PARLIAMENT,

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 952, 20 October 1910, Page 6

PARLIAMENT,

THE COUNCIL. IMMIGRATION RESTRICTION AMENDMENT. When the Legislative Council met at 2.39 yesterday afternoon ■ a me£«ago was received from the -House of Representatives agreeing to the amendnienk niade by tho Council in ■ the Immigration Restriction Amendment Bill. INDECENT PUBLICATIONS. ' Replying to the. reasons advanced hy the Council, for its' disagreement -with ;the amendments made by vfhe Lower House in,the Indecent Publications Bill, the House of. Ropreson'tatives suggested that a Committee of the Council should meet a Committee. of the House to consider tlie position. On the motion of .the Attorney-General; a Committee, consisting of -the Hons. Dr. .Mndlay, J. R. Sinclair, and J. Rigg was .set up to meet the 1 Conimittee from "another place" ■ at 5,30 this evening. N.Z. PORTLAND CEMENT. CO. ,! The third reading of the New. Zealand Portland Cement Company' (Ltd.) Reclamation and Empowering Bill was moved 'by the Hon.. T. Thompson ■ (Auckland). After a short discussion eonsideration of the Bill was left. over until to-day to enable the Speaker to rule on a point of order as to procedure raised by. Mr. Rigg. JUDICATURE AMENDMENT 'BILL. AN IMPORTANT, AMENDMENT , PROPOSED. .. , , On- the motion-to go'into Committee' on' the Judicature Amendment Bill '• The -ATTOE NET-GENERAL said he proposed, to make an important amendment in rega!rd' to the abolition of .imprisonment for- debt. .» In the existing law, .with; the- exception of :five cases, proyisioD was made ..that no person could .be-" arrested' or. imprisoned for.'making default in payment, of !money. Under the existing law; if .a .'trustee, who in his. trust'should, have certain' funds'in hand,, but owing to .a perfectly 'innocent; mistake,, had not got them,''was ordered by , a Judge to! pay the'sum, into; Court there was no option but to send him to prison ' if: a writ - .of • attachment : was' moved: for upon non-payment.;. The position was somewhat the same in the case, of of av solicitor who might be; perfectly innocent and iyet. on- a! : writ of' attachment 'must; be .sent to prison. The" alteration proposed' : 'liad 'been inado in the,, law 'of 'England' 22"year's; ago, ' but .it remained unchanged here. With the prbcedure 'bf England: and the plain jus-: tice ; of .the cases before us. he; considered the "time* was ripe • for'.'the-; amendment he , : -had: drafted. _ Itsintention , was : simply . > to. give Courts the ' discretion of saying ; that a ■ man. was innocent';, and. give, them: the power to refuse an attachment'!,order.. ; .:This it was impossible to do'at: present. It. a '.'dangerous:thingthat 'an .innocent: ttus-; tee , or, .'solicitor, should be'exposed-; to the' present ! machinery to;'.force : payment : in! particular! cases where." lie! really : had ; n6t' ,the: money,'and ought not to. be, sent.to prison. Tlie proposed new '.'clause, provided Thfit in;'any', case, coming within the exceptions specified'in paragraphs (c) and (d) of section three of ■ the'lmprisonment,for Debt Limitation .Act, 1908 i or withih .either: of .'those 1 exceptions, 'any. Court, or ,'JUdgo .making the order for payment, or having jurisdiction in the action oi 1 proceeding in which; the. order, for payment is made, may inquire, into: the ..case,; and. may .grant: or either ttbso-. lutely or Vlpon terms.' any application for a. writ of; or/ other: process' or. : order of arrest, or imprisonment,' and any application, io ,stay:;the'operation .of: aiiy such writ, 'process, 'or order,: or', for' discharge:'from: arrest -imprisonment thereunder. ■■; v' ; ' ', The "'exceptions! referred to' above' are:— ' (c) Default, by a trustee or person acting in a, fiduciary capacity,; and ordered to • pay- by a Court, having jurisdiction, in the. nmtter, any'.sum ,in his possession .pr'. control. ;'.'! .'!.

