GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Lyttelton Times, Volume IV, Issue 186, 2 August 1854, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

i if Delates continued from our Extra Number of | Wednesday, July 26th.] I Friday, June 2. I LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. s The Speaker was not present, Major Kenny jl occupied the Chair. | On the motion of Mr. Bei-l, the reply of the f .Council to liis Excellency's address on opening p the Session, which had been brought up by the | .Committee was agreed to, dt was as follows;-— I "We, the Legislative Council of New Zea- "'■. land, desire to couvey our thanks to your Excel- \. Jency for the Address with which you have been f ; pleased to open the tirst session of the General Assembly. "We beg to offer to your Excellency, our ,m.ost sincere congratulations, that the privilege jhas devolved upon you of placing the people of New Zealand in the full enjoyment of the Constitutional rights conferred upon them by our t Gjacious Sovereign and her Parliament; and to assure you, that your Excellency's desire of friendly co-operation and support will.be most cordially responded to by this house. "We rejoice at being able entirely to conpur with your Excellency in the existence of prosperity among all c'asses in the colony; and to bear our testimony, assembling as we have done from many parts of the country, to the increase of material wealth throughout the islands to ■which your Excellency has referred. "The maintenance especially of peaceful and friendly relations between her Majesty's subjects of both races and the increasing intelligence and civilization of the natives, lead us to the earnest hope that the time is not far distant when the aboriginal population shall take a part in the same constitutional duties and privileges as ourselves. ." We beg to assure your Excellency that, " whatever measures may be brought before us , by your Government, or by the other House of ' Assembly, will not fail to receive our most careful attention; and we unite with your Excellency in the prayer, that it may please Almighty God to direct and prosper the Councils of the first Parliament of New Zealand, to the honor of the Queen, and the welfare and happiness of her people in this portion of her dominions.'' Mr. Whitaker brought forward his motion for a variety of papers relating to the New Zealand Company's Debt, which was agreed to. Major Richmond postponed until the next ■ meeting his motion for an Address to Her Majesty expressing gratitude for tbe New Constitution conferred on the Colony. The Council then adjourned till Tuesday next. HOUSE OF EEPKESENTATIVES. ! The Speaker took the Chair at 11 o'clock. The Minutes of previous Meeting were read. HOTICES OF MOTION. Mr. Mackaj gave notice that, on Friday, the 9th June, he would move— For a Select Committee to be appointed to report on the present Duties of Customs levied in the colony. Major Greenwood gave notice that, on Friday, the 9th June, he would move— For a return of the total number of electors on the electoral roll entitled to vote for members of the House of Representatives of New Zealand, specifying the number registered for each electoral district, on the completion of the electoral roll of 1853. Mr. O'Brien gave notice that, on Tuesday next, he would move—■ That a Committee, consisting of Messrs. Monro, Fitz Gerald, Hart, M'Andrew, and Crompton, be appointed to consider the best means of introducing the most complete system of vaccination amongst the natives; and that such Committee be empowered to take evidence on the subject. Mr. Hart to move on Friday, the 6th June— For the appointment of a Special Committee to inquire into the origin, nature, and extent of the just claim, if any, of the New Zealand Company upon the Colony of New Zealand. ORDERS OF THE DAY. RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT. On the motion of Mr.E. G. Wakefield, the House went into Committee, Mr. Porter in the Chair. Mr. Wakefield said—Sir, if it was necessary for my hou. friend, the member for Lyttelton, yesterday, to bespeak the indulgence of the House, that course is still more incumbent on

me now. His task, though one of difficulty and great delicacy,.was performed by him with such judgment, tact, and skill, that he only won our admiration instead of requiring our indulgence. But then his means of success on that particular occasion consisted chiefly of tbe discretion which enabled him to avert any conflict of opinion in the house; whereas my duty to-day involves the necessity of going to the bottom of the very principles of government, and of not only touching, but dwelling upon topics which can hardly be mentioned without exciting strong differences of opinion and feeling. lam under the necessity of claiming that liberty of speech which is our dearest ptivilege, and of using the most distinct language that I may be able to command, whilst addressing the house on subjects of a very exciting character; a.necessity which, as the house will see at once, enjoins me to claim further their indulgent consideration. I have been <told by members and others that my proper businesslo-day is to expound and explain to the house something about which some of them know absolutely nothing—to teach as a lecturer some unknown .branch of political science by unfolding its mysteries,; but when that remark w.as made to me just now, I ventured to aek the pontleman who made it whether lie was an Englishman, and whether, as such, he professed total ignorance of that British-Constitu-tion of which'we .proudly .say at home, that it is a glorious Constitution, the envy and admiration of surrounding nations. To those who ask " what is meant by responsible government,?" I answer, government according to the principles and usages of the British Constitution. Every one will admit, however, that the application of that Constitution to colonies, and still more to this colony at this time, is a very different matter, and one which deserves the most serious and earnest consideration of this house. That is what.l understand to be the subject of discussion to-day ; and I may therefore not improperly begin by reciting a few words of ,the ABC of ' the British system of government. This will be best done by stating what is meant by responsibility in government, and then drawing a distinction between the two ways in which government is made responsible under the republican and monarchical systems. Addressing myself therefore to every hon. member individually, I would ask, What is representation for ? Why are we met here ? We have not been brought here for the purpose of making speeches to each other, or for that of discussing abstract principles of government, though such discussion may be necessary as one means towards very different 'ends. We are here to reflect the well understood wishes of the people, to represent their wants, to give effect to their settled desires. Such are the objects, and, speaking generally, the only objects of all representation. It is only not so under a representative system of government, when, through some disturbing cause, the machine fails to perform its proper work. Whenever representation works properly, it occasions a popular influence in all the processes of government as well legislative as executive. Can any one cite an instance of representation working undisturbed without making the popular voice prevail in all the measures of government, and producing that effect by means of the representative body ? Truly, there have been plenty of cases in which the voice of the people, as uttered by the representative body, was disregarded ; but, in every one of these cases, the effect was not government, but revolution. Or, at any rate, if there was government without regard to the wishes of the representative body, it was not government according- to constitutional law, but aii exercise of mere despotism. This rule admits of no exceptions. Now, there are two distinct and very different ways in which representation is made to tell upon all the operations of government. The first occurs under tbe republican system. The best example is that of the United States of America ; not merely the government of the American Union, but also that of all the States of which it is composed. There, representation extends beyond the representative bodies, to the officers of the executive government. All the Governors of the several States are elected, and, in many cases, the principal officers under the Governor. In the United States Government, besides the President, the highest officers, such as Secretaries of the State, are indirectly elected by the people, being appointed, though nominally, by the President, still, virtually, by the Second Chamber of Representatives, the elected Senate.

I need not go into further details in order to establish the fact, that throughout America the responsibility of government to the people, or, in other words, the influence of the people in all the proceedings of government, both legislative and executive, is secured by means of universal election in one form or other. To some extent, and, in passing, I cannot help saying that, in my own opinion, to a lamentable extent, the principle of direct executive responsibility by means of election, was admitted into the New Zealand Constitution when the office of provincial Superintendent was made elective. If the conduct of any Superintendent should be opposed to the wishes of the people in his Province, he will be made to feel his responsibility at the next election. Believing that entire responsibility in the Provincial Governments might have been provided for without making the Superintendents elective, I regret that the American principle should have been at all intermixed, in our system of government, with the British principle as adopted in all the rest of our constitution. Turning now to responsibility under the latter system, I am ready to confess that the time is not very distant when our ancestors set the first example of indirect or ministerial responsibility. Down to the end of the Tudor race there scarcely existed any reality of representation in the House of Commons. That body was assembled for hardly any other purpose than that of giving a colour of popular sanction to giants of money to the Sovereign. The reign of the Stuarts was but a mortal strife between the responsible and irresponsible principles. Charles the First lost his crown and life because he was unwilling to make Bedford, Say and Sele, Pym and Hampden his Cabinet Ministers. Rebellion and civil war became the last resource of the people, bent upon obtaining some how an influence in the government. At last they altered the line of succession, and introduced a stranger King on condition that he would adopt the system of ministerial responsibility. From that day to this the system has worked without interruption, and with the most beneficial consequences. Since the year 1688, the Crown of England has never, I believe, exercised its prerogative of the veto ou Bills passed by both houses of Parliament. Of course not, because the veto could only have been exercised by the advice of ministers, who, of course would never think of advising the disallowance of measures which they themselves had recommended, and carried through the legislative houses. The system may be described in few words. The Sovereign, at his own free will and pleasure, chooses a- certain number of persons to give him advice with respect to every use of his high authority. They are commonly, for the sake of convenience, but not necessarily, persons holding seats in the legislative houses. When the advice given by them is unpalatable to the people as represented in the House of Commons, the bad advisers retire from office to make room for others who enjoy the popular confidence. Thus the Sovereign escapes all responsibility, and his office, being in no way elective, escapes all risks of suspension or disturbance. The advisers, the ministers, alone are responsible for everything. When they-jdifferfrom the representatives of the people, instead of a conflict between the people and the Sovereign, instead of angry passions of political strife, ending perhaps in revolution, some half dozen gentlemen walk out of a room, and another half dozen walk in, when peace is restored, and the people throw up their hats for the Crown and the Constitution (cheers). Such is the operation of responsibility under the monarchical form of government. If we, being Englishmen, had to choose, can it be doubted that w.e would prefer that form to the other? To a man we should object to direct responsibility by means of subjecting the Executive to election, and should embrace the system under which one ov more legislative bodies are elected, and all Executive authority is vested in one non-elected bead, himself irresponsible, whilst all responsibility rests upon persons over whom the people, through their elected Representatives, can exercise a sufficient and unceasing influence. But now comes the question of lite applicability to colonies of tins plan of indirect responsibility. Not very long ago ir was the fashion in E'nirlaurt, and especially in D .wninic Street, to say that the Bviiisli constitution is all very we'll for the people at home who understand it. but it is totally unfit for the pm.><>ses of colonial government. Instead of contr'ovev-

ting that doctrine, I will state a fact. It is, that now, in every one of the colonies of Englaud which enjoys full representation, which has a House of Representatives without admixture of nominees, and which is occupied entirely or chiefly by people of the British race—' the British constitution, including ministerial responsibility, is in full force. It was first established in Canada, where it was worked admirably, and then extended to Nova; Scotia, New Brunswick, and even to Prince Edward Island, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, a colony whose population scarcely exceeds in number the colonists of New Zealand. But further, only yesterday I came to the knowledge of a yet more remarkable fact. I then read, in a London newspaper which arrived by the recent mail from Sydney, a notice of the speech delivered by Governor Sir Henry Barkly to the House of Assembly of Jamaica. Everybody knows that government in Jamaica was lately brought to a stand still by conflict between the representative body and the executive, and that under a special Act of Parliament Sir Henry Barkly was sent out to restore order in that colony. In his speech when opening the Assembly, he states that his intention is to establish responsible government without delay, because he is instructed to do so, and because he regards this as one of the principal means whereby the disorders of the colony may be remedied. There can be no doubt of the fact; for though the number of the paper which contains the speech itself happens to be missing, the account of ■which I have given appears in another paper remarkable for its caution and accuracy as to statements of fact. Moreover, some months ago, I read at Wellington a full report of the debates in both Houses of Parliament on the revolutionary state of Jamaica and the remedies proposed ; and I recollect that during the debate in the House of Lords, Her Majesty's Colonial Minister, the Duke of Newcastle, declared that her Majesty's Government looked to the establishment of ministerial responsibility in the government of Jamaica as one promising means of restoring peace in the colony. This circumstance is the more impressed on my memory by another; namely, that, notwithstanding my strong faith in the merits of responsible government for colonies of the British race, and the active part which it has been my good fortune to take in giving practical effect to that belief, I could not help doubting whether the hope of the Duke of Newcastle would be realized. The House of Assembly of Jamaica is already, in some measure, composed^ of Negroes, who will probably soon be a majority in that body ; and though that race may become qualified to work the free constitution of England, I cannot bring myself to believe that they now possess the requisite qualities. Imitations of the British constitution have utterly broken down in countries inhabited by races superior in intelligence and self reliance to tlie Negroes of the West Indies, and invariably through an apparent incapacity to establish or preserve ministerial responsibility; but then, Sir, if Her Majesty's Government think the Jamaica negroes fit for responsible government, surely the gentleman who now holds the office of Governor *in this colony, must think that the colonists of New Zealand are not less fit. Let us imagine, however, for a moment, his Excellency to be advised that we are less worthy of the proper consequences of representation than the recent slaves of Jamaica—that it is wise and expedient to withhold from us the boon which has been deliberately granted for them—what will ensue? Inevitably, the working of (he Constitution must come to a dead-lock. I pray of the house to fix their attention on some absolute peculiarities in our situation. We are just now in a position different from, and in one respect worse than, that in which any colony enjoying representative institutions, was ever placed before. I will take Lower Canada as an example of the contrast. There, before responsible government was established, the Governor was at any rate represented in the House of Assembly. The Attorney-General, and some of his executive colleagues had seals in that house. It is true, as my lion, friend the member for Wairapa must recollect, that, in a house of 64 members, the Attorney-General led or was supported by only a minority of 8, and that the attempt to carry on representative government in that way produced conflict and rebellion ; but at any rate there were not wanting means of communication between the House and the Governor.

The Canadian House of Assembly was never in. so awkward a position as ours a little while ago, when we rejected the report of a select committee on improvements of this building because if we had adopted it, we must have sent a deputation to his Excellency to ask him for a grant of £300 for the purpose of enabling us to substitute hard seats for soft and to supply Mr. Speaker's private room with the means of washing his hands. It is no joke. If we had adopted the report, and his Excellency, as in duty bound, had enquired how the money was to be expended, we should have involved him and ourselves in a most unseemly and indecorous proceeding. There never was before in any country or colony, a representative body deprived of all means of communication with the head of the Government. Sir,'this is no light matter, but one of the gravest import. If we cannot communicate properly and satisfactorily we shall do so improperly and dangerously. Like every other popular body which has resorted to hostile proceedings when popular rights were withheld by the advice of irresponsible ministers, we shall be driven to the last resource which the British form of constitution, whether at home or in a colony, places in the hands of the representatives of the people/ as the only means of defending their constitutuents from wrong and oppression. I come now to another point. With kow much responsibility shall we be satisfied ? Not with what we have now, which indeed is absolutely nil. We shall never be otherwise than perfectly dissatisfied until we have somebody here answering for the Government. As to the rest —I mean general responsibility —speaking for myself alone, I shall be content with a small reality for the present, but utterly discontented with the largest possible sham. I shall be content if one or two persons, having seats in this house,' shall be charged to carry through and explain the policy of the Government in this house, and to conduct the business' of Government when the session shall be over; but, of course, with the understanding that their tenure of office, as his Excellency's advisers, shall depend on our approbation of their policy and conduct. To such persons, so presented to us, I should tender all possible support; that is, a full support short of the sacrifice of fixed and cherished opinions. My own disposition and desire would-be to help and strengthen such a Government, and to prolong [its existence, if possible for years, at any rate until the General Assembly should meet again. Once more I say* that I could not abandon objects to which I am deeply pledged; no, not even for the purpose of averting great temporary evils; but I should wish to postpone such objects, if necessary, and to be guided generally by a spirit of forbearance and moderation. With regard to gentlemen out of the house, supposed colleagues' of the new ministers and perhaps actual holders of office, I should be willing, nay desirous to avoid differences with them, to bury the past in oblivion, and to work with them for the future in gradually establishing complete and permanent ministerial responsibility. Sir, we have all lately seen in print and heard in private discourse, that difficulties, insuperable difficulties, oppose themselves to the adoption of the policy which I have indicated; that the proposed change may be good to do, but cannot be done ; that in order to the establishment of ministerial responsibility or parliamentary government, there must be two hostile parties tearing each other to pieces. I can see no such necessity. I trust that we may remain for years without violent party animosities. The two great parties at home (which, by the way, have been almost extinguished by Sir Koberi Peel's free-trade policy) sprang out of great events, long years ago ; and we may well suppose that years will probably elapse before there can be in this country a banded party of Outs always striving to turn out the Ins. I believe myself that the absence of party has nothing to do with the matter. In due time, no doubt, rival parties will grow out of events. There may even soon be a conservative party, aud a movement party, such as all free countries exhibit; or perhaps the day may not be distant when parties will be distinguished by Provincial and Federal preferences. But instead of regretting that there are not two hostile parties we may surely rejoice at observing the general and earnest desire of this house to make the constitution work as well as possible, instead of throwing party obstacles in the way of that most desirable consummation. But lam far

from saying that there is no' difficulty to be overcome. Let us suppose that His Excellency should in some way inform us that as an Englishman he has no objection to the principle of the resolution before the house, that as' an observer of political events, he sees what is the natural, proper, and indispensable condition of representative Government, and that he is ready to give effect to his opinions, but that he finds difficulties in his way arising from the fact that he now meets for the first time a body of men who are for the most part strangers to him; and that he is ready to do his part if we will do ours by presenting to him the men capable of carrying on his government; men that is, of judgment and prudence/ enjoying the confidence of that house, and willing to undertake the duties and responsibilities of office; if, I say, such a call was made on us, the Governor would put himself completely in the right, and we should be put completely in the wrong- if we were unable to respond to the call. We should lose the benefits which we are seeking, by showing that we are not fit to enjoy them. His Excellency, by convening us-when it was not absolutely necessary, has evinced, more clearly than by words, his sense of the creditable manner in which the people have performed their duty as electors; he has shewn that he is not without confidence in us; and though we must not praise ourselves, I think that a stranger observing the proceedings of the house, would say that His Excellency's confidence in it is not misplaced; that it is a. a good house, earnest, but moderate and discreet, and capable of furnishing him with a Government; though I firmly believe that not a single member came here seeking for office/ Further in the background theie is another set of objectors. Imean those who insist that this thing cannot be done without an Act of Parliament. When this so-called difficulty was mentioned, I called to mind what had been done in Canada, and by what authority. The Canadian'constitution under which responsible government was fully established, is the Canada Union Act; and I will venture to state positively that it does not contain one word about ministerial responsibility, or even an allusion, direct or indirect,to the subject. That Act was principally framed on the recommendation of Lord Durham's report, a copy of which is now in my hand; and I can assure the bouse that Lord Durham when urging the necessity of adopting the responsible system of government expressly declares that an Act of Parliament is not required ; that the change may be aecora- | plished by a few words in a despatch. Nor i does he say that even a despatch is necessary. He describes it as a means, not of enabling the Governor to change his ministers and make the new ones responsible, but of compelling him to do'so if he should be unwilling, if he should be advised to be so unwise as to refuse the desire of the people. If we were to pass an act, which, not being disallowed by Her Majesty would have the force of an Act of Parliament, we should have precedents to go by ; for the Legislatures of South Australia and Victoria have recently passed acts to provide for responsible government. But why ? Because in each of those legislatures, [one third of the house are nominees, who have managed to withhold responsible government; and have so induced the majority, being popular representatives, to make sure of obtaining their desire by passing a law, the object of which is not to enable, but to compel. Unquestionably, if we had a Governor who had made up his mind to refuse and withhold, it might be necessary for us to pass such an Act; but with a Governor disposed to grant the boon, all talk about the necessity of an Act for enabling him to please himself and us, is absolute nonsense. The proposal has no foundation in fact; it is (only a device of men in trouble, who want to delay, stave off, trusting that something good for them may turn up ia the [future chapter of accidents (hear, hear). This reference to circumstances in Australia prompts me to return for a moment to the question of a small reality or of a great sham. If the governor's whole Executive Council, even 8 or 9 members had seats in this house, but on the understanding that they were not bound to resign office when they lost our confidence, it would be oniy a great sham. It is just so in Australia, when one-third of the house are nominees, including office holders ana members of the Executive Council, who say. We are always ready to explain and uphoui the policy of the Government, but if you, tuc

representatives, two-thirds, differ from us, we shall retain our offices, and we don't care a bit for you. It would be the same if the New Zealand Legislative Council of Nominees were mixed with us in this House and pretended to be responsible ministers. It would be a very large sham. Any arrangements will be a sham unless it distinctly provide that the ministers m this house and out of it retire from office whenever it shall be fully established that they do do not possess the confidence of the frepresentative body. After so long wearying the house with these grave considerations, 1 may entertain them for a moment by citing the opinion of an Australian office holder and nominee legislator on the subject of responsible government. All the officials' in the house, except oue, voted against the provisions which I have before described, and "the Acting Solicitor General" (I quote from a printed report of the proceedings)' " explained that responsible government consisted in the liability of the advisers of the Crown to impeachment, and afterwards to decapitation for giving dangerous advice to the Crown; and, therefore, as this could not hold in the colony, he would expunge the words." Hear we see why the Victorian legislature thought it prudent to pass an Act for compelling, not enabling, the Governor to establish responsible government with or without the assent of his advisers. Whilst on what may be termed the personal part of the subject—l mean the appointment of new officers and the removal of present incumbents— I wish to express my own deliberate opinion that when a set of persons^ who have long served the public, are removed from office by the introduction of representative government and removed after becoming unfit to gain a living for themselves/ they ought to be provided for by the public. I believe that justice demands this no less than policy. On the score of policy only, it would, I think, be most unwise in a body like this house, seeking so great an object as good government for the colony, to let so small a thing stand in their way as some retiring allowance to a few officers, some of them, be it observed,being persons who, if they understood that the house intended to starve them, might Naturally attempt to put formidable obstacles between the house and its desire. Therefore,' and also on the higher ground of the sound policy of justice, I trust, (and I know that many hon. members hold this opinion likewise) that a just and proper .provision will be made for office-holders who may be removed by the operation of a constitutional system. If we obtain that system completely, I should myself be quite disposed to forget old grudges—to abstain, and to strive at persuading others to abstain, from pursuing revengeful or malicious objects. I know that some are far less afraid of Expulsion by responsible government than of the exposure of ancient mal-practices ; and we naturally have an inquisitive longing to pry into past mysteries ; but still,* for myself,- I must repeat, that unless with a view to some important object in the future, I should be Content to forget the past altogether, and to see this house devote all its energies to the promotion of future good for the country. On a dif= ferent point, I must express entire agreement with my hon. friend the member for Lyltelton, who said yesterday that ministerial responsibility ought not to be volunteered by His Excellency. Our business, I thiuk is, to bring the question before His Excellency in such a form and manner that he must either comply with our wish, or stand in the unenviable position of having consciously disappointed the expectations and frustrated the deliberate wishes of the people's Representatives. This course seems desirable with a view to home, where there may be persons jealous oi the high reputation which our new Governor seems likely to acquire, and therefore willing to carp and cavil at a great performance by him. Therefore, I shall be glad if responsible government be pressed upon him by us* instead of being originated by him* But I must here draw a marked distinction between the head of the Government and his advisers—between the Governor and the Government. Under the responsible system at home and elsewhere, it is the custom to attribute to the Crown or Governor, any act of grace or favour towards the people, and to cast upon their advisers the blame of every unpopular act of authority. This may often be unfair, but I would adopt [the custom in this instance, because I have an impression, occasioned by circumstances not definite enough

for description, that- His Excellency is personally well disposed to establish ministerial responsibility,whilst his advisers are indisposed. I have therefore an impression that though there is at present official agreement between His Excellency and his advisers, there may be a personal difference of opinion on the question before the house. I imagine, therefore, that the settlement of that question rests principally with His Excellency himself; and judging by the manner in which he has already wielded his high authority, I conclude that he has the sense to perceive the absolute necessity of this concession, and the courage to disregard the bugaboos of danger which may be raised up to frighten him from a wise and honourable purpose. Sir, lam conscious of the inadequacy of the exposition of principles and policy with which I have troubled the house at the instance of other members. Many important branches, or rather essential parts of the subject,1 are left wholly untouched. For example, not a word has been said by me abont the mischievous operation of irresponsible authority in disallowing Provincial ordinances.' I trust however, that relative of mine who has paid attention to the subject, may be encouraged to bring it before Hie house; Whilst confessing the insufficiency and defects of my own attempt, I feel bound to hold myself prepared to submit to cross-examination,' to answer questions on points whereon I have failed to express myself clearly, and to endeavour to remedy as far as I may be able, acknowledged deficiencies; and the form of our discussion, in Committee of the whole house,affords facilities for subjecting me to any enquiries that any member may deem requisite. It is right that I should take care not to entrap the house into agreeing to any motion without being aware of its consequences. I must state, that therefore, that if they should adopt the Resolution before them, I shall feel it to be my duty to propose as soon as possible a respectful Address to his Excellency, praying that he may be pleased to give effect to the opinion and wish of the house as' set forth in the resolution. I must not sit down without one more remark. To me, of course, and to many more, it will be highly gratifying if the Resolution should be unanimously adopted; but there is a reason for almost wishing that the motion be opposed, so that his Excellency may learn from debates and a division, how earnestly, and by how large a majority the motion is supported. No precaution has been taken by me to' secure a seconder. One consideration induced me to leave that matter to accident; namely, the hope that after hearing what I could say in suppport of the motion,- some member from the North might he willing to second it. I beg leave to move as a Resolution (cheers),

"That amongst the objects which this house desires to see accomplished without any delay, both as an essential means whereby the General Government may rightly exercise a due control over the Provincial Governments and as a no less indispensable means of obtaining for the General Government the confidence and the people, the most important is the establishment of ministerial responsibility in the conduct of Legislative and Executive proceedings by the Governor."

