GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
[from our special reporter.] Tuesday, August 29. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON PANAMA POUT OP CALL QUESTION. Mr. ITaughton, who seconded tho amendment on Sir. R. Graham's resolution, relativo to tho port of call for tho Panama Mail Service, reminded tho House of tho position in which tho dobato stood when it was adjourned. The Postmaster-General (Hon. Major Richardson) said he had not intended to speak so early in the debate, as his hon. colleague at tho head of the Government (Mr. Weld) had already addressed the House, and had adduced many of the arguments? in elucidation of the subject which ho hisn-'clf would have brought forward; but after the remarks of the hon. member on the opposite side of the House, which showed some want, of information, ho thought it his duty to place before the House that which he possessed. Tho subject under consideration was tho resolution and amendment, and he believed it would be strictly in accordance with the usual practico to confine his remarks to the amendment only; sometimes, however, an amendment was of such a nature as to involve almost necessarily the consideration of the original question, as in this easo: for the question was that tho subject should borefcricd to ft Select Committee; but in his opinion the House would be in possession of sufficient uiformation to justify it in coming to a conclusion without the appointment of any committee. When the member for Franklyn (Mr. Robert Graham) introduced his resolution, he (Major Richardson) ■waa unfortunately called away for a short time, but tho papers, and the Defence Minister had eiven him some information about what was said Bv him. When he read the resolution, ho had doubU whether tho member for Franklyn (Mr. R. Graham) was in earnest in introducing it, tor it appeared to him to bear on tho face of it the impress of a joke. They had heard of geographical centres and of commercial centres, but Auckland could not bo considered as either the geographical or commercial centre of Now Zealand. _ They had been advised, in considering this question, to discard all the provincial prejudices and jealousies from their minds which were so apt to take possession of them. He had endeavoured to do so— to divest himself of any feeling he might have as a representative of Otago; but, even if ho had not done so, it would not only be as one entrusted with the administration of the affairs of tho colony, but also as such representative that he would protest most earnestly against any change taking place, and object both to the original resolution and to the amendment* to the effect that the matter should be submitted to a Select Committee. He desired to state, shortly, the legal position of the matter; it was this:—An Act was passed in 1563, and another in 1864, relating to the Panama Service, and subsequently in this Session, an Amendment Act had been passed by the Legislature. In the contract entered into by the Government for the service between Panama and New Zealand, it was stipulated that the port of call should be Wellington, and it was quite impossible by any resolution of that House, or even of both Houses, to vary an Act of the General Assembly; it would have to be done by an Act, if done at all. He would go back and give a history of the progress of this matter. He found that, in 1859, when this subject was under the consideration of the Imperial Government, in connection with some very strenuous efforts which were being made at that time by New South Wales for the establishment of a communication between the Australian Colonies and Great Britain, via Panama, several tenders were made for the service, and there were some stipulations made by the Imperial Government in a Treasury minute, bearing date February, 1859; they were to the following effect: —
<• In coming to this decision, however, it must be clearly understood, that my Lords will not coneider themselves bound to accept any of the tenders unless they are fully satisfied. " Ist. That the amount is reasonable, and such as they would be justified in incurring. '•'2nd. That the times and rates of speed are such as to harmonise perfectly with the Suez ser▼ioe, so as to make the two, alternate fortnightly with each other; and, " 3rd. That the Government of the Australian colonies will undertake one entire half of the cost of both the services, via Suez as well as via - Panama, whatever they may be." 1 When the present Government took up the question, they did so with this ultimate object 1 mi view, viz., that there should be a general 1 united service by way of Suez and Panama. He hoped he should be able to convince the House ; that that could only be carried out by making Wellington the port of call. If that were not done, it would be utterly impossible to gain the assistance of Melbourne, for it was by distributing ; the mail from this centre (Wellington), that they hoped, not only to enlist Melbourne, but Queensland, and some of the other Australian colonies. He would refer to papers received on the matter, i and he hoped the members from Auckland would , acknowledge, that in looking over the records, he , had endeavored to extract aD;that was fair on both , sides. He had been accused by Auckland members of being prejudiced against Auckland inter- ; ests, and having a partiality to southern interests; . but he hoped those members would disabuse their minds of that prejudice, for it was not that he loved Auckland less, but that he loved New Zealand more. He found in one of the tenders, dated Ist July, 1859, the following, " This Company will [ establish coal depots atFaval, at Colon, at Panama, at Tahiti and at Sydney. The vessels will, however, take on board sufficient coals to prosecute the whole voyage on each side of the Isthmus of Panama. The vessels will call at a port in New Zealand, somewhere in the neighbourhood of the Bay of Islands." (Hear, hear.) (He hoped his hon. friends would admire his want of prejudice "when he said that.) " And from Sydney the Company will send forward by separate steamers the mails for other ports in Australia." About the same time there was another tender from another company,of which Mr. George Clarkwas theagent, dated about the same time, Ist July, 1859:— "The station in New Zealand will be at Cook's Strait, where are Wellington and Nelson, the commercial capitals of the two main islands." (A laugh.) He was quite sure difficulties would arise when he came to that part of the statement. (Mr. J. Williamson: Who is the writer ?) The writer was a person of established reputation, though, perhaps, not known to fame j —Mr. George Clark, Secretary to the Australian Company (limited). He invited the serious attention of the House to the arguments used. " The commercial capitals of the two main Islands, the places of most importance in that oolony. A call there appears the only means of suiting the requirements of this case, as both Melbourne and Sydney have virtually settled the question by establishing their first stations for intercolonial purposes —the one at Nelson and the other at Wellington. It will further afford the oniy solution erf the difficulty of reconciling the interest in this line of the two great Australian colonies by a nearly simultaneous delivery at Sydney and Melbourne. The object of the present Government was to enforce what had been done by a previous Government; they had decided that when the mails via Panama arrived at Wellington, a swift steamer should go south and another north, and at the same time that two steamers should go to Sydney and Melbourne, so as to put those places on a direct equality ; ■ that, he believed, could only be done by having Wellington as a port of call. (Hear, hear.) Some reference had been made as to what was done by an hon. member not then in his place (Mr. Ward). It was said that he had exceeded his powers in getting Wellington made the port of call. He (Major Richardson) would read the general instructions which he (Mr. Ward) received from Mr. Domett, in 1862:— " N.Z. Colonial Secretary's Office, " Auckland, 6th Dec., 1862. " Sir, —I have the honour to request you to be good enough, in entering, on the part of the Government of New Zealand, into any contract for the Panama Steam Mail Service, not to fix or recommend any particular port of call or departure in New Zealand, but to give the contractors permission to call at those ports in New Zealand which can, on the outward and homeward voyages respectively be most speedily reached from Panama, and vice versa, with the smallest cost to the colony. "I have, &c.,
" Alfrkd Domett. " Hon. Crosbie Ward." Wliea' he (Mr. Ward) came in, as he 110 doubt MVuld, during the course of the debate, he would prove to the House that he did not take any part in making Wellington the port of call, but that he was actuated solely by the information which he was enabled to obtain in the commercial capital of the world; it was then decided that Wellington should be the port of call. He would freely acknowledge that Lord Claude Hamilton said, in a letter, dated October 16th, 1883, "that if Auckland was made the port of call, the company would consent to the. discontinuance of the present service between Sydney and Auckland, provided that the existing line between Sydney, Otago, and intermediate ports was maintained at the present subsidy.?'■ Then* was something stipulated for an additional charge, which Mr. Ward was justified in not agreeing to; Wellington, therefore, becamo the port of call. Th*: Government! then took a furthor step in advance. A. Bill came before the House, in 180 i, on the subject, andhon. members would, <$.U to mind that a severe debate, .arose, on
the consideration of the clausos; tbo Bill, in fact, would not then have passed had not tho Govern* ment dccidod that thoro wero three or four things in which tho House was anxious that thoro should bo restrictive stipulations. Ho roterrcd to sub-clauses of tho Act, Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 6. Tho Government had religiously abided by those stipulations. At the timo this subjcct was under debate, had there been any intention of changing tho port of call, eomo sub-olauso would have been added then, making Auckland, or any other placo, tho port of call. Thoy had heard, from timo to time, of floating statements respecting tho opinion eutortainod by Captain Vino Hall, the agent ot tho company. It had been stated that ho liau said that a large reduction would bo eilocted it Auckland wero made tho port ot call* Ho (Major llichardson) had considered it his duty to address Captain Hall on tho subjcct, and said to him: " These rumours are circulated by certain persons j is there any authority for their so doing ? Give mo some information on tho subject." Captain Vino Hall had done him tho favour to sond him a reply, which ho would read:— " Wellington, August 22,1865.
" Sirl hnvo to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday's date, and, in reply, beg to say that I havo no authority from tho company 1 represent to tako any stops towards substituting a port of call for that named in tho memorandum of agreement for tho Panama contract; nor do I see how two ports of call would bo more economical to tho company than one. " I believe that, undor existing circumstances, tho central position of Wellington renders it tho most eligiblo place for tho port of call. " I havo, &c.,
" JonN Vine Hall, " General Manager Panama Co. " The Hon. Major Richardson, " Postmaster-General." That would, apparently, settle that part of the question. He (Major Richardson) also inquired whether there was any authority for the rumour floating about that Captain Vino Hall had said, or somebody else had reported him to have said, that a large saving, such as £20,000, would be effected by carrying out the terms of this resolution. Capt, Hall replied that he had not at any time either said or written that such a saving would be effected, and ho naturally wished to know how tho saving could be effected, as tho saving, if effected, would have been with the company, and not with tho Government. (A laugh.) These arguments were very effective in contradicting such rumours. (Hear, hear.) The member for Franklyn had also informed them of a fact which he (Major Richardson) was not aware of, nor did he know any one who was aware of it, nor did he expect to find any one who would be aware of it (A laugh), viz., that by selecting Auckland as the port of call they would save two days. He (Major Richardson) had entered into elaborate calculations on this point, and they did not bear out that statement. He was almost afraid that the member for Franklyn had abstracted one of his most important documents. (A laugh.) He had found it (A laugh), and would read it. Miles. Panama to Mongonui 6400 Auckland ... ... 6507 „ Wellington ' 6500 So there would appear to be a saving of seven miles between the two places. He went to another source, and there he found that there was no appreciable difference between the distances from Auckland and Panama and Wellington and Panama. When he found two distinct authorities saying the same thing, he thought he was justified in saying that it was not true that two days would be saved. He would now read another distance table:— Miles. Sydney to Mongonui 1155 „ Manukau 1200 „ Auckland 1315 „ Wellington 1275 There Auckland was again at a disadvantage with respect to Sydney. Supposing they wanted Melbourne to join them (and he would inform the House that this was a most important point, for the scheme would only in that case be a complete success), the distance between Auckland and Melbourne was greater than that between Wellington and Melbourne. Miles. Melbourne to Mongonui... ... 1490 „ *Manukau 1440 „ Auckland 1650 „ Wellington ... 1505 Doubtful of the accuracy of his statements, or at least resolved that there should be no mistake, he (Mr. Richardson) referred to another and highly competent authority, and this was the result of the reference: — ! Distance Panama and Wellington and Panama and Auckland, no appreciable difference in practice.
with respect to Sydney. Supposing they wanted Melbourne to join them (and he would inform the House that this was a most important point, for the scheme would only in that case be a complete success), the distance between Auckland and Melbourne was greater than that between Wellington and Melbourne. Miles. Melbourne to Mongonui... ... 1490 „ *Manukau 1440 „ Auckland 1650 „ Wellington ... 1505 Doubtful of the accuracy of his statements, or at least resolved that there should be no mistake, he (Mr. Richardson) referred to another and highly competent authority, and this was the result of the reference: — Distance Panama and Wellington and Panama and Auckland, no appreciable difference in practice. Distance Panama and Otago, about 250 miles more. Distance Sydney and Auckland about 1280 miles. „ „ Manukau „ 1200 „ „ „ Wellington „ 1270 „ „ „ Otago „ 1250 „ There they had Wellington again at an advantage ; but some persons said, " It is not Auckland we are talking about, but the Manukau; we have a project of a railway to join Auckland and the Manukau." They had no details how the scheme was to he carried out, yet by that means they were told that a considerable saving would be effected. He had entered into an investigation to find out whether that would be the case, and he found that the mail steamer had been detained during the last three months for two days each time, from a difficulty in passing the Manukau Bar. That was a difficulty which would be insuperable, as the great object was the regularity of the service. His hon. friend (Mr. E. Graham) pictured the difficulties from distress of weather and earthquakes in Cook's Straits, Wellington being addicted, as he said, to earthquakes. He (Major Eichardson) would not take an ungenerous advantage. It was rumoured in ancient times that when a south-east wind blew, the boulders from the east end of the town were blown up to the other end, and when a north-east wind blew they were carried back again ,* no harm, however, was done unless some one happened to be in the way. He had the pleasure some time since of dining with an hon. friend in Auckland, when they were suddenly terrified by a whirlwind passing over the place; part of a building, about a tenth of the size of the House, was carried away, and a child in the road was also knocked down and had his leg broken, whom he had the pleasure, or rather the pain, of carrying to the place where it 1 lived. He had been some time in Wellington, but had never seen anything so striking as that. With regard to earthquakes, he knew nothing about any periodical return of them; but this he did know, that Auckland was a volcanic centre, and that the volcanic fires were very anxious to emit again. (A laugh.) He had it on very good I authority, that some day (he hoped a distant one) there might be i» few more of those cones so prominent in the beautiful features of Auckland at the present time. The next point he would enter I on related to the coals. The member for Franklyn (Mr. K. Graham) made, he thought, some strange I remarks about the great saving to be effected in the way of coals, by calling at the North. Ho was not quite sure whether it was £20,000 or £30,000. (Mr. Graham: £30,000.) He had been at some trouble to ascertain how the matter stood, and he would read the result of his investigations. COALS. Carbon. Wator - Sul P hr - Bay of Islands 55.40 ... 4.40 ... 5.10 Pakawau, in Nelson ... 60.10 ... 3.56 ... 1.04 Buller Eiver do ... 68.74 ... 0.70 ... 1.85 Grey Eiver do ... 62.37 ... 1.99 Coals consumedbetween Panama and New Zealand, say— Twenty-seven days, at forty tons a day=... ' ... 1,080 tons each trip. 2,160 per monf&. 25,920 per annum. Coals consumed between New Zealand and Sydney— Six days, at forty tons a day= 240 each trip. 480 per month. 6,760 per annum. 31,680 tons in all could be delivered alongside the hulk at Wellington at 30s a ton. From Australia coals could be obtained at a very cheap rate, and the quantity required in Now Zealand would be very small indeed; so that it tuna vnnof 4'.) 11 n »w. ■t a to. lU ..1.1
From Australia coals could be obtained at a very cheap rate, and the quantity required in New Zealand would be very small indeed; so that it was most fallacious to say (hat there would be a saving in the way of coals.; Ho would not disparage tbe coal deposits in the North. lie looked forward (o the day when Auckland, having got rid of its native difficulty, and relying more on itself, would be a largo centre for tbe Worth ; but while acknowledging tbat, he could not do injustice to the remainder of the colony. Ho would notice an analysis of the coals in other parts of the colony, for some stress should be laid on (his point. He found that coals from a place in Nelson (the name of which he could not pronounce,, as ho was . not well versed in Maori) contained a very considerable quantity of carbon, the amount of which was an essential ingredient in good coal. (Mr. Brodie: Hear, hear; and a laugh.) The Bay of Islands coal contained 59 per cent., aad the Nelson cqal 66 per cent, of that substance; the coals from the Buller and Grey rivers contained 00 or 07 per cent, of it .respectively; so. that thero was, in the neighbourhood of Cook Strait, a coal of a very superior quality'to that of the Bay of Islands. There was another point. The Bay of Islands coal contained a large quantity of sulphur—s.l f per cent.; Buller coal contained only
1.85 per cent. Supposing thoy woro to discard from thoir consideration the other advantages possessed by Wellington as a port of call—it the Panama Bteamer wont by tho north and returned by the south, tho distances, to say tho very loast, would bo about tho same. (An hon. mombor! No.) His hon. friond was unfortunately absent when ho adduced his evidence, or ho would havo been one of tho most vociferous in assorting its truth. Supposing tho mail had arrived in tho north, it would require four days to roach Wolhng* ton, which would bo lost to Otago, Canterbury, Marlborough, and Nelson. If Wellington was kept as tho port of call, the English news could bo telegraphed immediately to tno Middlo Island, by means of the submarine cablo laid in Cook Straits. It would also bo moro convenient lor travellers. Tho Postmastor-Genoral concluded by savin" 1 that ho thought he had established this fact-that tho port of call should bo in tho centre of tho islands, whence tho letters could bo distributed, not only north and south, but also to tho other colonies. He was, therefore, justified in saying that it would bo highly unjust to change the port of call. (Applause.) Mr. Reynolds said: Although ho himself was nearly convinced by the arguments ot tho Post-master-General, ho would advise the Government to assent to tho proposal for a Select Committee, as it would decide those who were doubtful on tho subjcct, and if tho quostion was not settled now, it would bo brought forward every session. He belioved that Mr. Crosbio Ward had suggested that Wellington should bo the port of call, (No, no), and it was desirable that any doubt on tho matter should bo cleared up : Mr. Glkdiiill said he thought tho appointment of a select committeo would dispel any doubt on the subjeot Mr. Phakazyn said ho thought that the appointment of a select committee would bo of no use, as whoever the members might bo, they would be prejudiced one way or tho other. Mr. John Williamson said he would voto for tho appointment of a select committee, an inquiry would then bo made into the subject, which had never yet been made. Although he belioved the contract could not be profitably carried out, yet, if Auckland and Otago were made the ports of arrival and departure, the present steamers to Sydney from those places would not be required, and in that way a saving would bo effected. Mr. Mantell said he rose to vote against the Select Committee, as he had no faith in Select Committees generally. A great amount of evidence would have to be called for on tho committees sought for, and perhaps before its labours wero concluded the Parliament would be dissolved. Besides that, tho arguments of the PostmasterGeneral were sufficient to convince any one who had any doubts on the patter, for he collected information from every quarter, and was the best person to give any information on the subject. In conclusion, the hon. member said ho trusted the contract would bo carried out in its present shape. Mr. Brodik said the contract entered into by Mr. Crosbie Ward was notoriously in excess of his powers, of he believed would be generally admitted. Wellington was not stipulated decidedly to bo the port of call by the company; but there was no doubt influences in certain quarters to come eventually to that conclusion. Commercial men would principally be benefitted by the Panama Service, and they would, moreover, have principally to pay for the advantage. The port of call should therefore be where the commercial men were most numerously located. The hon. member then compared the commercial returns of the port of Wellington with tho ports of Otago and Canterbury. The assertions of the Postmaster-General and other hon. members were not sufficient to convince every one, and for that reason the Select Committee should be appointed. Mr. Wayne was in favour of adhering to the present arrangements, and he should therefore vote against the appointment of tho Select Committee.
Mr. Vogeli intimated his intention of supporting the resolution for making Auckland and Otago the termini in New Zealand. Ho was in favour of the Panama line, and sooner than see that abandoned, he would rather see Wellington the only terminus in the colony. (Hear, hear.) He trusted that ultimately the colony of Victoria would come in and join the grand design of postal communication round the earth. He supported the resolution because he thought that, by adopting it, they would very much expedite the passage of the mail steamers. He affirmed that, in making Auckland and Otago the ports of arrival and departure, they would make the passugo much 6aferand pleasanter by avoiding the dangerous passage of Cook's Straits. He contended that' Wellington had not the trade possessed by Auckland and Dunedin, and that by making Wellington the terminus they would be depriving the company of those commercial advantages which they would otherwise have. He believed that if the committee was refused this session, another Parliament would see no reason to refuse a committee on such an important subject. He could se no reason why the Government should refuse the committee, except for political and party reasons. Mr. Cbosbie Waed said it was not true that ho had departed from his instructions and forced the contractors to adopt Wellington as the port of call. The correspondence on the subject showed, on their part, an indifference as to which should be chosen, at least to the extent o) leaving the point in his hands; and he had dealt with it—not finally, for power was left to the Government to alter the port if they chose,—simply as a postal question. Wellington was far superior to any other port for the purpose of distributing and collecting mails quickly. From Auckland and Dunedin, only two steamers at mo:t could set out at once on the arrival of the trunk boat to carry on the mails to other ports. From the extreme North and South, only two provinces at most, besides the port of call, could receive their mails after one day's delay; but, from Wellington Taranaki, Hawkes Bay, Marlborough, Nelson, and Canterbury could do so. The advantage was in the proportion of 6t03, or double. The total time occupied in delivery from Auckland and collection at Dunedin would be 41 daya, but to and from Wellington only 24 days, showing a saving of 17 days. This was adding the time of all ports together. And Auckland and' Dunedin, which claimed some advantage, would not get any by this proposal, for if they saved in one way, they would lose in another. Four days would be lost to each between receiving and answering their letters whether Wellington was the port of call or not. If so, the advantages gained by the other provinces settled the question even to those who might reckon the claims of the great commercial centrcs most highly. However, the contract was now settled, the price to be paid tor it was fixed, and there was no proposal on the part of the contractors to do it cheaper from any other port. On the contrary, there was a written declaration from Captain Vino Hall, read by the Postmaster General, to the effect that they did not wish to change, and would make no reduction in price if the change was made. To alter tha port in the face of this declaration would be folly. The postal service of the colony would be less efficiently conducted; and if there should be any saving in it practically, that would be the gain of the contractors, fie contended that, to change the port of call under such circumstances, would be excessively absurd. As to the amendment, referring the question to a Select Committee, he wished the House to remember what the effect would be. Next mail it would bo the duty of the Company's manager to write home, saying, "The Port of Call question has been referred to a Select Committee, and is still in suspense." What would be the effect on thfl company, on the eve of completing its arrangements, if they found that the port to be called at was not yet fixed? Would they not consider that New Zealand was playing a fast and loose game with them ? Ho implored the llouso to remember how the company had kept faith with the colony, and to reward them in turn by a strict adherence to existing arrangements. The company deserved the thanks of House for their moderation and patient reliance on the ultimate good faith of the colony. Ho spoke the more warmly on this point, because the company might, if they had chosen, have treated him with great severity. Others in their place would have done go; but they had, on tlio contrary, extended to him the utmost consideration and forbearance, even when they wore suffering loss. Ho ontreatcd the House not to leave the port of call question open, unsettling the company's arrangements at the last moment. Mr. CoiENBO said ho would vote for tlio Select Committee, because he saw no other alternative. He, did suppose that the Postmaster-General had Baid that the contract had been taken up, and that it could not be interfered with. Had he done so, there would have been no debato. The figures laid before the Postal Committco in 1862 were of quite a different character to tliojo brought forward now. If all those data given this evening by tho Postmaster-General wore correct, why rofuso e committee?
Mr. Bubns spoke in favour of the committeo. Mr. Wii.hon entreated the Houso not to furnish (he peoplo of Englund with an argument against giving (o this country free institutions, such as any attempt to interfere witli this contract would certainly bo construed into.
Mr. Patterson thought they wore in tbat position which demanded that tlioy should take every precaut ion in the matter. Ho voted for the amendment.
The Nativb Minister (Ran. Mr. FitzGerald) said ho had nothing further to adduce on the subject. (He went on at considerable length to refute the remarks of the—hon, member for Dunedin, as to the numbor of shipwrecks at the different' places; also, as to the value of Dunedin as a commercial centre.) Tho population of the settlement of Cooks Straits
was equal to that of Auckland and Otago together, Tho interests of tho population, in point of num. hero, was oqual on both sides of the quostion. Auckland was a bad placo as a m*rt; it led from nowhero to nowhere. A very considerable part of their exports was tho re-exportation of goods rocoivod from othor ports. It mijght bo made a centro of trade by extraordinary circumstances, as it had boon mado by the war. It was not, in reality, a groat commercial contro; but when its internal rosourcos wero fully dovoloped, ho had no doubt it would bo a proat commercial contro. In point of trade, Southland, I'icton, and Canterbury woro in a far moro liouithy statp than ovor Auckland had been undor tho present rotton system. Ho was confident that tho commercial contro of Now Zealand would, in a few years, bo Bomowhoro in Cook Straits, and not formed of a population such as had formed Duncdin, which was liablo to bo called away at a moment's notice. Although ho admitted that the commercial position of Duncdin was hotter than that of Auckland, yot ho maintained that twelvo months Would nbt pass over before that great commercial bubblo would bo knocked on tho hoad. As to tho question of distanco, it could easily bo proved on a globo that tho arguments which had been advanced on this subject woro absurd. Tho captain of tho Great Eastern had told him that if they wished to make a quick passago they must novor seek for winds, Thoy must make a diroct passago and never seek for winds. So that it was a folly to run south to scok for westerly winds. The main reason why thoy should not give this committeo was that tho question had been sufficiently discussed. It had been settled last session and had boon settled this session, and it was against tho dignity of tho House to rake up this subjret again. On tho question boing put that tho matter bo reforrred to a Select Committee, the House divided. Ayes, 18. Noes, 21. Tho Amendment was therefore lost.
