. » f . EVIDENCE BILL. Tlie Evidence Bill, a consolidation of English ami New Zeahnid law, with an additional clause making tho publication of prohibited questions, contempt of Court, was read a second time. CORONERS' HI LI/. The ATTORNEY-fJHXKRAL, in moving tlie second reading of iho Coroners' Bill, explained that it aln>!i.h<d con:ii?rs and 'juries, and «üb*-tituted Stipendiary Magistrate*, and a Justice of tlm Peace in the ii.hisenos of iJio M-isi.sir.it*>, to act. as coroners. Inquests would ciily be. held upon the authorisation of tlw Magistrate after a preliminary inquiry. Mr T. KELLY, in supporting the Bill, drew attention to the cafe of the death of a Amman in the Auckland 'Hospital, in which he said tho medical officer insisted upon a post-mortem being held, though this was objected to by the relatives. He characterise tho action as monstrous. Mr ARKWRIGHT thought the proposed changes too drastic. «nd said he would move ,-m Amendment in committee. The ArrORNEY-CEXERAL. in replying, promised to make enquiry into tha case referred to by Mr Kelly. The second reading wis agreed to. PROPERTY LAW BILL. Tito Property Law Bill was rca<i a second time, pro forma, and referred to tho Statutes Itevisrion Committee. Tho Council rope at a quarter past, three. HOUSE,' OF REPRESENTATIVES TurasDAY, Jcxv 14. AFTERNOON SITTING. , Tha House met at 2.30. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM. Sir 'WILLIAM STEWARD moved tha second reading of the Legislative Council Reform Bi'l. He urged thnt tlie time had now fully arrived when some- chauges should he made in the constitution,.of lha LegWativo Council. There was an! Almost universal feeling throughout the country in, this directou. He believed that the IseJiag was reflected ia tho House, and

therefore he urged that it was the duty i of rmnYben. to propose such a change. The i Premier had expressed the opinion in and • out of Parliament Vl-at the Council should i be abolished, but. if tlie Houso parsed such < a Bill it was not probable that it would i receive the endorsement of the. Council i ttreif. and he ventured to think that it i would take a long time to secure tho con- . sent of the Imperial Parliament to such a < novel departure. He thought, however, i that, such a change was not necessary, and > that the Council should be amended, and '• not eiKled. Hi* proposal was to make the j Council elective by the Hon.**?. He went < on to point out that although tlie Premier ' had appointed a larger proportion of the members of the Council, not only were tho country and the Hou**e dissatisfied with it, ' but. tlie Premier himself was so dissatisfied 1 with it that he had stated in tho HouseTi|s opinion that it would be better to abolish ' it altogether. If the Legislative Council ' were elected by the House; every member ' would he directly responsible to his con- ' stitu-tTrts for the choice- he made, and the Council 1 would bo in the main in conson* ■ ance with vlw opinion of the L'n- 1 der his Bill the normal number of mem- : Ihts of the Council would be fixed at forty. ' The existing members would not be dis- < turl>ed, but as soon as the number fell lielcw forty, vacancies up to forty would ' he filled by persons nominated and elected - by the House. Tlie age limit, he propo-red to fix at 77 years, but. members could re- * tire at 70. retaining tho title of "honourable." their railway pass-s, and library privih-gf. Mr 1?. M. SMITH complained that Sir ■ William Steward was always trying to assume the function*, of the Government. Mr Mt-LAOHLAN thought the Bill was , not required in suoh a form. It was a ] good debating society Bill, and ho was , goinj; to send it down to his constituents ] fur dhcuesion during the winter. Tlito j was not. one sensible proposal in it. His t idea wa* to give the members seven years' honorarium, and let them go. It would be , a. cheap way of getting rid of them, and ] they would thus <lo away with a source of , very considerable expense. j Mr T. MACKENZIE said he would support this or any ether Bill designed to , place, tho Council on a more sat:sfactory footing. Thi»re could be no doubt that the Council, as at present constituted, did not mrif.it with approval, or satisfy the conscience of the country. The mover of th° Bill should have insisted that members of the Council should have* had the con- ' fjdence of the people in some public capacity, so that they might have something in tho nature of practical experience of the duties they would have to perform. They should be elected by the members of elective local bodies, so as to prevent the Council Iwin-g a mere duplication of the popular Chamber. He did not agree with > those who said tho Council should be wiped out, although if it was proposed to continue it as at present, ho would *ay "wip* H out." Mr R. McKENZIE urged that tho Government ought to deal with the matter, and adopt the policy of not. making any more appointments to the Council. iMir DUTHIE said the Legislative Council, as at present constituted, had brought tho whole of our Parliamentary life into something of the nature of a farce. Ths members had not been selected for tlie.ir specie! qualifications. The Council was dependent on tlie Premier for its existence, mid the members had before them tho example that those who showed some degree of independence were not re-appointed. He suggested that the Council fhould be elected by large constituencies, and that members should have had previous public experience. This Bill was only playing with the subject, and did not in any way meet with the approval of tho country. Mr BEDFORD supported the Bill, hecause the constitution of the Upper House was undemocratic, but the real reason for the demand for reform was duo solely to , tho abuse of privilege by the present head of the Government. ' Mr JENNINGS {an ex-member of the ] Council) supported the Bill, because he be- ; licved some change was desirable. Some : of the members were too old, some were absent for too long a period, and he also objected to the undue proportion of South Island members, there being only 19 North '' Island members and 26 from the South Island. ] !' 'Mr HAN AN favoured the abolition of the Upper House, and expressed the opinion that if there was only one House. ' with' a Committee of Review, tho work ' would be done very much -hotter. Mr £. G. ALLEN complained that the House had had no expression of opin ; on from the Government in regard to the Bill. Mr J. C. THOMPSON urcred that the. Upper House should be elected on the same suffrage as members of the Houso of Representatives. Tlie rkibato was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment.