The Globe. FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 1874.

Globe, Volume I, Issue 76, 28 August 1874, Page 2

The Globe. FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 1874.

The Premier regrets exceedingly that Otago should be the only province which has not been specially recognised by the Assembly during the present session. These regrets are induced by the action of the Legislative Council, which, by a majority, has thrown out the Bill authorising tbe purchase by the General Government of the various provincial lines in Canterbury and Otago. The Premier, however, is determined to do good to the province from which he first entered on political life in New Zealand, and so he proposes to leave certain objectionable clauses out of the Bill as it at present stands, and present it again to the Legislative Council next session. Meanwhile, in order that there may be no unnecessary delay about the turning over to the Government of the various lines in question, he proposes that the valuation of the lines shall be proceeded with, and a date fixed, at which time the Government will be prepared to complete these arrangements. It will be said, therefore, that the Premier has no doubt about obtaining the consent of the Legislative Council to his Bill, as soon as certain obnoxious clauses which do not appear lu him to bo of very great importance, as compared with the remainder of the measure, shall have been expunged. The Premier's action in this matter is conciliatory to the Upper House, and seems to us to be conduct which would have the effect of inducing the Legislative Council to look favorably upon the Bill, when it is presented a to them in its amended shape. There appear, however, to be members in the House who would force the Bill clown the throats of the members of the Upper Chamber, and accordingly speeches were made by certain members, which were by no means conciliatory to the Legislative Council. Messrs Eeid and Macandrew both advocated the immediately taking faction in the matter, tho former, by proceeding to move a resolution which would enable the Government to proceed with the

Bill as if it had been passed, and pledging the House to indemnify the G-overnment for their actions in so doing ; whilst the latter, would throw upon the shoulders of the Council the whole responsibility of throwing out this important measure. Either of these plans seems to us to be open to the very grave objection that they would involve a quarrel between the two Houses. No one seriously supposes that the Legislative Council can stop any important or vital change in the policy of the country from taking place, and we have the word of the Premier that the Legislative Council do not object to portions of the Bill, which Mr Vogel terms " of very great importance." This being the case, and looking to the small majority by which the Bill was thrown out in the Upper Chamber, it is evident that Mr Vogel thinks that, by making some concessions which shall not affect the vital principle of the Bill, he will be enabled to convert the minority on this occasion into a majority, and the end he has in view will be attained without any ill-feeling being engendered between the Legislative Council and the House of Representatives. The House is evidently of his opinion, and the Bill was amended as desired, but even this expression of the opinions of the members did not content Mr Beid, who brought forward the resolution he had spoken of, and the Premier, after some discussion, agreed to bring down, at the evening sitting yesterday, a Bill giving authority to pay £GO,OOO on account of the purchase of the railways in question. This would, we suppose, satisfy Messrs Eeid and Macandrew, but as usual, when the chance of getting money was scented, there were other members who wanted to get hold of some if possible. The Nelson Loan Bill having been thrown out by the Legislative Council, Mr Curtis thought this a favourable opportunity of getting it forward again for discussion, and the Premier so far yielded as to say he would bring down a separate Bill for the purpose, though he deprecated the request, and from this we conclude that he will not be very vexed if the House do not endorse the views of Mr Curtis on this occasion. We sincerely hope that they will not do so, and that, if Mr Curtis has any grounds for complaint of the Nelson Loan Bill having been thrown out, he will be obliged to bring down any proposals he may think fit to make to the House of Representatives in the matter, by themselves, and not be allowed to mix up the question of the purchase of the Canterbury and Otago railways, and the Nelson Loan Bill, in one set of resolutions, merely because they have both been thrown out in the Upper Chamber.