Ayes, 18.—Buckland, Butler, Bums, Colenso, Creighton, G. Graham, R. Graham, Henderson, Monroe, O'Neill, O'Rorko, Patterson, Reynolds, Stafford, Vogel, J. Williamson,' John Williamson, Macandrow (toller).
Noes, 24.—Atkinson, Bunny, Brandon, Cox, Curtis, Fitz Gerald, Gledhill, Harrison, Jollie, Mantell, Miles, Ormond, Phavazyn, Renall, Sewcll, W. W. Taylor, Walker, Ward, Wayne, Weld, Wells, Wilkin, Wilson, Kichardson (teller). " _ Pairs. — For: Russell, Brodio, Haltain. Against: Fitzherbert, Featherstone, Domett. The House then adjourned. Thursday, August 31, 1865. REPORTS OF ENGINEERING SURVEYORS. , Mr. Ceosbie Ward moved, "That there be laid on the table copies of the last reports of the inspectors and engineer surveyors under the Steam Navigation Act, upon the steamers New Zealand, Wakool, and Favourite, and of the last certificate, if any, granted to each; also, copies of any general instructions issued by the Marino Board for the guidance of inspectors and surveyors under the said Act in the performance of their duties." Ho said he wished to raise tho whole question of steam navigation regulations. He mentioned the great number of wrecks which had taken place on the coast, and wished to find out if that was owing to the non-carrying out of the Act, or if tho Act was defective in itself. He was mainly responsible for the faults of tho Act, as he was principally connected with its being brought in. Tho steamers mentioned in the motion were the New Zealand, which, after arriving here from America went ashore on Hokitika, and suddenly disappeared. He wished to find out if there was any survey held on her at all, or whether the survey, if any, had been properly carried out, or whether the steamer was destroyed through unavoidable causes. The Wakool was a small steamer, which was allowed to go on to the West Coast without being at all surveyed. This steamer was allowed to ply between the steamers in the offing and the shore, and went down under more aggravated circumstances than' the last. He wished to know if the clause of the Act had been complied with in this case. The third case, that of the Favourite, was one of a small steamer plying from Wanganui along the coast, but which had not been surveyed in consequence of its not plying to a large port. The gentlemen who were on the survey were perfectly competent men, but they had not had that organisation which would enable them fairly to carry out their duties. He wished to know whether the proper steps had been taken by the Government to insure the proper organisation of these measures, and to carry them out on an equal scale in all ports in New Zealand. He pointed out a few of the mistakes in the Act. There was no, authority given in the Act to determine the iiumber of passengers to be carried by steamers; there was one regulation in Sydney, and another regulation in Melbourne. Tho Melbourne regulations of 1862 had been adopted, which had the effect of overcrowding the steamers. They also adopted the certificates of the New South Wales Board. The Act compelled them to adopt these certificates, which were very defective. They were responsible for the lives of those travelling on the coast, and thejt could not cast off this responsibility by saying j that they were compelled to adopt the certificates of another colony. It should be left competent for the Governor, in cases where it wis found that proper certificates were granted, to adopt these certificates, but it should not be compulsory. It was also allowed that steamers should go to sea without a survey, if they carried no passengers. This was a glaring fault of the Act. There were also provisions as to overloading witfy cargo. Tho inspector (by the Act) was allowed to permit a vessel to go to sea with cargo on deck. This should not be allowed. Th<s inspector wished to obey the law, no doubt ,* but in some cases it becomes very difficult for bim to disoblige his friends by not allowing them to carry articles on the deck.' There was no actual power in the Act to compel the landing of these articles or to place them between decks. The law enforced a very small penalty in case of accidents not being reported. A case occurred a few days ago between Napier and Auckland, where the accident was not reported. The penalty was only £5, and the loss of vessels could not bo prevented by such paltry fines. There was a period laid down in the Act, in which any vessel built before that time was allowed to proceed to sea without compartments. This should not be allowed. These vessels were neither more nor less than floating coffins. The steamers might be allowed to ply if they wore altered so as to comply with the existing regulations. Steamers should not be allowed to proceed to sea with more than a certain number of passengers. He hopod the Government would give their attention to this matter this session. There had been suspicions bruited abroad and printed, to the effect that, by means of a private douceur, the owners of the New Zealand had got that vessel passed when she ought not to have been passed. He believed this rumour to be wholly untrue, but grounds for such suspicions should be removed. 1 Mr. Macandkew seconded the motion, but suggested tho advisability of referring it to a Select Committee.
Mr. Stafford supported the motion of the hon. member, and thanked him for having brought the mattor before tho House. He had had particular opportunities of observing the capabilites of sea-going steamers from his residence at the mouth of the Nelson harbour. The hon. member ought, however, to have gone further with his motion. There was no survey allowed on sailing vessels under 40 tons. On one occasion, a vessel came back twice to Nelson for want of provisions and water. It appeared to him that there ought to be a power in the Act to qxamine masters of both steamers and sailing vessels, as well as their vessels, which would tend to raise the qualifications of masters of passenger vessels. He hoped the suggestion of tho hon. member for Bruce would be adopted. It was imperative, for tho safety of sea-going passengers, that precautions should be taken to prevent vessels from carrying too many passengora, and that the vessels should be sea-worthy. The Attorney-General (Hon. Mr. Sowell) said it was very probablo that tho Act was very defective. It would have been better, however, if tho remarks of tho hon. member for Lyttelton had been embodied in a sories of resolutions for tho consideration of tho Government. The Government was entitled by tho Act to appoint the Commissioners, but it was tho Murine Board which hud power to make laws to carry out the Act. Tho Government wore not responsible for the shortcomings of that Board. An Act, however, had been just passed to take tho power out of tho hands of tho Marino Board, and to throw it on tho Government. Up to this time tho Government had no responsibility in tho matter. It was to supply this defect that tho Marino Board Act had been brought in. Tho Government would bo glad to give every assistance to tho formation of a Seloct Committee, which would materially assist tho Government in tho matter. Tho j^ostmastkr-General (Hon. Major Iliclmrdson) supplemented the remarks of the Attornoy-Genoml. From tho disposition he had always evinced to reeeivo tho suggestions of tho hon. member for Lyttelton, tho House would beliovo that the Govemmont would bo glad to carry out his wishes.
Mr. GJjEdhiMj said that this was a nrnttor which showed that, t.horo wero groat defects somewhere, (ind strict inquiries should bo made, and spoke of an accideut which hwl happened to the Auckland, on tho voyage from Napier to Auckland. Mr. O'Nmr.ii said that ho was a passenger in tho with tho lion, member on board tho Auckland, and certainly ho saw nothing of tho accident; all lie saw was, that she was hove-to for about half-an-hour, for tho purpose of screwing up something. All tho damage that was done was ft lew pigeons belonging to tho lion, member being washed overboard. Tho engine was not broken.
Tho Native Minister (Hon. Mr. Fit«Gorald) said thot tho engines in this vessel wero tho best that could bo supplied. Mr. Gledhill said, if the hon. member saw nothing of the accident to the engine, ho must havo been in a rovorio or asleep. Mr. Crosbie Ward thought that this was a matter which tho Government ought to tako on themselves. He had no objection to a select committeo, but tho Government could more easily got all tho information which was required. If the hon. tho Poßtrnaster-General thought it wrong that ho did not come to tho Govormnent bofore bringing a matter to tho House, lie would merely state, that tho Government woro so busy that he thought his best plan was to lay tho whole matter before tho House. On tho quostion being put, tho motion was passed. resolution khom tiik committee ov ways and means. The following resolution was reported from tho Committeo of Ways and Means: —" That it is desimblo to revise tho present Tariff; and that tho Hon. tho Commissioner of Customs bo authorised to tako such measures as may bo necessary for the collection of any new duties, pending tho discussion of tho resolution." On tho question being put that the resolution bo read a second timo— Mr. O'Neii/Tj deprecated that portion of the Colonial Treasurer's speech which referred to Auckland as being a millstone round the neck of the colony. The Colonial Treasurer knew very well that when he staled that, ho was stating what he know was untrue. Tho Speaker called the hon. member to order.
