PARLIAMENTARY. Thursday, 24th August.

Evening Post, Volume XIV, Issue 48, 25 August 1876, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY. Thursday, 24th August.

Motions mainly of a formal character occupied the early part of the afternoon sitting, and the resumed debate on Mr. Sheelmn's motion, asserting the inadequacy of provision for public works north of Auckland, lasted until its end, and was then itself not ended. The evening sitting began and ended (at one o'clock in the morning) with a debate on a bill introduced by Mr. Bryce to " vest in a board certain lands in Wanganui, originally granted to the Bishop of New Zealand, for the purposes of au industrial school." The hon. member related the previous parliamentary history of the subject, read correspondence which passed betwen himself, Sir Julius Vogel, and Bishop Hadfield, and explained that the true meaning of the bill was not to break a trust, but to fulfil its true intentions, which, he contended, was not being done with this valuable reserve of 250 acres in the centre of the town of Wanganui. The debate which ensued expanded as it advanced, aud included a variety of questions — the distinction between public and private bills and public and private trusts, the danger of intertering with trusts, the legality of doing sc except by suit in the Supreme Court, and the asserted right of the State to interfere with State entrusted property when the trust failed to be fulfilled. Mr. Rolleston was the first tc oppose, on the ground of the evil precedent oi interfering with trusts. Sir George Grey, aftei giving a history of the creation of this and other trusts, suggested that they should, il necessary, be dealt with collectively, not individually. Sir J. Vogel combatted that argument, contended that it was a public trust whose purpose was not being fulfilled, showed thai the operation of the bill would be to improve the trust without altering its intention, and supported it on the understanding that il should be sent to a select committee. Of the legal members of the House, Mr. Stout raised the question as to the bill being a private one j Mr. Brandon thought it was; Mr. Whitakex objected to interference with a matter for the Supreme Court; and Mr. Button held that the House was, in a sense, the author of the trust, and had a perfect right to see it properly carried out. Of the other members, Mr. Ballance, Mr. Donald Reid, and Mr. Tribe addressed themselves particularly to the equities of the case; Mr. Hunter, as one of the trustees, defended the management of the estate, and disputed the jurisdiction of the House ; and Sir Julius Vogei again, when speaking to an amendment, cited the Irish Church, the English Endowed Schools Act, and passages from Lord Romilly as justifying the interference oi the State when a church or corporation acted as a bad trustee. Both lie and Mr. Ballance were emphatic in describing the badness of this trust, by its distant, instead of local existence, and the Premier was sure that, though the bill might not be carried this year, it would prove the beginning of the end oi a public wrong. The amendment was that the bill i be read that day six months, moved by Mr. I Macandrew ; and on a division it was carried by a majority of 11, the voting being 19 to 18. An amendment for adjournment, moved by Mr. Burns, had been previously negatived on the voices. On the motion and the two amendments, a majority of the members spoke, and the bill was altogether more keenly discussed than any that have been introduced this session.