FLYING SKETCHES IN PARLIAMENT.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume I, Issue 17, 9 June 1880, Page 3

FLYING SKETCHES IN PARLIAMENT.

(from our own correspondent.) No. I.

I pvouxiaecZ to give yoa a iew P&rliamentary jottings during the session, whenever I had a chance of being in the House of Representatives, and if anything transpired of any consequence. Hitherto, I have been too busy to 'attend more than a few minutes at a tune, and, as you know, but little has transpired of general interest. However, on Friday night, I was able to be present for an hour or two during the debate on the second reading of the Charitable Aid and Hospitals Bill, and I propose to give you a pen-and-ink sketch of what I heard. I shall take the liberty of interpolating a few remarks about the style of the speakers, and an occasional criticism of the arguments used, whenever the subject-matter of my tale seems to require it — that is to say, I shall try and write just such an account of the proceedings as an ordinary intelligent habitue of the House would give, by word of mouth, in reply to a question as to what had been going on in the House on such-and-such a night. These remarks will apply not only to this contribution, but also to any other which I may be able to furnish you with during the session. I know from experience that country readers, as a class, do not care much about abstract politics ; but I believe an occasional sketchj' parliamentary letter, buch as is proposed, will be both read and appreciated, provided, of course, that the subject is well handled.

On Friday evening .1 strolled into the gallery of the House about 8 o'clock, just in time to hear a hearty and vigorous speech delivered by Sir Win. Fox on the subject of the Chatitable Aid and Hospitals Bill. He declared that he was by no means enamoured of the Bill in its present forcn ; its tendency was to destroy the spirit of self-reliance shown by people who had invested their savings in benefit and friendly societies. Wanning to his. subject, he sketched in graphic lines the misery which is brought into the colony, and the crime, poverty, and distress which are directly attributable to the intemperance of the community both here and in Great Britain, and contrasted the habits of the bulk of the working classes here with those peasant proprietors on the Continent and elsewhere, of which we hear so much. The fine presence of the man, and his great command of language, were shown to much advantage, whten he undertook to draw a well-defined picture in vivid colors of the sober, thrifty, and industrious habits of the French peasant. I am bound to admit that much of it was plagiarism (probably an unconscious one) of part of the first chapter ot "The People," by Michelet ; certainly it was so, so far as the remarkable and wellknown passage which describes the French peasant fanner as hardly able to tear himself away from his little plot of ground even on Sunday.

Although Sir Wm. Fox did not support the Bill, he praised the Government for having determined to devote their attention to these questions of so ial reforms. Of course, he made free use of the startling statistics of pauperism, directly attributable to drunkenness, which are familiar to all apostles of teetotalism ; he alluded to an orphanage at Duuedin, I think, in which every child, almost without exception, was found, upon inquiry, to be the offspring of intemperate parents, either on the father's or on the mother's side. On this occasion, Sir W. Fox was content to appear as a temperate advocate of temperance, as he only urged that some of the public houses should be removed, and that the total number should be somewhat restricted and diminished. I noted this point particularly, as I have long held the opinion that the cause of temperance, and even of strict temperance, has suffered more from the wellmeant zeal of some extreme teetotallers, than from any organised opposition which has ever been brought to bear against it by those interested in the sale of strong drink. Sir W. Fox concluded his speech by saying that he was unprepared to speak on the subject, and that he was unable to approve of the Bill, because he found that it would tend to increase, rather than to diminish, the pauperism of the colony. The very instant that Sir Wm. Fox sat down, Sir G. Grey rose, and advancing from the back seat which he now occupies, conjointly with Mr. De Lautour, began by saying that he was delighted to find that Providence had brought to his side such substantial aid as that afforded by the previous speaker. Sir George contended that if the land laws of a country were what they ought to be, no poor laws would ever be needed. The pauperism which had been referred to in England arose, he thought, chiefly from the absence of all hope- in the breasts of the people of ever acquiring independent homes of their own. " The people of England," he said, " have so homes — no