Mr. O'Neill would most emphatically deny the statements made by tho Colonial Treasurer, and contended that the war was a colonial and not an Auckland question. The hon. member said that the Colonial Treasurer had endeavoured in his statement to throw dust in tho eyes of tho House.
Mr. Stafford dissented from the latter remarks of tho hon. member, and complimented the Treasurer upon the lucidity of his address. Ho also congratulated the hon. Treasurer on tho change of opinion which had resulted in tho expression of his intention to repeal the Surplus Revenue Act. He (Mr. Stafford) would, however state, that instead of the Treasurer using the words " the case of Auckland," he should havo used the words " the policy of 1863," and he said that, as that policy was distinctly the policy of tho colony, it was with great regret (hat he heard that charged upon the province of Auckland.
Tho Colonial Treasurer said that he would refrain from discussing tho " Surplus Act of 1858," and ho thought that tho hon. gentleman who breught in that Surplus Revenue Act should not now complain that a bond under that Act was claimed to bo carried out; and, although he (the Colonial Treasurer) had been compelled from his position to carry out that bond, yet, when the question arose as to whether a law under which that bond was made, should bo continued, it was hardly fair to accu?e him of a change of opinion, because, although opposed to the law, he had -yet endeavoured to enforce tho bond. With regard to his observations respecting the province of Auckland he denied most emphatically any desire to cast apolitical slur upon that province; what he meant was, that the public expenditure of Auckland had hung like a millstone round the financial neck of the colony. At the same time, he would admit that there was a want of preciseness about his expressions, and for which he desired to apologise. He would state that the people of the province of Auckland were not chargeable for the policy of 1863, but they were chargeable with a desire to keep a separate purse, when the colony might fairly a?k, are you in a position to separate and pay your fair share of the past expenditure of the colony ? Colonel Haultain said that throughout the whole of the Colonial Treasurer's statements there was an inimical feeling evinced towards the province of Auckland, and he (Colonel Haultain) would protest against such remarks, as being very damaging, not only to the province of Auckland, but also to the whole colony, besides being calculated to impede legislation. The Native Minister (Hon. Mr. FitzGerald) said that one or two hon. members who had addressed the House had alluded to some remarks which fell from him the other evening, and he hoped that he should not be prevented by any strict rule of the House from making one or two observations as to what he really said. The Speaker said that it was not competent for the hon. memb;r to refer to a former debate.
The Native MnrisTKE (Hon. Mr. FitzGerald) said that he was going to claim for a moment the permission of the House to make one or two remarks of personal explanation. ("Goon, go on.") It had been supposed that, in the remarks he made the other night, he had been indulging in a sneer against Auckland. He wished distinctly to state that he had never indulged in a sneer against Auckland more than against any other part of the colony. Mr. Vogel rose to order. If the hon. member was going to refer to that debate, lie (Mr. Vogel) should feel it to be his duty to reply.
The Speaker—The hon. member Las permis' sion of the House to make a personal explanation.
The Native Minister (Hon. Mr. FitzGerald) said that he had claimcd the indulgence of the House to make a personal explanation, but as the lion, member objected to that, he (Mr. FitzGerald) would not proceed. The Premier (Hon. Mr. Weld) thought it was to be regretted that when a member of the Ministry felt himself called upon to make a personal explanation, that he should be precluded from doing so bj an hon. member rising to order. It was, however, quite a matter of taste, and he (Mr. Weld) having congratulated the lion, gentleman on the good taste he had shown, would there leave the matter.
Mr. Vogel—As the hon. gentleman had mentioned mo by name, I said that I should feel it my duty to answer him.
The Premier (Hon. Mr. Weld) —No doubt the hon. gentleman was justified by the rules of the House in the action he had taken, but as the hon. gentleman had thought that act to be consistent with good taste, he (Mr. Weld) would say no movo upon the subject. With regard to the change of opinion, of which liis hon. friend the Colonial Treasurer had been reminded, he might state that he hardly thought that his hon. friend could be charged with inconsistency, inasmuch as he had clearly stated that, although he felt bound to carry out a claim made under the Surplus Kevenue Act, yet that he was opposed to the law which gave the right to make that claim; and, as to the position of the provinces, ho (Mr. Weld) would state that ho believed the provinces would, at the end of this session, be in a different and much better position than they had been for some time past. As to the reference made to the province of Auckland, he (Mr. Weld) contended that the policy of Government was not antagonistic to the interests of that province. He would ask, when the present Ministry took office, hew many acres of land had been added to that province, in the Waikato district, and he then would point to the largo additions of land which that province now possessed. He did not blame the people of Auckland, for he believed that they had been misled by the press and the statements of interested persons. Why, only the other day it was stated in an article in an Auckland paper that, in reply to a question put by an hon. member, he (Mr. Weld) said that the Ministry could do nothing to apprehend and punish the murderers of the Rev. Mr. Yolkner, neither could they confiscate the lands. And this was said when the Government had actually organised an expedition to the East Coast tt> punish theso murderers, and had a Bill before the House to confiscate their lands. It was by such statements as these that the people of Auckland wore misled; but he believed that the time would come when those vety people would say of the present Ministry "These are the men to whom wo are indebted for our prosperity, for they have not only added to the riches of our province but they have taught us self-reliance." He believed that the time would come when his hon. friend the Superintendent of Auckland, when he saw the rich country which had been addod to Auckland, prosperous and happy, and its magnificent harbours toeming with vessels to boar away I the produce of the province, would say that the policy of the Ministry towards Auckland was a grand epoch in tho history of tho colony. Ho might inform hon. members that it tho Ministry could not bo put down by sneers and newspaper articles, still loss wero thoy likely to bo put down by statements not founded on fact. As to the financial statement, it was a groat credit to his hon. friend tho Colonial Treasurer. It was an opoeh in tho history of New Zealand; and in timo to ootuo thoy would say, ®/ ) . yo "ir'" om J )or Fitzhorbort'e financial stiitomont idi 1805 P It was a model of financial research, and would remain on record as a model of parliamentary eloquence and lucid explanation, and he (Mr. Weld) thought it was a great com' l'l ?nln of iwTi® frientl that tll")UghoUt the wholo of that lengthened address, the only matter of: complain hat could be found was, thai m tho boat ot delmto, his hon. friend had made use of two or threo words which, perhans j„ his cahner moments, bo wouk , nofc and his hon. fi tend hud fully explained that ho never meant to reflect on the people of Auckland but to stale that tho expenditure of that province had been like a millstone round tho " financial neck "of the cobny; and ho (Mr. Weld Sd contend that nothing had been said calculated to injure the credit or to impeach the solvency of he province of Auckland. He would liko tho members for Auckland to riso and Bay that thev objected to tho l|ebel 10 & Act as antagonistic to tho interests of Auckland; because, if they con-
gidored it favourable rather than otherwise to Auckland, thoy had no right to say that it waa forced on them by a Southern majority. He had never thoroughly concurred in the Acts or that session, neither at tho time nor since, and he stated so in the Houso, although ho waa not present when one particular Bill was read. He belioved a certain amount of confiscation was necufsary and advisable, but ho nover did expect that they could recoup £3,000,000 by tho sales of confiscated land; ho thought that one of the maddest ideas of one of the least competent t urers that ever sat on tho Treasury Hencu ot the House. FTo beliovcd it could not bo carried out, but ho did believe that thcro was eorao reasonable hope that tho expenditure of the money would bring tho war to it cloho, but anv little expectations lie had had were disappointed. JIo was unwilling to go into tho question at any length, because it would lead him to refer to ft gentleman unfortunately not in tho IIouso; but thcro was no doubt that that scheme broke down m tho most lamentable manner in which any scheme ever did in this or any other colony. Before the passing of that £3,000,000 Loan Act the colony was in a position in which he thought the then Government, with discretion and good management, might, at a very small oxpense, by relying on their own exertions and those of the friendly natives, as the present Government had done, have suppressed the rebellion. He should have been ashamed if, instead of corning into office with .£900,000 in debt at their bankers, they had come in with a clean bill and £500,000 to their credit, and had not crushed the rebellion. That was his opinion, although hon. members might perhaps differ from him; but a good many people, perhaps, looking at what had done with £000,000 against them at their bankers, would think they had not done so badly under those circumstances as the previous Government had done with £3,000,000, or something like it, to their credit. He would say, therefore, this one thing—that he thought they were losing Uu>n in making aggravating statements, either on one pide of the House or the other. (Hear, hear.) And ho would not have broached the subject, had it not been for the direct challenge of members in opposition. He would have wished hon. members from Auckland to have allowed the Government to settle down to work; have accepted the luture which was before them; havo considered what were their resources; have had more confidence in themselves, in the Government, and in the assistance to be rendered from the home country, and | nave set themselves to accepting facts which they could not alter. They might as well stand by a river and try to send back the water to its fount, as try to call back those halcyon days of large expenditure, which, whatever the Ministry might do, had passed for ever. He thought it was a pity that hon. members should so hastily take a mere matter of figures and finance, a mere matter of fact enunciation, which was necessary for putting the true state of the colony before them, as an attack on a province, which, whatever honourable members might say, the people of Auckland would see on some future day was so far from being injured bytho Ministry, that it had been been benefited by them (hear, hear) in consequence of having been obliged by the Government to look to their own resources, which were as ample as the people were able. Having studied for many years the course of events in colonies and their growth, he had the firmest belief that such a body of Englishmen as were in Auckland, and possessed of such a fine territory, could not fail except by relying on adventitious circumstances and by relying on others instead of on themselves. (Applause.) Mr. John Williamson said that the hon. member (Mr. Weld),in his speech, had asserted as much as would lead hon. members and the people of the colony to the conclusion that the inhabitants of Auckland had been, up to this time, mere camp followers, lazy, indolent colonists and worthless people, who had never helped themselves, and that the present Government were about to give them an opportunity, for the first time, of acting like men, and developing the resources of the country. The hon. member then compared some statistics of Auckland with those of other provinces, previous to the war, to show the industry of its inhabitants. These were the people now stigmatized as camp followers.