Mr. Oarleton begged to second the motion of the hon. member for the Hutt, reserving, for the present, any observations of his own.

Mr. Macandkew stated that after the very luminous speech with which the motion has been introduced by the honourable member for the Hutt, he would not attempt to go over the same ground again, at the same time, the importance of the subject, and the strong1 and. decided feelings entertained respecting it by the constituency which he had the honour to represent, demanded that he should not give a silent vote upon the question. While fully concurring in all that had been said by the hon. mover, as well as in the comprehensive tenor of the motion, he would have been better pleased had it been more explicit, or rather had it been followed up by a practical delineation as to the manner in which the principle asserted in the motion could be carried into effect. This objection, however, was in some measure obviated by the announcement of the honourable member that he intended to follow up the notice by an address to his Excellency. He fully appreciated the difficulty of the position in which His Excellency the

Officer administering the Government was placed, as well as the motives which has prompted the lion, mover in framing his motion, and in supporting it, with a due regard to the difficulty of that position ; at the same time it was useless to shut his eyes to the fact that unless the Executive Government was identified to the fullest extent with—-and responsible to the fullest extent to that house— their meeting was nothing more than a solemn farce. Without such an Executive the business of the country must come to a dead lock. There were many measures of the most vital importance to the colony, which no private member of that house could either originate or carry out—measures which would require the whole time, energy, and influence of the Executive Government. It has been surmised that there were not men in this house either qualified or prepared to conduct the Government. His answer was, that if so, and if there were not men in that house qualified,-and, if need be, ready to make personal sacrifice in order to conduct the Government, the people of New Zealand were not ready for free instistitutions, and the Constitution Act had been conferred too soon. He felt assured that there were men in that house as well qualified to compose an Executive as any out of it. It has been said that they were unknown to each, other, and that a ministry could not be formed from the representatives of the people, having the confidence of that house ; in other words, they would have more confidence in an Executive nominated by Sir George Grey, irresponsible to that house, than in an Executive chosen from the representatives of the people and directly responsible to the house. He (Mr. McAndrew) would take any number of men out of the house in preference to an equal number who had not undergone the same ordeal of election. He would conclude by expression his intention cordially to support the resolution.

Mr. Weld, in following the example of his hon. friend the member for Dunedin, and rising to address the house on this most important and momentous question—;he did so from a feeling that it was important that not only men who froTn deep study and long experience were qualified to act as public advisers and public instructors, but also that men of l£ss calibre, like himself, should come forward to give expression to their feelings and convictions. He was the more encouraged by the dignified and temperate demeanour of that house—he had almost said the charity of its comportment —to those members who, like himself, stood, from inexperience, so much in need of indulgence; but even were he not speaking under such favourable circumstances,-he should still have felt it his, duty not to give a silent vote on such an occasion, holding, as had always held, decided opinions upon the subject of responsible government—opinions strengthened by age, and matted by reflection into convictions. It was a duty he owed to himself, a duty he owed to that house, and a duty he owed to his constituents, to give utterance to the expression of those strong and emphatic convictions, and he trusted that however deficient in power of argumentation, he might be excused from expressing a hope that the feelings of a mind thoroughly aud honestly imbued with its subject might not be without its weight on that house. He must confess that when he heard hon. members congratulating themselves and the country upon the inauguration of representative institutions,—when he heard the felicitations of the representative of the Crown echoed back by the representatives of the people, the thought had crossed his mind that such good auguries for the future were premature, unless they were built, as he had a most confident hope that they would be built, on the oiily true aud sound foundation of really responsible Government. He would never, for his part, consent to sit in that house, to take part in the government of this country, did he only sit there as part of an obstructive and disjointed system. Were we called together simply to cavil at, to obstruct, to make war upon an alien and irresponsible executive, he believed that no hon. member would come there for such purposes. He had always opposed an autocratical form of govemment,*yet even that had unity to support it. Without such unity of design, which could only be supplied by responsible government, he foresaw nothing but disorder and con fusion—confusion so utterly confounded that it might take years of labour to