(d) Default by a solicitor, in payment of costs when..ordered to pay, ;Costs : for ,mjs-, conduct as such, of in payment of a . sum of; money; when ordered- to 1 pay .'the' i! same' in, his character; of' an officer of-the/Court" making. the order." vThe- Hon.; O. SAMUEL (Taranaki) saidlit .would' have/liked to have had a little more time ;to look in to. the matter, but. lie did not think, as fir as 'he! could' sea, that, we could.; make' any,.mistake in adopting the, new'xla-use.;' !''■ ; / : The Hon. J; M'GOWAN (Auckland) thought the; proposed amendment should really be made in the/Imprisonment for Debt Abolition ;Act,/an/Act .which had done great good to all classes throughout the .'Dominio'n.. -He certainly / thought trustees : should be given some protection. " i l .'

/ Tho Hon. J. R. SINCLAIR . (Otago) thought*iit - might - ; be;;desiTable".to '.-maie the ;amendpiont in the. Imprisonment forDebt Abolition Act, if. that "w'p.uld have, been convenient, but. lie.-,thought ;it • oould be'made/in this Bill. . ..' ./- '

Tho ATTORNEY-GENERAL ' said" the amendment was in a fit place when it .was, made in this Bill. . It was dealing withwrits .'of . attachment, and ,-had a really, .fit place,in; this Bill; / although, if; the > other. Act were before the Council' it could ; have been;made there. ■; •• ■ , : The new ..clause was : .adopted,- and '.the. Bill/ ' was /.'reported;' with . ' amendments. The,-"third., 'reading ; was. set. down,' for to-" day.-,;;.;'.:;/;';;';;'.' ' .V : '.; ».v' y 'river boards amendment. Inmoving . the, / second reading'; Of the ; River'Boards' Amendment ; Bill, ; /; The ATTORNEY-GENERAL.. said:., the main purpose of: the Bill was : to protect river boards . from' oppressive.^"-claims' caiised'i by .flooding,; - or - ' prospective flooding, - by •. -enabling/'. them /,to" 'buy , tho land coricernM , at'' a-prioe to - be fixed upon '• between the. owner, .and the board.. .At a; .proper time he would askthe .Council to make an amendmentto Clause';!; 'Which extended'.-the time for. making /.claims'' for compensation to" two years.: ,He. would ask. that' the- clause be '.put : m--the /same, shape as v it>was' when; ;it iwent'Viiito another /place.; ; : 'As ; it stood now, he tho'ught'it.wasja- vicious' provision, .which .'would be abused;; = 'If ; they were'going, to- allow men to lay . by; for. . two .years , before miking': a . claim it would be very unfair. He thought a ■twelve months' limit was ample. He be-' licved" the section' had been .put in for .private.-.reasons, in . "another; place," -and he would in due . course; ask that it bo altered. ■

.; A voice: Will yon take out the clause atlogether? - -.Dr. Pindlay: I will certainly ask for an alteration in regard to'the provision for the two years.' ' ' The Hon. 0. H. MILLS {Wellington) did. not-.think. two, years was out of, the way at all. • ' i

The Hon.; George -.TONES-.; and A. BALDEY-agreed that two' years was not. too .long a period. - ; •The lion. J. ANSTET (Canterbury) was ; disposed ;to .think; that one -year : was as good as two. • • The Hon. W. W. M'CARDLE (Auckland) dfd not .see that any better provision could be made than was proposed .in ' tho Bill. - • ■

The Hon. 0. SAMUEL (Taranaki) said one year was tho usual limit..' Personally, he thought two : yenrs ;.'-was little enough considering the particular nature of the works, as ' they . appeared ' to him.

The Hon. .T, K. SINCLAIR (Otago) said months was fixed by the law as, it stood to-day, and; lie saw no reason why it should not be fixed in .this case.' , After some further -discussion, the At-torney-General replied / at some- length; Claims under. the Public Works Act, with; its limitation of twelve months, had never worked harshly. \ There, had been thousands and thousands of cases brought under- that Act; and lie did riot, think anyone could say the twelve months limitation had worked harshly. An extension of /the limitation over, twelve months would greatly embarrass every. public body in New, Zealand, and he earnestly' trusted that the Council would not agree to the extension. ';

The'Bill'was read > second time, and was'set down for committal to-day.