The Pbemier (Hon. Mr. Weld) rose to ex> plain that he had not made use of such an expres sion.
Mr. John Wiliiamson said he (Mr. Weld) had made use of expressions which would lead to that inference, and had, moreover, an animus against Auckland in spite of his apparently warm wishes for its welfare. On that account he felt a perfectly justifiable indignation. He had at first been inclined to support the present Ministry, as they were about to introduce peaceful measures, but when he found they were about to initiate such a policy as would be the ruin of Auckland, ho had changed his mind. He believed that the withdrawal of the troops was a most dangerous step to take, and would lead to most disastrous results. He had hardly, indeed, believed that the Government were in earnest, for soon after they came into office they initiated a new war, with those same troops they had decided to dispense with. The Ministry were also introducing measures whichcouldonlybecarried out withthe aid ot the troops. It had been said by the Colonial Treasurer, that Auckland hung like a millstone round the financial neck of the colony, in consequent of the expenditure lavished on it. If so, the people of Auckland were quite willing to manage their own afFairs, and be answerable to Great Britain for the treatment of those who were, after all, some of her best inhabitants. They would, however, be responsible for any just debts which they had incurred. Mr. Vogel said the Premier (Mr. Weld) did not appear to be aware that he depreciated Auckland, as he was much in the habit of doing so. The statistics which had been referred to by an hon. member (Mr. Williamson) were a true guide by which to judge of the progress of the various parts of the colony, although the Government might treat them with contempt. The Premier (Mr. Weld) had indulged in the same kind of slander against Auckland as had been indulged in by the people in England against the colony at large, as might not only be perceived by his speeches, but also by some of the memoranda which he had written. The hon. member then noticed some points in the statement of the Colonial Treasurer.
The House then adjourned, as usual, till seven o'clock.
The House met again at seven o'clock, when the debate was resumed. Mr. Choseie Waed said—The early part of this debate had reference to a personal matter, and to the interests of a particular province. It is doubtless very right that the expressions used by the Colonial Treasurer should be explained, and that the case of Auckland should be heard at full length injustice to the interests of that province. I do not deny that the grievances of any province should be heard at full length before giving further supplies; but I do hope there is not going to be too much of this. We cannot occupy our whole time in discussing whether a member has used injurious expressions. I hope, then, that the part of the debate has coine when I may ven-
ture on the broader ground of the argument, and look at it in the same point of view as the Colonial Treasurer looked at it, with regard to the present financial position of the colony. As regards that division of the colony I represent, the Government aro prepared for what I have to say. They know my news. On these proposals there is but little to say, and that littio is of a critical character, and it is not the pleasantest in the world to say. The Government, I hope will be prepared to hear these criticisms in the farst place, because it is right to say them; and, in the socond place, because whatever we say, can do thorn no harm. If halt friends and, whole foes were to bring together all their forcos against the Government, it would not throw them out of their seats, but it might have only the effect of dissolving the Parliament a few weeks earlior than it would otherwise be. But, whatever can be said cannot do them any real detriment—cannot turn them out. The financial statomont, as far as concerns the South, is summed up in this view.—The Treasurer is going to take away all our chance of surplus revenue—he is going to reduce the throe-oignths of the customs reveuue allowed to theprovincos to two-eighths—a roduction of fifty per cent, on the revouue of all tho provinces. _ i The Colonial Tkkasubeb (Hon. Mr. Fitahorbert) .• No, no.
Mr. Ckosbib_ Waed: Ihavo tho lion, member's own figures for it. Tlio Customs revenuo is to bo £780,000. The provincos aro to get one-half of that, partly by way of local estimates, and partly in aid of provincial revenue proper. Tlie local expenditure is to be £180,000, and tho amount payable to tho provincial ordinary expenditure is £210,0J0 lor the sis months. The total customs revenue being estimated at £780,000 per annum, tho provinces would have got three-eighths of that rovenue, which would amount to about £292,000. Now wo are only to get £210,000. Instead of getting three-eighths of our sharo of the surplus, wo aro to get two-eighths and no surplus. _ I don't say that tho provinces havo a legal claim to that three-eighths, but it is tho smallest amount that the provincos are able to get I on with. We know protty well, from our intimacy with uroviuouft estimates, that the three-eighths i» little enough to carry on tho affairs of tho province. But the Treasurer aays to us, abandon your chances of the surplus, and one-eighth ol the customs' rovenue besides. And, besides all that, we are to enduro a taxation on stamps, and on distillation; although that is only a minor amount, to the extent of £42,500, for tho coming year. Those aro in addition to the taxation which, at tho present moment, is exceedingly tevere. Every penny of that taxation is taken out of the pookets of thoso who can ill afford it. We aro to be mulcted at both ends—deprived of a portion of
our revenue, and made to pay more taxes. But that M not the whole, because, if I read hU „tf ( meat aright, it appears to me he has provided ouf of the ordinary revenue of the cominu J?/ * aum of £00,000 for defence purposes propel el a-halt year from the ensuing first of January' fe in the current financial year there be wanted for the half year/ there will b« re<K uV?' t Ma j° r Atkinson" " More than that." | The share of th o ,' vinces next year will therefore be less by tofjow, at least even than this year. I do think tW I have a right to say that the financm proposal which ends m that i, riot satisfactory one to those who have , m)V ; n a ciftl interests at heart. I do not use t)„. Wo „i "Provincial" ns it is sometimes used: [ mc to soy that those who have tho interests of tIT minor Governments of the country at heart -who wish to look after the ordinary administration <f affairs in the Provinces, must look on this as very unsatisfactory proceeding. As to surplus revenue, I do think it was hard, during the L t few years, that the General Government should have had no claim on the expansion of the rcvcrmf The Colonial Treasurer was a little leu than f u ||y explanatory when he made out that the General Government was losing because of the exe'e-sof expenditure over the appropriation. I/' (hat, excess occurred, it was the fault of the General Govcvnment. They could never have n-irnb themselves out of any fund until next The sole claim which they had, and what they our'ht to have done was to estimate the revenue to the extent they think it will bear. If they had unde r .' estimated the expenditure, they had only thfrnselves to blame. If they tell the House "that the provinces arc in the position of junior partners who could not only spend the money of the firm but take the senior partner's spare cash to pav their debts, besides, it was misleading the House The provinces stand in this relation to the General Government, that the senior partner has the option of taking all the money of tho firm to pay his debts,and the provinces are left with only what he chooses to leave them to pay theirs. The Colonial Treasurer was scarcely just to the provinces on that subje t. That is of'little moment • it is but fair that if any expansion shoulo o.:eur on the revenue of any particular year, the proving should at least share that with the General Government, and if the h-in. gentleman does propose to carry on that surplus revenue to the next vear and make it available for the purposes of the" ensuing year, I have no objection to it. Hut tie ought to do it with a clear statement, arid not te introduce it to the House with a little unfair .show of having suffered robbery on the part of the provinces. But the Colonial Treasurer was not satisfied with cutting off our surplus revenue, and reducing our share of the customs receipt-*, and imposing additional taxation, ho ea;ts a wistful eye to the territorial revenue. The Colonial Tbkasdber (Hon. Mr. Fitzherbert): If the hon. member is desirous of not ! misleading the House, he will allow me to interrupt him. On two points he has misunderstood me. He says that I propose to cut off -v) per cent, from the provincial revenue. That is not the case. As to the territorial revenue, I supposed it impossible that he could misinterpret what I had said on that point. No single expression that dropped from me could be twisted into that meaning. If I did say so, allow me to correct any such expression. Whilst I did regard, in h-jfj this arrangement—whilst I thought that it was a hard measure meted out to the North, there is not a man in New Zealand who has acted more loyally to that arrangement than myself. Mr. C. Ward: I am delighted that the r-mark has brought out the indignation of the Colonial Treasurer, because, while he is indignant at the imputation, I shall hold the territorial revenue safe. I was not going infcrentialiy even to sav that he meant to touch that revenue. I did not mean to insinuate that, but I was going