repair the errors of that one session. Around him were gentlemen who might live to see New Zealand a great and mighty nation, with interests so great as to he beyond the most sanguine present anticipation ; but he would predict that they would never again be called to take part in a session so pregnant with the germs of futurity as that session which they were how holding. He rejoiced to see that hon. members, iv the speeches of yesterday and to-day, had taken a •wide and extended view from the eminence on which the Constitution had placed them, and had looked beyond the present into the distance of futurity. It was the property of small minds to lose sight of the magnitude of a principle in the littleness of its "material adjuncts. Hon. members, he was glad to find, had advocated a line of uniform and consistent policy to be taken in reference to the future as well as to the present of this country. Let him ask how such a course could be adopted? How could it be carried out without the design of some guiding mind? how put in force under an irresponsible Executive? For his part, he would state that he was prepared to give his earnest consideration to almost any line of policy with some plan, some consistency, some design, to a mere patchwork o£ conflicting legislation. To do so he would, as far as possible, wave any personal feelings, any crotchets of his own, everything but great and immutable principles. He thought that any hon. member opposing this motion would feel it his duty to proposesome eißcient substitute for responsible government. He knew of no other mode of setting the wheels in motion. He would earnestly consider any proposition that might be made, unless, as the hon. member^ for the Hutt had said it should be, a '•'sham." Representative Government without so much responsibility as would ensure unity of action, was, to use forcible words, a mockery and a delusion. Illustrations were hardly needed. He and cither hon. members had bills" and suggestions prepared; how, in the present state of things, are we to dovetail them into one edifice, and what guarantee have we that when this session is ended an irresponsible Executive will carry its line of policy into operation. It was his opinion that Responsible Government afforded our only hope of an efficient and strong central power. He trusted that all would stand together and do their duty by the country. He felt sure that that house would assumea firm, decided, yet respectful attitude. He expressed his confident hope that the Officer Administering the Government, to whom we owe so much for introducing the suspended element of the Constitution, would, by exercising the prerogative of selecting some advisers amongst those who had the confidence of that house, place the future Government of this country on a secure, a firm, and lasting foundation (cheers). Mr, R^vans said he had not intended to take part in the debate at this early stage,' but to lceep the discussion alive, he would offer a few remarks at this time. He thought the hon. member for the Hutt was entitled to the thanks of the house for the convenient manner in which he had placed his motion in their hands for fdiscussion in Committee, thus enabling members to express their views on various points of the question as brought out in debate. For his own part he had no difficulty in arriving at a conclusion on the subject before them. He believed that representative institutions would be no benefit to the country unless accompanied by responsible government—one part of the machine, however beautifully constructed, would be useless without the other in fact, it would be as incomplete as a coach without its wheels. It was vain to talk of the motion involving his excellency in embarrassment ; there could be no doubt whatever that nothing would tend more to relieve him from embarrassment and facilitate the action of his government than the adoption of this principle. The remarks which had been made in the course of this debate respecting opposition on the part of his Excellency's advisers might have no foundation, but if so the injustice thus done to those officers must only be traced to the system which that house was anxious to get rid of, for one that would relieve the house from a constant liability to misunderstanding of the motives and actions of the Government. There might be good grounds for the suspicions referred to, but on the other hand, possibly much injustice had been done to his Excellency's advisers by those who entertained this suspicion. Never v/as there a chamber of legislature placed in such anomalous circumstances for carrying on

the business of that house. Reference had been made to Canada; but there the case was not so bad ; for members of the Government had ex officio seats in the house. Still they sought for ministerial responsibility, and took the same road to attain it which had been recommended to this house—the only road which is open to an Englishman to secure for his country those institutions which are her glory and her safety —(cheers).

Mb. O'Neill said,—l have been given to understand that a feeling exists, that those gentlemen who represent the Northern province in this house are in some measure opposed to Responsible Government, and as I allow no man to be a mouthpiece to me, I will take the liberty .to give my own views on the subject. I have come down to the house with my mind not made up on the question, and I have listened with the greatest imaginable attention to the honourable member for the Hutt, who introduced the subject for discussion, so that I might, by a little reflection, arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on this very novel topic. And from the explanation given by the mover, who evidently is well acquainted with the subject, I am rather disposed to offer no opposition to the plan being tried, because the scheme, when cbnoid.ered, seems very feasible. The droppings of Responsible Government have been so often heard in this house since it has been opened, that I have been puzzling my brains whether it would be really conducive to the interest of the colony, and if desirable, how the machinery could begot into action in the absence of a second great parly ; because to introduce Responsible Government, and be at the tender mercy of one set of men, it might possibly place us in a worse position than we were even before free institututiohs were introduced into the country. If there is no mistake about the matter, and if members feel assured that the necessary materials for two or more complete parties do exist, it would perhaps be worth while giving the project a fair trial. Supposing that the materials could be found, this form of Government would, I believe, afford us a great amount of security against official misrule. If we take even a cursory glance at the past history of New Zealand, we cannot fail to perceive that everything has been carried on in the most secret and dogmatical manner imaginable, and altogether irrespective of the opinions and wishes of the majority of the people. Laws have been framed and passed by officials in whom the settlers had not the slightest confidence, for they had little or no community of feeling with the colonists; they came merely to enjoy comfortable quarters, and a good salary. However, thirteen years of misrule are quite enough; the days of secresy and error have, I hope, expired ; and I trust for the future the Government vail employ those only in whom the people can place the fullest confidence. I dissent from the views of the mover, that old servants of the government should have a pension. They have feathered their nests pretty well in the country ; from a small population they have for the past ten or twelve years been receiving enormous salaries. I will, therefore, be opposed to giving any retiring allowance; but I am disposed to give Responsible Government a fair trial.

Mr. Lee said that lest it might be considered that by his silence he gave unqualified assent, he wished to offer a remark, admitting at the same time, that to a great extent he was unacquainted with the subject. He would support the motion for responsible government, although by so doing he might be bending the bow at a venture. He regretted that the hon. member had not gone more into detail. He would ask how the executive was to be appointed ? How did the hon. member mean to give practical effect to his motion if carried ?

Mr. Wakefield said he should best answer the question put by the hon. member for the Northern Division, by stating1 what had been done in Canada when responsible government was first established there. A new Governor, Sir Charles Bagot, found his executive in a minority in the House of Assembly. He therefore sent for one or two members of the majority, and charged them to form a government. He recommended a new Executive Council, including some of the old members, and new appointments to some of the highest offices. All this was clone Avithout a difficulty or a question; the new government had a large majority in the representative body; and the whole machine, which had been stopped, moved on with per-

feet smoothness. Exactly the same thing mieht happen here. * °

Mr. Lee had not yet been able to understand how responsible government was to be established. Was it to be understood that members appointed to the 'government were to go back to their constituencies to be re-elected ?

Mr. Wakes-IBM}, in reply, said that that was not necessary, if so, it would involve the delay of a long adjournment; there'was no existing law provided for the resignation of their seati in this house by members accepting oflice under the Grown.

