EVENING SITTING.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 10093, 7 September 1895, Page 3

EVENING SITTING.

jj 0 Tho Hoaee reiamed at. 7.30. Btt LIQUOR BIIiIj. Tho Alcoholic Liquors Siilo Coutro ed Act AaieHdment Bill wan committed, at Cause 2, " Interpret iti"'i." Be A long dlscuPMau took pluco nn |!r Bt, proposal that the HeensinK poll -h.i.iiit ■■• i"c taken on the same day as tiio Rener;i oleotloD.— Mr Seddon s&id he ;,honld U{

Jha j prepared, although it would add to tb Vy, 1 coat of the elections, to amend tn-j bill b his having Beparnte pulling boothi an er. separate offioers. Ha wleitcii. to pet th Mr voice of tho whole "f tbo peni'lo'on th he licenslnn qncstlou, as he felc the he. Nero;- would hcve rest till Hiia iiupqrtan Question was decided. He ho^ed th h e House w6uld gl^e o ntwlcht caii vot tB( , as to whotboir ot liub the licensing pol be aheald be taken on the nama day as bh :er general election.— Mr Hall-Jones move B t ( an amendment that the licensing pol et übonld not be tiokßli on the same dav a ed ' ne general election. — Mr Seddon" an a nonnced that the Government did no r0 trer.Ubis Bill as a party question Thi or division resulted in a ti« ; ayes 31, noei h e 31. The Cb.alrmau of Committees gavi (j_ his voto against the amendment-, whief 3( j was declared lost, and tho clause passec en tmaltered. „ j e la ela&se 3, which provides that the granting of licanses U s-.'J'jecb to n vote oi ? . electors, and seta ont four quest'orii fit m which votes are to be t«?:eo, Mr G. W. m Rassell moved th£ excision of the firsl ot) sub-sectlcn iitotlng electors to determine wbeiii'ar the cumber of licenses in the district ia to continue. He said if this sub,j section were struck out, throe o.neotio'iis ', would be left for ejectors ;c decide, viz. : whether there afcould be reduction, " whether th'era should be total prohibition In tha district, and whether there should v oa total prohibition in the colony.— Mr . Seddon could not accept the amendment, aa the electors had as muoh right to have 3 _ this issue submitted to them as any other. „ — Sir R, Stoat naw no reason why tb,'e f amendment .should pot be ocroptod, • as it woutd apt afters* the bill. — ■ After a short dlstassion Mr Russell's fcojendtierifc was lost by 42 to 21. ■ ' --Mr Millar proposed to strike out the second sub-section, which makes the question of whether tap nnrnbGr cf licenses existing In a district la to be rea dnced one of the questions to b? decided by the electors.— The amendment wan , lost on the voices and the clause passed 1 unaltered. * Mr T. Thompson proposed to strike . out clause 4, which provided that a poll should be taken on the day of the general I election, He said the 'question was one of such great importance that ftcether " vote ahonlri b& fakeo on )*, especially as the last, vote had reunited in a tie. The ' responsibility 'ot deciding the question 1 should not rest with the Chairman of Committees. — On a division Mr Thomp-> son's amendment was carried by Si to 30 ■ and the olanae BtTiii& cub. 1 Clause B, v.'ii'uh provided that eiich voter nhall be entitled to vote on any one or two of the proposals, bat on not rcoro than two, and voting shall not be cumulative, was discussed at great length — Mr Euufbaw moved an amendment that each voter shall be entloled to vote for one. two, or three of the proposals, instead of ono Or two. — Mr Seddnu hoped the Honey would stick to the bill as it stood.— Sir R. Stout snpported the amendment, and said it a cumulative vote were not allowed, be would ask all those who supported temperance to voto for killing thG bill by rhe c'lairmtn leaving the chair. If the bill were passed as it stood, it wou'd be entirely in favor of the liquor party,— Mr Seddou aiid tlih was de mOcrtioy •, th>»o the tcmp.'