PARLIAMENTARY.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3161, 16 August 1881, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES. The House met at 7.30. GAMING AND LOTTERIES BlXili.J Mr Dick moved that the House insist on its amendments in the Gaming and Lotteries Bill. The motion was agreed to, and Messrs Montgomery, Bowen, and Dick were appointed managers to draw up reasons. REFBESENTATION BILL. The debate on the.Representation Bill was resumed by Mr Gibbs, who opposed the hill and supported Mi- Gisborne's amendment, without, however, any feeling of antagonism to the Government. He felt bound to defend to the utmost the policitical existence of his district, which was threatened with extinction. He considered the hill was one calculated to throw the government of colony into the hands of the provincial trict of Canterbury. Canterbury and Otago were to have 45 members, and all the reßfc of the colony 46. He suggested that the boundaries of his district should be extended —not that it should be wiped out altogether. It was one of the oldest goldfields—and ifc had derived no advantage from the public works expenditure. It really had less community of interest with Mofcueka, to which, it was to bo attached, than it had with Wellington. Mr George opposed the bill. It was no. one to give representation on the basis of population, or else the Maoris would have been taken into account. They were British subjects, and entitled by law to be on tbe electoral roll. He held that their special representation should now he abolished, and they should be treated as ordinary electors. Were this done the balance of power between the islands would be very little disturbed. He also objected to towns being cut up into single electorates, as encouraging plural voting. Under such a scheme of representation as was proposed the North Island would have no chance in the distribution of any future loan • the seat of government would probably be moved to Canterbury, and the direct Bteam service he given to Otago. Dr. Wallis expressed qualified disapproval of the bill and unqualified disapproval of the amendment. He advocated a complete system of equal electoral districts, and strongly supported the system of singlo electorates. " The bill, however, proposed a most unfair preponderance o£ members to the South, and if it was passed the North would demand separation. Mr Sutton supported the bill generally, although he wished it had not been proposed to increase the number of members. , At present the South was entitled to a ' preponderance of political power, but in due time no doubt the turn of the North would come. He objected to Wairoa being thrown into Auckland, and would have no objection to leaving another member to Nelson. He opposed single electorates. Mr Shephard thought that Ministers had got the model of their Representation Bill from the same place as they got the model of their beer tax—from America. They could not have gone to a worse school for an English colony. There was no principle in equal electoral districts. Community of interests was far more than equality of numbers. He agreed that the time would come when the Worth Island would support a larger population than the South, but if the North once parted with political power it would never recover it. The South having the power, would then say, "You acted on a wrong principle in 1881 j we will retain the power you gave us." The North would bitterly regret this bill if ifc passed. He thanked Mr Sutton for hi. suggested in regard to Nelson, and urged the Government to reconsider the subject, and to do justice to districts which had already suffered greatly in other ways. Mr Pyke thought most of the objections "-f** to the bill might be obviated in committee. He advocated the number of electors as a basis, instead of population. That was the principle laid down in the Constitution Act. By taking population instead of electors as a basis the Otago goldfieldi would be unfairly treated, by being deprived of a member. A similar injustice would be done to the West Coast goldfields. He complained that no consideration to community of interests seemed to havo influenced the farmers of the schedules. He would vote for the first part of Mr Gisborne's amendment, but not for the second part. Mr Weston would vote against the bill at being most unfair to the North Island, Other considerations than mere population should enter into any scheme of redistribution. Mr Pitt strongly opposed the bill. He warned Wellington that if the bill passed the seat of Government would be removed to the South, and the ultimate result of placing so much undue power in the hand» of the South would be separation. Many other considerations than population should enter into the apportionment of representation. He agreed with Mr Pyke that the principle of the Constitution Act—the number of electors, or the number of male adults—was a more important one than mere population. He did not believe there was any public desire to deprive any district of the representation it at present enjoyed. He hoped the Government would be content with reading the bill a second time ; if not, he would oppose it to the utmost. Mr Murray objected to the system of single electorates. Major Harris did not think the North would ever recover the power if ifc once parted with it, and where the political power was there tbe money would be also. The public money would be spent in encouraging immigration to the South, so as to retain the power there. He urged the claims of the natives to be considered in calculating population. Mr Reader Wood thought most of the objections which had been urged were such as could be dealt with in committee. _ He held population to be the only intelligible basis of representation. He denied that tbe interests of the two islands were antagonistic, and therefore they need not be ■-_, afraid of any preponderance of power. The two islands had never been known to vote in a body against each other. Still, on the population basis the North Island was entitled to additional representation, and on going into committee he intended to move that the basis of representation be popula- j tion, native and European, and that the A special native representation should be abolished. On this he would divide tbe House, because the natives as taxpayers were entitled to equal representation with the Europeans. He had no sympathy whatever with the cry raised by the Nelson members, and he did not believe in their jprofessed sympathy for tho North Island,

Dick said that from the speeches made the bill was evidently not considered an ordinary party measure, for parties seemed very ranch mixed over it. He regretted the natural feelings of the Nelson members, bufc he did not see how they could reasonably object to their unhappy lot. If while adhering' to a fair and just principle any alteration had been possible the Government would only have been too glad to have made ifc. The cry of separation was an old one from a new quarter. The North need not be afc all afraid of the South. Auckland and Otago always worked much better togother than Auckland and Wellington, or Otago and Canterbury having the power in their hands would exercise it with such forbearance as to even defraud themselves in the interest of the colony as a whole. Ho could not agree to take the natives into consideraeion until they divided their lands, took Crown grants, and obeyed our laws. Mr Lundon strongly supported the claim of the native population to be taken into account in the compilation of population as a basis for representation, and urged a large number of reasons why this should be reoognised. Captain Colbeck agreed with representation on a population basis, bufc maintained that the natives should be included. Mr Levestam moved the adjournment of the debate, which was agreed to, and the House adjourned at 1.5 a.m.