Mr. Forsaith said, I regret, Sir, that hon. members who have already spoken on this subject should have encumbered the question with remarks that belong more properly to the principle of Responsible Government in the abstract than to the practicability and expediency of its introduction into the administration of affairs in this colony. I confess, Sir, I entered this house quite undecided as to the course it would be proper for me to take. Looking at the hon. member's motion as it now stands, and regarding it as but the enunciation of the principle that Responsible Government was good and desirable considered in the abstract, I should have had ho hesitation, provided a trifling verbal alteration had been made, to give it my cordial support, had not the hon. member, by the candid admission with which he closed his speech, warned the house that if they carried his motion, he should immediately proceed to take steps for the practical application of the principle. I still feel it difficult to determine whether I should proceed to explain my own views, or whether I should follow the hon. member in his remarks, as far as memory will enable me, and offer such comments upon his views as suggested themselves to my mind while he was speaking. I will decide on the latter course, lest by deferring those comments until after I have given my own opinion, they should altogether escape my recollection. 1 think Sir, that a great portion of the hon. member's address might with safety have been omitted, because it turned on the abstract question, upon which there could be little difference of opinion. I believe that the confession of faith of this house, on this question, might be thus expressed. The princible of Responsible Government is the principle of the British constitution. And from the earliest dawn of thought and. reflection we have been accustomed to revere the institutions of the land of our fathers, and consider them as nearly allied to perfection as human institutions can be. But it does not necessarily follow that because the British constitution is the best and most perfect system of Government that is to be found in the world, or on the record of history, that therefore it is in all respects adapted to every dependency of the British Empire. The first part of the hon. member's address was a truism. We are all agreed in opinion as to the value of Responsible Government; but the succeeding part of the hon. member's speech was a non sequitur. It did not follow from this that the introduction of Responsible Government in this colony was practicable and expedient. The hon. member asserted that in every instance upon the records of history where the ministerial representative principle had obtained, and the responsibility had not been carried out, collisions had been followed by revolutions. I quite agree with the hon. member in his remark that we do not want a rebellion. And I deprecate the utterance of predictions of this kind. It is not the first time in this house that the hon. member has predicted collisions, and I would remind him, and hon. members of the house thai there are predictions, which from the very circumstances connected with the position of those who utter them, are calculated, if not intended, to bring about their own accomplishment. The hon. member said that it was not necessary to obtain an act in order to the practical application of the principle of his motion. He referred to the Act of Union in the North American Colonies, which made no allusion whatever to Responsible Government; though Responsible Government was introduced. He led the house to suppose that because the act contained no allusions to the subject, that therefore the constitution under which we are assembled this day, presented no obstacles to the immediate introduction of Responsible Government in tins colony. This I also consider a non sequitur. We are not ot liberty to form our conclusions apart from the constitution, and if the act by which this house is constituted contains no

direct allusion to the subject, it does on the other hand expressly allude to the mode in which communication between the Executive and Legislative departments of the Governments are to be conducted. The lion, member was not sufficiently explicit in unfolding the plan by which he purposed to make the introduction of this principle practicable. He said that he would be satisfied with the concession of a small reality, but would repudiate a great " sham." And at first he led the house to suppose that he wouLl be satisfied with one or two members of the Executive in this house as the exponents of Government measures (Mr. Waketield, " no, no.") The idea conveyed to my mind was, that such concession would be a reality, but it afterwards appeared that unless they were to be dismissed when they lost their majority it would be a " sham." I think, Sir, if it can be shown, that there is the slightest ground for supposing that the Constitution is inimical to the adoption of the principle in all its integrity it behoves this house to pause. I entreat the house to walk warily in this matter. I know that the idea of Responsible Gorernment is a popular one, and I know, too, that by demurring to the expediency of its immediate introduction here, I run the risk of being considered an enemy to progress and reform ; but no consideration of a personal kind, nor any desire to court popularity, shall deter me from expressing my conscientious convictions. I believe that this question involves consequences far more momentous, than we can easily, at a glance, perceive ; and I would not have hon. members, who by long study and familiarity with this subject, see their way clearly before them, press the question to a definite decision, before others, less acquainted with it in all its bearings, had time for calm and deliberate reflection. I will now proceed to state the opinio.i I hold, and unfold the process by which I have arrived at that opinion. I hold it to be legally impracticable, though on this point I would not speak dogmatically. There are members of the legal profession in the house, and they will know what weight properly to attach to this argument. First, I would call the attention of the house to Sir G. Grey's despatch, dated 30th August, 1851, (here the hon. member read paragraph 49.) The next link in the chain of inductive reasoning by which I have arrived at my present opinion is that our constitution was based upon and framed in accordance with Sir George Grey's recommendations. (Cries of no, no.) In proof of this I turn to Eavl Grey's despatch, dated February, 1852, (here the hon. member quoted the paragraph.) This admission was reiterated and confirmed by Sir J. Pakington, turn to his despatch accompanying the Act itself, dated the 16ih of July, 1852, he says, (here the honourable member read the paragraph,) and again towards the close of the 'same despatch, he says, (here the honourable member again read.) Now, Sir, I take these proofs to be sufficient to establish this point that the Constitution was framed according to Sir George Grey's recommendation, —and he recommended that the Executive should be permanent. I now turn to the act itself, and I think hon. members will admit that there is a great difference between it and the Act of Union referred to by the hon. member for the Hutt. In clause 57, it enacts (the clause was read by the hon. member.) This when coupled with Her Majesty's letters patent instructing the Governor how he is to form his Executive, I think clearly establishes the idea, that the Executive is only to be responsible to the Crown. Iv clauses 56, 58, and 59, the manner in which the Governor is to communicate with the Legislature is expressly laid down. It is by this process, Sir, and by these proofs of the intentions of the fVamers of the Act that I have arrived at the conclusion that there are legal obstacles in the way of the immediate introduction of responsible government in the sense of the motion before the house. There is in addition to what I have advanced, collateral proof that the framers of this Constitution did not intend to admit the principle. The house will recollect that Sir J. Pakington found the heads of the bill, which he adopted, and which, without essential alteration, ultimately became the law, ready prepared to his hands by Earl Grey. Earl Grey, when he proposed that bill, was a member of the Cabinet, which distinctly recorded their opinion upon the adaptation'of responsible government to the Colonies. It is to he found in the report of the Committee of

the Privy Council, upon the nature of the Constitution that should be granted to the colony of the Cape of Good Hope. With permission of the House, I will read an extract.