.rnnco members would support a hill m Inr.g us they gob what thpy wanted. (Sir R. Stout : " Certainly.") Then Sir R. Stout would (iud that the majority would not vote for the chairman leaving thi> cbftir. He considered two vote? weie sulliciFiti. Voters conlcl vote for local prohibition or nAtfonat prohibifioc, or n reduction or licansns do remain as they \verc-~llr 6. J. Smith said the bill && at present drawn was infinitely worse tlirm tue pre sent law. — Mr Kell anid the bill was a brewers' bill, — Mr Seddon resented Mr Bell's statement that his w.is a brewers' and pnb'ieaos' bill, nnd declared that, on the contrary, it gave more to temperance reformers than any measure introduced ia any Lpglslnture in thp world.— Captain Russell suggested the lint thing to be done was to take <i atra'gm onti votn of the people for prohibition or nn prohibition. They conld then t;ike a vote for the reduction of licenses, but the two should not be mixed up together, as it would only lend to confusion.— Eventually Mr Karnsh^w'fl amendment wits curried by 40 to 20. The following Is the division list:- • Ayes (40). Allen Mis] In Bell Mn'sey Buddo M'Guira Baick M'Nab Batton Millar CarncroßS Mitshelson Cornell Mna'gomery Collins Morrison j Dntbie Kewman I Earnebaw OK?gin ; Flatm.-iu Piukcrtn:; Frassr Piraui Hall Jones liv. vA\, G. W. Hone Heke Russell, W. R. Hutchison, G. Ssundern Joyce Kmith, E. M. Hutchiceu, \V. Smi'.h, G. J, Kellj, J. W. Stoat Lang Tanner Mackenzie ( T. Wilson Noks (20). ' Cadmon M'Kei.zle, J. Cirroll M 'Ki!! zic, R. CrDwtbur M'LiLehlan Dancin Mills Green Purata Hnriia Seddon HO(>g t-tevcDK Knlly, W. Wiilia M'lntosh TUoiiipfon,T, j M'Goivan [One name short te'iegropued.] Paibs. aye. ko. Wi Pere Mereiiiih Mr Seddon said he would ioyuliy accept the verdict of the committee juat given. Clause 7, " provii.ioDs iju'ojccl to wbich poll to be taken." — Mr Seddon ruovtd that this clauae ba struck cut owing to rhe alterations made in tha previous clauses. — Vh» clause was strnck out. In cliuie9, which sets out when a proposal is deemed to ba carried, Mr Luvry moved tint v three-Gfths majority should decide for a reduction iustend of an absolute majority. — Lost on the voices. — The clause iv.ik altrrtd to provide that the committr.e ut its lirit; meetirg uftar a licenslcg poll sluul reduce lic-juses by 10 pfr ci'uo instead (if 5 per cenr, if r.he poll is ia Uvnr of rcsiiuction. — A proviso was ad(! i f 1 . !>! the effect ttut where a reduction hnc 'i i:n civrried tin: nuiubov of iiceneea sho-: t' \n: reduced b> cne no U;,Ht. This \v»>. i;;."«>rt(sd to nif.ct tiiu caau nf any dititrico which has only uue nr t*vo hotels. — Mr G. J. Smith totivnl ilni', in that i portion of the ciaurt; providing for no i licenses, it should be by >i bue majority foe prohibition imtend of thrce-tifi.hs. — Mr Siddon opposed the amendment which was rejeiitoJ oo a divi«iou by 31 to 22 and a tbree-fiith m&jotity rtiUiufid. The lollowing is tha division list) : — KOES (31). Allen Lang Bnick Lvwry Oadman Mackenzie, T. Cirucross M'Gownn Carroll M'Kenzle, J. ColHds M'Lachlan Crowther Mills Duncan Mitchelson Fraßer Montgomery Green Reeves Hall Kn.-atll, G. W. Harris Seddon Hogg Smith, E. M. HatchlsOD, G. VViiJla Kelly, W. Thompson, T. [One name short telegraphed.] AYES (22). Bell M'Nab Buddo Millar Button Morrison Caruell Newman Earnshaw O'Regan Klatman Plnkerton Hall-Jones Pi:n:ii Hutchison, W. Saundeis Kelly, J. W. Smith, G. J. Mashn S - out Massey Tanner Pairs. NOES. AYES. Meredith Wi Pere i i Parata Te Ao ; Sir R. Stont moved that the threefifths majority required for Colonial pronlbiton ba struck oat in fnvor of i\ bare i mnjority. Lose by 30 to 21, [ The clauau wus then agreed to as , amended, j A motion tn report prnprcss was curried ' by 31 to 20, :m<l ilm U.usc rose at 1,25.