to sav that he looked at it with a wistful eye. I knowit is a subject that can scarcely be handled without creating suspicion,, and if he is willing to allay this suspicion we are also anxious to prove that there is no ground for it. If the Colonial Treasurer will tell us whether these figures are true or not, it will clear up that point. The total amount of customs revenue for the ensuing year is £780,000. The Colonial Treasurer proposes to appropriate one-half of that to the provinces for all purposes. He says he will allow to local general charges £180,000, leaving £210,000 to be provincial revenue proper. That is the share to be paid to the provinces duiing the present year. Three-eighths is what they were to he paid, according to the old system; that was an amount of £292,000, and the difference between £21v,000 and £292,000 is about one-eighth, or from tlireeeighths to two-eighths a reduction. If there is an increase of the Customs duties, he intends to carry it all to the credit of the General Government. If it is not so, I have misunderstood him. As to the territorial revenue it would be a good thing, in the Treasurer's opinion, to shew it on the estimates of the colony. It would look well in : the eyes of a foreigner, or to display before our creditors at home. But he will remember that if he shewed it on one side of his account, he would I also have to shew very large liabilities on the other side. If he took that territorialjrevenue. and the duties belonging to it, he would not show any greater balance than he did at present, lint the Colonial Treasurer congratulated those provinces which had territorial revenue upon having such a fund during the time of war and trouble. I think he said that it was rather hard on the colony that these territorial revenues should Lot be brought to account at the time the colony was pressed with war and tribulation. (No.) I received an impression of this kind. It is a most fortunate thing for the colony that in time of war there has been such a fund available for ordinary purposes, some fund that could not be touched, but which was left to keep vitality in the colony, and to keep the operations of colonization going forward. Were it not for such a fund, it might have been that the colony would have been drained of its resources. I will now call the attention of hon. members to the expressions used in the earlier part of this debate by the hou. the Premier. I call the attention particularly of those hon. members who, on a previous evening, declined fo~ some private reason to maintain the integrity of the existing provinces. I call their attention to those warning words which dropped from him. when he told the Assembly that this session would not leave them in their present position; when he told them that another session would not find them with power to maintain their rights. He asserted that the Treasurer s change of the law relating to surplus revenues was consistent with this changing condition ot the provinces. I see no argument in that but this. The time will come next session that the provinces will be so weak that the Government will be able to enforce the present proposed systnu or finance without the provinces being able to help themselves. Does Lot this affect those gentlemen who the other night refused to maintain the integrity of the provinces ? I now pass to the oolonial question, the financial condition of the colony at this moment, or, rather, the condition ot the Northern Island—the question of the expenditure of tho £3,000,000 loan. Whether it was posMblo to avoid it or whether it was not possible t" avoid it, we must admit this fact, that that loan was not spent according to law. The sums mentioned m the Loan Appropriation Act of 1563 have been widely departed from. This House has not yet guou consent to that mistaken appropriation ot therf sums. The fault lies (I am speaking teehmc.ikv with the Executive. The House is no party as yet to the loan of 1863 having been applied than it was intended m that Act. Ihe Hoibe could, if it choose to insist upon it. _sav. 1 lt> amount that ought to have been spent tor earning on the war was one million, aud that that all it will give its consent to. The House i> to be presumed to have consented to the nay ia which the war has been carried ou, or the monev that has been spent on the war. The House wi , no doubt, at tho proper time, assent to any I J I P ar j tures from law which were unavoidable; lui wish the House to understand that as vet we given no assent to the altered expenditure ot loan for tho war. There was a Government wl' ll had more to do with that than the present l " nt .' r , 1 ' ment. Its members are not now in the , and I will not rake up the question whether t u . were right or wrong. I will not make allection which cannot be answered or explained. I cou 1 c myself to attacking those who can deleml t ionselves, and I put tho point to the House a' l u present Ministry, as a frieud of theirs. •} ' un j present Ministry camo into olliee they ' expenditure of the loan in a certain position. <>. found that the million which was to be expfiu. for war had beeu already exceeded, or was on <■ point of being exceeded. Now it bus been stilt mo largely exceeded. Looking at the tiling strictly legal point of view, do wo not hold sent Ministry responsible for having exceeds law to that extent ? They could not assume session that the House gave thorn leave u ' 10 j Granting to the presont Government the i iu 7 making good tho credit of tho colony in a engagements of thoir predocossors in regiiri war, aro they not responsible to tho ' yil3 haviug spent out of the unvoted uionoy w ia . , spent m tho Wauganui and Taranaki What answer can they give to tho Middle 'V for having so far gone on with the war. a tered into a now phase of it, without t means, apart from this three million ' olin ' ', -.jj the oxpenso ? Wo have not got from •>e _ , • . l , ( ; Treasurer anv estimate of tho sums to >l by tho colony for confiscated lands be 1 •„.](, and Taranaki. Wo haw* not hoard word from the Colonial Treasurer abou lands that aro to be. Aro wo to bo j 4 . same Ministry who have refloated on ipa jgn cessors, that they havo initiated a -ions for without means, and havo made no p . f,j meeting the expense, as they raig i>< t j ielll) means of confiscation. 1 0 *P e m lam and am surprised not to hear it ' 101 t have surprised at it, because it seems to mo
wn an oversight on the part of the Colonial Sourer, that ho did not bring a large amount / balance his expenditure out of this fund. I wc limned to the native policy from the Minisrf f or iintive Affaire, to the defenco policy from ** Defenco Minister, and, lastly to, the finance Ly and I do think that tho Government have V faced this confiscation policy at all, that they J! vc been shy of committing themselves to what •f ft plain duty. It is owing, probably, to tho rossion of English opinion on the Act of 1863 tlmt they have departed from that plan J . '(.ed by the Houso of making tho war pay taroly f° r * don t tll!n k at all foll °ws, that wause the plan °f confiscation hitherto adopted jL o niy succccdcd in making the lands taken, exceedingly expensive, that confiscation is not a ff j sP ft nd profitable plan. I have no sympathy • t l, ro bol natives. I don't understand that wo ire to be left to encounter the enormous burden of the war. and then to treat tho natives as if they w cre better than they wero before tho war began. Before tho war began wc forbade them to sell their land to Europeans ; we used to buy their lands at Is an acre (A Voico: 2d), or some very low figure, but when the natives have been so rebellious as to (rive us cause of war, and to put themselves in the I1( r, it. appears to mo to oo a wonderful thing that we should end in giving them all their lands, and allowing them to make twenty times tho original market price. Is it. not astonishing that wo ghould havo been forced into war, carried it on at our own expense, and also leave the rebels' torritorr more valuable than it was boforeP Wo should have made these natives feel tho consequences in their persons ; we should havn made those who brought about the war pay a largo portion of tho cost of it- I do say, with all respect for Euglish opinion, that it is not English opinion wo are to bow to. I should be ashamed of this Houso and the colony if, after in 1803, asserting that it was riffht that the expenses of war should fall on rebel Maori?, that wc should now throw up that, and sav we are ashamed of ourselves, and that we will treat them as if they had never been rebels. Let us have some consistency. I believe, in theory, the Settlements Act of 18(33 was perfectly right. I wss not a party to it, but as far as tho theory of matin? the lands of rebels pay for the war they brought on, it was perfectly correct. If this is so, if we are going on with the policy of confiscation, let us not only have tho theory from one Minister, but the practice from another. If tho Native and Defence Ministers' plans are real and not visionary, let the Treasurer make a counterpart statement, and carrv something to tho credit of the war. Lot the Finance Minister back his colleague, by saying that this land is to produce something. Confiscation accompanied by compensation, on the present system, is a magnificently inoperative plan. "What prevents the Government of the Colony, who have said one after another that the >"gatiru »nui and Taranaki tribes have misbehaved themselves—what prevents them saying that the whole of their land belongs to the Crown ? "What prevents them from taking possession of that land as soon as they can touch it- ? I trust the Government will not think of going through such a routine as has attended the cases