" It has been suggested in most of the minutes enclosed in Sir H. Smith's Despatch that the principal officers. of the Colonial Government should be at liberty to become members of the Assembly, by election. We cannot concur in this recommendation, j,which .is''(contrary to what has been the usual practice of Colonial Governments. It is true that of late years in the North American colonies, what was formerly the general usage Las been departed from, and that some of the principal offices of the Government are now held by members of the Legislature; but this change of position has been coupled with the establishment of what h&s been termed " responsible," but what would more correctly be described as parliamentary or party Government, the essence of which is, that the offices of the Colonial Government which are conferred on members of the Legislature, are to be held by them only while they continue to be supported by a majority of the House of Assembly. This system of administration we regard as altogether unsuitable to the present circuinatanccs of the Cape Colony. (Cries of Hear, hear.) Because we believe it to be one which can never work with advantage except in countries which have made such progress in wealth and population that there are to be fonnd in them a considerable number of persons who can devote a large proportion of their time to public affairs.1'

Now, Sir, if such were the sentiments of the Cabinet of which Earl Grey was a member,and if he considered responsible government unsuited to the colony of the Cape, which, though in some respects analogous, was at that time much further advanced in wealth and population, I think it affords sure ground for concluding that he did not think it. suitable to this colony." Recurring to the hon. member's remarks about the compromise with which he would be satisfied ; it must not be overlooked that without an alteration in Her Majesty's letters patent, it would not be possible for the members of the Executive to hold theirappointments only while they could command a majority in this" house. Members of this bouse might be added to the Executive, but they would then necessarily be permanent, at least subject only to the will of the Crown, because they would be appointed in virtue of the instrument which is intended to provide a permanent Executive. So that were such a compromise as this effected, no very material advantage would be gained. 1 admit sir, that there would be one object gained by the presence in this house of one or two members, recognised representatives of the Government. Honorable members would then be able to while away the monotony of the dull days of the Session. They would have a butt at which, during their hours of recreative leisure, they might discharge their shafts. I recollect, Sir, when a boy, we used in cold weather to play a game called buffet the bear. We took care to warm him and ourselves too. And which of the hon. members would undertake to represent the Government in the house. For my part, I would willingly concede the post of honour to the honourable member for the Hutt, the mover of this resolution. But let me remind hon. members that such an arrangement would be no more akin to ressponsible government than was the bear in our game akin to the bear of the iceberg. I come now, Sir, to those considerations which induce me to think that it would be expedient to press this question, and I will commence with one which, in a sense, may be termed the "aro-u----mentum ad hominem." It addresses itself peculiarly to those sentiments of honour and generosity which I believe to be cherished by this house. His Excellency the Officer Administering the Government has avowedly taken a great responsibility upon himself in thus calling us together, and in the reply to the addresl which he delivered at the opening?of the assembly, which we adopted yesterday, we make graceful allusion to the'fact. And although that reply did not contain, as I think it ought to have, any assurance on our part that we would abstain from any step calculated to increase the difficulties of his position, yet I am persuaded that honourable members'will not the less feel themselves bound in honour and generosity carefully to guard against doing so. And I think it would be an ungrateful return, if, at the very commencement of our proceed-

ings we were to make such a demand upon him, occupying, as lie does the posiiion of a " locum tenens" and not that of permanent Governor, as must necessarily increase his difficulties and responsibilities. There is another element in this question which appears to have been entirely overlooked by honourable members who have addressed the house. It is that of the rights of the natives. How would they be affected by them ? When they consented to the establishment of British authority in these islands, they voluntarily agreed to rely upon her Majesty as their guardian and defender. Would they be satisfied with such an arrangement as that which proposes to transfer this power from the hands of the Queen to those of a party? Again, Sir, I maintain that the principle of Responsible Government could not, with safety to the interests of all classes, be introduced without a previous remodelling of some of the provisions of the Constitution. The effect of the immediate introduction of this change without a previous remodelling of some of the provisions of the Constitution, would be to curtail, if not extinguish, the political privileges of some classes of the community. There is a passage in the Report of the Privy Council, to which reference has already been made, which bears especially on this view of the subject. It runs thus :—

"It has been the invariable tendency of free Government to lead to the formation of political parties ; and we believe that much of the usefulness of deliberative bodies exercising the powers of Legislation depends upon their being so constituted as not entirely to exclude any of the parties into which the community is divided." Now, Sir, looking at the constitution of this house, we all know the talents of the hon. mem. who moved this resolution, together with the similarity of his views with other hon. members would always command a majority. That majority, too, would always be composed of those hon. members who—by reason of the proximity of the Provinces which they represent —the close affinity of the systems under which they have been nurtured and brought vp —and the community of feeling existing among them, would be naturally drawn into combination on all questions ofjpublic policy, and thus the representatives of that Province which, by the isolation of its position, and the singularity of its origin must ever furnish the minority, would be permanently excluded from a clue share of political power. Again, I would entreat honourable members to walk warily in this matter, and to calculate the consequences that may possibly follow the hasty adoption of this measure. The honourable member for Lyttelton, in his eloquent address in moving the reply, alluded in felicitous terms to the solicitude with which the first exercise of our powers would be watched by the parent State, and I would remind the honourable member that this first expression of our new-burn powers, instead of being hailed with joy and pride as the healthy cry of a promising child, may be regarded as the sickly craving of a pampered appetite, and be answered, not merely by a stern prohibition of the desired boon, but also by the imposition of some new restrictive re<jimen. The honourable member for the Wairau, in his address in support of this motion, declared that we are left to grope on our course without a guide, and insisted on the necessity of our having one. He will permit rue to remind him that the possession of talents, however great, does not always furnish a sufficient guarantee that the possessor of them is endowed with the attributes of a safe and trustworthy guide. Fearing that I have already trespassed too far on the patience of the house, I will conclude by moving the following amendment; and as I have not made any arrangement towards its being supported, I hope that it will so far commend itself to the judgment of the house that some member from the South will feel at liberty to second it:—

" That this house, being deeply convinced of the magnitude of the question of Ministerial Responsibility, and of the necessity that any steps in connexion with it should be taken calmly, deliberately, and only after all the members shall have had full time for the due consideration of the subject in all its bearings, is of opinion that its first proceeding should be the appointment of a Select Committee to consider and report upon the expediency of the adoption of the principle referred to, in the government of the colony, and the time and mode in which, if such adoption should be deemed expedient,

it may be brought into operation so as most effectually to attain the object, and guard the interests,"and promote the welfare of both races, and all classes of Her Majesty's subjects in New Zealand. That it be an instruction to this committee to report on the earliest day that may be found consistent with the fitting discharge of its duties : but that in the meantime the house will feel bound to proceed with those measures of immediate and practical utility which may appear best calculated to meet the present requirements of the colony." Seconded pro forma by Mr. Sewell. The continuation of this debate will he given in our next •publication.