MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 18.

Clutha Leader, Volume III, Issue 115, 22 September 1876, Page 3

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 18.

Mr De Latour.. resumed his speech at 10 a.m.,, and continued 'till shortly after noon, when . „...•,. The question was put " that the House do : now adjourn." A large niimber bf the Opposition members- en-

tered the chamber, and it looked as if a surprise was intended.

Sir Robert Doug-las got up amd made a few remarks, arid then sat down, when Mr Hislop commenced to speak, and after going on for twenty ininutes the question was again put, arid a division called for, the adjournment being* lost by 8 : 1 to 23. Mr Balance's amendment was then put.

Mr Stout anil others complained as to the speeches riot being* reported, and a discussion ensued upon 'this and several other points.

Mr Murray rhoved, as a proviso, " That the House expresses its regret that Ministers should have brdken the law, and expresses the opinion that even no\y it would be better to prorogue and go before their constituents."

Tlie House adjourned at 1 till 2 p.m. . Upon the House resuming at two o'clock, another debate ensued as to the Speeches not being reported. Mr Stout said that the morning paper had unfairly treated the Opposition during* the session by misrepresenting and misreporting the various rriembers of the Opposition. The honourable member then went on to say that Ministers had influence over the Press of the Colony by goinp; up arid down the lobbies 'with, arid taking irito their rooms, representatives of different papers, anci he referred to a statement in the Otago Times of the 12th, from its Wellington correspondent, regarding Ministers saying that Sir G. Grey was afraid to serve* the writs. He (Mr Stout.) intended to have the statement inquired into.

Sir George Grey went on to state that, owing tb the influence of the Government over the local Press, ifc was impossible for him and those who acted with him to be reported. The Premier gave this ari unqualified contradiction.

Mr Murray's afnendment was put, and a division was taken, with the result that the aniendment tvas lost by 42 against 23. The resolution was then put iri an amended form, as follows: — "That it is expedient that a Bill of Indefnriity should be forthwith introduced and dealt with as a matter of urgency, to indemnify several members of the, Executive Council, appointed by his Excellency the Governor on 'the Ist September iri'stant, from the consequences (ii any) that may have arisen under tho Disqualification Act, 1870, in respect of such appointments; and, further, it having been referred to tbe Disqualification Committee No. 2 to consider -whether any of the provisions of the Disqualification Act, 1870, had beeri infringed by the then Miriistry, : and the Committee having 'reported they were df opinion .that the provisions of the Disqualification Act, . 1870. had beeri infring-ed by the members o*f the Ministry, this House resolves that, nnder the special circumstances of the case, the seats in this House of members referred to should not be vacated, and are not vacant."

Another division was taken, which resulted in the resolution being carried by 44 against 24. The Premier then introduced the Indemnity Bill, but

Mr Stout divided the House before allowing the first reading. The division was — Aye<*, 4=f; ne'e?, 21. Mr Si out said that if the Bill could be read a first time it could be read a second and third time, and if that were done he would say the Opposition ought to leave the House.

Mr Macandrew observed that if the Bill were tb be forced through in that way he mast say it was most discreditable.

The Bill was read a first time, ancl The Premier announced that the Govern rneilt would move the second rea'dat 7.30 that evening. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m.-, Mr Whitaker moved the second reading of the Indemnity Bill briefly. Then Mr Stout initiated a series of explanatory remark?, that followed from one hon. member after another, as to the circumstances which led to the present complication, and after strongly condemning the Bill and the action of Ministers in regard to it, he said he hoped the Opposition would all leave the House before the division, and allow Ministers to have it all their own way.

Mr Macandrew agreed with Mr Stout, and called it the most high-handed exercise of power eVer witnessed in any Assembly.

Sir George Grey and Mr Rees also denounced the proceeding altogether, the former saying it was using a niajority to rob constituents of their right to say whether they should ever elect Ministers again. As soon as Sir George Grey had finished, a majority of the Opposition members— including Sir George Grey, Messrs Macandrew, Sto***t, and Reader Wood — left the Chamber, arid a sort of personal debate took place. Explanations and counter-explana-tions followed, as to who was responsible for the present talking agairist time ; the Opposition blaming the Ministry, arid the Ministry blaming the Oppositiori.

Mr W. W6od moved that the Bill be read that day six months. This led to rriore debating, sharp speeches being made by, Messrs Whitaker, Wakefield, arid Hislop. • When, the division was taken on the second reading only two Opposition members— Messrs Fisher arid Wdod-^

who acted as tellers, were present. The division was 37 against 2. After the Bill went through Committee, Mr Sharp gave notice that hi would inbve fbr. an address to his Excellency to put money on the KstiriiateTs tb indemnify those who took action against Ministers.

Some objection being raised against this, the Bill was read a third time and passed. ;Mr Brown (Tuapeka) wanted the Bill tb haye tlie title of 'the " Whitewash Bill," but the Speaker said 'it \vafc not a proper amendment.