spot of land to call their own." A similar state of affairs, he thought, was threatening this country. The Native Land Bills, just laid before the House, were instanced, and he adjured the Government to check the action of the land harpies, who were even now grasping after lai'ge tracts of native lands, with the secret approval, if not with the connivance, of the Government. Sir George then proceeded to attribute the intemperance and want of thrift of the working classes to their state of hopelessness, to the hardness of the times, and to the want of homes being placed within their reach, and wound up by referring to the present Government as the real cause of most of the depression, declaring that if " a land tax, increasing with the acreage of each property, had been imposed, we should shortly have a happy people — thrifty, sober, and industrious — because each man would be settled on his own piece of land." Sir G. Grey was at his best on this theme, and was well prepared with statistics, showing that a heavy direct tax upon land was levied in Australia, Belgium, Holland, Germany, &c. He also stated that he was informed that the Thames borough had, during the past year, expended half their year's rates in charitable relief; that all the rates in that town had to be levied upon about half the propertyowners, the rest being gold mines or Maori freehold ; and that, consequently, the provisions of the Bill woulcf need much amendment before it would meet the requirements of that case.

Mr. Rolleston, as Minister for Lands, replied. His style is far from good — to a hesitating manner, he joins an unhappy knack of mending Ins sentences, and but seldom finishes or rounds off a period; bait when warm m debate, he can hit out havd aM straight. Upon this occasion, he did not shine as an orator ; nevertheless, the substance of his reply to Sir G. Grey was sound, practical, and well-ad-vised. He pointed out that the plea, that hopelessness was a cause of thriftlessness and intemperance, was unsound, because it is well known that intemperance increases with the increase of prosperity — that practical administration in respect to the question was imperative — that Government action was required, because, through the undertaking of public works by the colony, a large class of men had been rendered wholly dependent upon the Government for their livelihood. The measure had been carefully considered, but the Government would gladly accept amendments to suit special local requirements, and would be guided by local knowledge in such cases. He resolutely declined to notice the severe political attack made by Sir G. Grey, because he hoped the questiou would be treated as one from which all party feeling should be care'ully excluded.

Mr. De Laxitour followed, and but for his shrill, grating voice, there are few men better worth listening to. He criticised the Bill very severely, and declared that an attempt was being made to turn the Otago self-supporting hospitals into sciniworkhouses — to degrade the voluntaiy co-operative institutions of Otago into pauperised, irresponsible bodies, largely dependent on Government money. The proposed boards would probably prove as extravagant as the Education Boards had done. Hospitals as refuges for the sick of all classes ought, he thought, to be kept entirely separate from charitable-aid institutions. The proposed sj'stem of outdoor relief was highly objectionable and demoralising. Mr. De Lautour concluded by appealing to the Otago Ministers to explain why they attempted to diag down their institutions to the low level of Canterbury hospitals. To this appeal Mr. Oliver responded. His reply was apt, as far as it went, as he pointed out that the largest institution in Otago was not voluntaiy, but was supported by Government subsidies and rents from landed reserves, and that, consequently, no individual could claim to enter the hospital as a right for which he had paid by the exercise of thrift and forethought, as Mr. De Lautour had contended. As the colony as a whole was undoubtedly responsible for much of the pauperism of the day, Mr. Oliver strongly urged that the Consolidated Fund of the colony should be mad j to contribute a fair proportion of the required amount. Mr. Speight followed, but I do not regard him as sufficiently interesting or instructive to be worth listening to, and I did not stay to hear him. The Premier replied briefly to most of the speakers, and, as usual, directed the heaviest fire against Sir George Grey. He concluded by asking the House to consider the Bill in a fair spirit, and to amend its defects in committee. It was then read a second time without a division being called for. The debate was admitted by Mr. Rolleston to be one of the best he had ever taken part in ; this fact, and the importance of the subject will, I hope, excube the inordinate length of this contribution. Y.