THE COUNCIL

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 286, 27 August 1908, Page 9

THE COUNCIL

FIRST READING, . \ In the Legislative Council yesterday afterjoon tlie Westport' Harbour -Board Loan Bill (Hon. J. R: Sinclair) was read a first time. SAURIES of: registrars of \ ELECTORS. \ The Hon. W., C. SMITH (Otago) asked the Attorney-General' whether he' will take into consideration the question- of increasing the salaries; paid to registrars of electors in diss tricts' where the position is not .held by a porraanont Government official. Mr, Smith stated that the increase of population and the extension of the franchise to women had caused additional work to the registrar, and he submitted that £25 per annum was an insufficient'salary. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Hon. Dr. Findlay) replied that the matter had already received the "attention of tho Government,, and the.'salaries of registrars of electors who were not permanent Government officials had ito £52 per annum. • WELLINGTON HOSPITAL. Tho Hon! T. KENNEDY MACDONALD • (Wellington) wished to'ask a question without no'tice by way of dr'awihjg attention to a newspaper - paragraph reproducing Dr. Ewart's. report concerning tho fever ward' at the Wellington Hospital. ■ ,■ < Some 'discussion ensued as to whether Mr. Macdonakl should be Allowed to ask the question without notice. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that-if Mr. Macdonald would ask the Hon. Mr.- Luke (who is chairman-of- the 'Hospital Trustees) he would find there was no need for any fuss. 1 i As members objected to the matter being treated''as one of urgency, Mr. Macdonald' gave notice in tho ordinary way. LOCAL ELECTIONS BILL. The Hon: J. R. SINCLAIR (Otago) moved the second-''reading - -of the ■ Local Elections and Polls Amendmont Bill, which was introduced in the other House by Sir W. J. Steward, and passed by:that Chamber. The Bill enables deputy retiring officors' under certain circumstances to ; make the necessary declaration, on appointment before a Justice of tho Peace 'instead of tho returning officer.

The'motion" for'the' second reading was supported by the Hon. 0. Samuolj and' carried. . FARRIERS' BILL. ' The Hop. J.' e: JEMINSON (Wellington) moved thQ..sseond reading of the Farriers' Bill (which came from the Lower House) stating that he did so for the third time.-. He. defended the principle of the. examination and registration of farriers, and claimed that the requirements outlined in the measure were not so stringent as to bo in any way oppressive. The Hon, J. MARSHALL (Westland) said ho bought- his first horse when ho was 15 years old,- and • had since ; sptat 1 hundreds of pounds on horse-shoeing. Yet he .could not say that he or his horses had ever suffered at the hands of farriers. He feared the Bill would set lip a close corporation. A mail might be thoroughly competent to shoo a horse, and yet unable to pass.the examination. Hon. Mr. Jenkinson: It's a very simple examination.. " Mr. Marshall admitted that the proposed examination was a v'dy simple one. It was concerned with the' anatomy' of : the horse's hoof, but this knowlodgo was not required m shoeing a horseV He exhibited a horseshoe of unusual shape as an'example of the skill shown by farriers under existing conditions.

Farming Members' Views. , ' The Hon. A. BALDEY (Otago) supported the Bill as calculated to bs of the greatest benefit to the noblest animal ever given to man. In his 40 years' oxpcrience as a farmer, ho had many times had to havo his plough-horses- re-shod owing to unskilful workj which would have caused permanent lameness. ■ Tho,Hon. W. W..M'CARDLE (Auckland) supported tho second reading,. but hoped for amendments in Committoo, to mako tho measure more .effective. • The Hon.- J. ANSTEY (Canterbury) said \ the cruelty inflicted by farriers on horses'was so littlo as not to call for preventive legislation. Referring to Mr. Baldey's experience, he was shocked- to .learn. that that gentleman was in the habit of shoeing his plough horses. The attention of the, Society for tho Prevention. of Cruelty to Animals should be called to such • cases. (Laughter,) Tho Bill would bo useless; because it would leave tho farriors who were supposed to have done so much., harm still in practice, and would, according to tho mover, enable tho merest tyro to become a. registered farrier. Tho matter should bo' dealt with by technical education. It would bo absurd to force a man to. drive .a horse five miles along the roads to bo shod by an.."R.F.'" Mr. Baldey explained that. t]ie cruelty or otherwise of shoeing plough horses depended on the character of tho s.oil. , ' . SulTorlngs of Wellington Horses. ~ 9 SAMUEL (Taranaki) said that the fact that defects in horse-shoeing could be at once detected' by the driver made tho' provisions of tho Bill unnecessary. If cruelty was in question,; ho would point to the cruelty practised on horses by those using thorn. -There was -moro of the City of Wellington than in ■ any other city ho' knew. As tho pohco did not stop it, ho presumed that they had been -instructed not to interfere. Ono objection to tho Bill was that the four'years' apprenticeship,. the examination, and. tho foe would deter youths fromentering tho farriery, trade.. On the other hand, 1 there was to -be no protection against farriers who had been in business on their own uccotint for oho year, -or had; been -apprentices lor four- years, at tho time of the measure becoming .law. Ho would vote against .the second reading,. •The Hon. G. JONES (Otago) supported tho Bill. The long harangue of:tho last speaker suggested the. idea that there was sonic, other measuro on the Order Paper which ho did not like.' (Laughter.), ' The Bill received goiicral support from,tho Hons. C. M. Luke, T. Kelly, W. Bcehan, and J. ltigg,. and, was opposed by the Hon. R. A. Loughnan."

Tho. .ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Hon. Dr. Findlaj-) submitted that tho Bill went too far or not far onough. It would allow anybody who know nothing of farriery to bo registered as a farrior,'if ho wore the partner or employer, of a registered farrier. _ There was nothing in.'tho Jlill to prevent ignorant unregistered assistants from injuring horses by bad shoeing. As tho Bill stood, it would do littlo more than" protect tho mercenary interests of tho horse owner, but would scarcely be more oft'eetivo than tho present right of taking action for damages. He sympathised with tho efFort to protect horses from ignorant cruelty, and would support the Bill, if amended, so as to'' irinko it eifectivo for this purpose. , Carried by One Vote. Tho Hon; Sir HENRY MILLER (Otago) said tho Bill was oil the wrong lines. What was needed-was tho Charlier system of horseshoeing, which scarcely everled to lameness. Tho system now in uso in this country caused corns, which, in turn, wero the most frequent causo of lameness, and were accompanied with torrible suffering on tho part of tho animals. Tho Bill would not do tho least bit of good. : ' Tho Hon. J. E. JENKINSON, replying, said the Charlier system of farriery had been proved to bo quite unsuitablo for Australasia. Ho asked tho Council to take tho Bill as an instalment of a _ nuich-nooded reform, and amend it in Committee if necessary. Tho second reading was carried by 16 votes to 15, nnd tho Bill was 'referred to the Stock Committee.' ' _ Tho Council adjourned at 4.45 p.m.