of Maoris in Taranaki and Waikato. It does not follow, because we do not take proper measures, that the land is not valuable. There is a magnificent financial prospect before the Government if they will declare the policy which was correct in 1863 is correct in 1865. Let us not forget our own opinions merely because people across the water have told us I hat our opinions are open to suspicion. I believe, if the territory which lies between this and Taranaki, if the territory which lies north of Taranaki, which lies any where where the tribes themselves, as a tribe, had participated in the rebellion, were declared no longer the property of tbe tribes, that capitalists would give handsome sums of money for these lands, and give Government no further trouble about it. It is false delicacy, when we have have spent money on subduing rebellion, to hesitate about doing this. I may be told that this is inconsistent with justice. I do not think it The truest justice can be done to the Maoris by doiilg it to ourselves. If we make ample reserves for the native population, give them the benefits of real tenure of lands, admit them to participation of representation, and surround them with Europeans, so that the law can get at them, we are doing them a greater benefit than the value of the land represents. I should give to all the Maoris of this colony enough land f>r their purposes, and I should deliberately say, the remainder of the land now belongs to the Queen to satisfy the cost of rebellion. "(Hear.) That is the policy which, in those gentlemen's places, with due regard to justice and humanity, and to the opinion of England, I should be content to get up and If we do not hear that this confiscated land is to produce money, I shall not believe that~they intend to do anything. But if we are not to be prevented from reimbursing ourselves, if we have a territory to turn to account, it opens a vista for Few Zealand, which the Treasurer's financial statement does not open. If we have this debt hanging over us without the means of paying it, I do not see a very hopeful state of things; but by the process I have indicated, the burden of the debt will be a small burden after all. I hope I shall not be told that this is a blood-thirsty and sanguinary policv. I do not wish to hurt a single man, but to be" pottering about claims which cost more to adjust than they are worth is folly, when we might do them justice by a much easier method. I recall the statement of an hon. gentleman in this House, who said that the friendly natives never had any arms, and tho rebel natives never had any land. This will ever be the case. There is a prospect of justice to the natives and financial and political advantage to us if a bold policy be adopted. Passing on, we are told that the next- year's native estimates are £59,000- I want to know why that is not an expenditure locally charged. I want to know why anybody is to pay for governing the natives but the natives themselves, or the people amongst whom they are to reside. Why are those natives dealt differently with to Europeans in this matter ? If we charge locally for governing in the South, why charge generally for governing the natives in the North? I shall take the opportunity, in the proper place, to move that they be locally charged. I heard with great surprise and anxiety of mind the proposition which arises from the dispatch of his Excellency the Governor, which was read last evening, for getting the Imperial guarantee to the existing loan, and then taking advantage of that guarantee to get another million for expenditure on native matters. We were asked to get the three million loan at five per cent., and when we found that was not enough we were asked last session to increase the charges from five to six per cent., the total amount being the same. It did not matter what we had to pay for it. We consented to pay £20,000 a year more for it. Are we to have the principal also increased ? That is the tale of the schoolboy's knife. The knife was the same although the blade was changed, and then it was the same knife although the handle was changed. If the Imperial guarantee is given, so much the better for the colony. Let us save our means, but do not let us increase our debt for purposes for which enough has been Bpent ] already. The Attorney General (Hon. Mr. Sewell), enumerated the sources on which the Government relied in carrying out its policy. He was of opinion that a certain amount should be credited to the Government for the sale of confiscated land, but the House could not have expected the Colonial Treasurer to name any particular sum for that item. If, after providing land for military settlers and the loyal natives, there was a residue, the Government would turn it to the best account. He agreed with some of tho remarks which had fallen from the hon. member (Mr. Ward), but ho could not agree with him when ho said that confiscation, accompanied by compensation, was a magnificently inoperative plan. The hon. member then entered into details of what the Government had dene with regard to confiscation, and said that in a fow days the proclamations, under tho "Settlement Act," with regard to the West Coast, would be issued. The Attorney-General then alluded to the proposed distribution of the surplus revenue to the provinces, and took occasion to rebut the charge brought against him by the member for Nelson (Mr. Stafford), of inconsistency in his opinions on this point. The claims of the provinces, undor the law, were such as—if adhered to —would place them in a worse position than they had been hitherto. It could not be said, therefore, that the proposals of the Colonial Treasurer on this point were such as would wrong the provinces. With regard to the unauthorised expenditure, it had chiefly been causcd by expenses in the Waikato and Taranaki, the former of which the Government had been charged with "repudiating," and the latter of which had been incurred in carrying out the plans of a previous ministry. Although, in his opinion, Taranaki should never have been colonised; yet, now, no one would venture to say that that settlement should be abandoned. War had existed in Taranaki before it existed in tho Waikato, and, in his opinion, should never have been removed from there, yet the present Ministry had been charged with commencing a new war there. The AttorneyGeneral then spoke of the withdrawal of the troop:-?, anrl vindicated the Government from the charge of inconsistency in advocating such withdrawal, and at the same time, in employing tho troops. The campaign in Wanganui had, no doubt, reached unexpected which lie much regretted, but it whs perfectly justifiable, and might havo been a very small affair, if earrie on in a proper manner. The Attorney-Geneial then alluded to the remarks of tho member for Auckland (Mr. J. Williamson), in aformer part ot the debate, and read some statistics showing that the prosperity of Auckland was almost whol y owing to the expenditure which had taken place there. _ Mr. Ceosdie Wabd explained that he never suggested that the rights of loyal natives should bo disregarded in any confiscation. He wa» in
l f ov fl °l U L°^ ju d tiue *> all natives, whether never itt* ? furthor explained that ho <»»,.; . 0 wy that tho policy of tho Wanr* B WftS a now P° ll °y. a nd had never netfiP h PF ° Houso, but that, financially, it had w « n sanctioned by the Houso. 7 the ff™ n D ! E . Ba , id that tho statement mndo by „f , ■ tton> Colonial Treasurer was a mere coner/l really meant nothing. Ho contended that tho financial condition and ombarassments of Southland and the chums of Otago had been overlooked. Ho would ask, how were the provinces to exist P and ho should also like to Know what amount was to bo oxpondod in carrywg out a sentimental policy towards tho Maori race; and he complained that the Attomoy-Gone-ral had not done justice to tho Fox Ministry by stating that it was through the interference of tho representative of tho Queen that thoir policy was not carriod out. There could bo no question that a rovision of the tariff was necessary, but at the same time the House ought to know what was tho nature of that revision.
Mr. Colknso said ho belioved that the speech ot tho lion, the Treasurer was in tho hands of the printer before it was delivered in that House. Ho expressed his regret at the animus which had been shown by tho Ministry against Auckland, and he trusted that such allusions to Auckland as had beon made would not bo made in future. Tho hon. member complainod that, instead of altering the tariff so as to make it press less heavily on tho population, it was proposed to continue the prosent high rates. He contended that the Houso should not give up tho three-eighths of the revenue which tho provinces had hitherto received unless some substantial guarantee was given by the Government in favour of the provinces. He thought it was worth consideration, whether a slight tax upon wool or an income tax would not bo botter than a stamp tax. Mr. Glediiili, said, that as expenses had been incurred they must bo met, and he trusted that, instead of wrangling, hon. members would apply themselves to business.
Mr. Harrison made a few remarks on the proposal rolating to the surplus revenue to be distributed to tho provinces. Mr. Cox referred to a reply unanimously adopted in a former session by the House, including some of the members for Auckland now in the House. With regard to the opinions expressed in England on the former policy of the colony, they could be excused, as the people • there were, in most cases, ignorant of the facts, but not so those who had been in tho colony, amongst whom he included the present Native Minister. He would, however, support the present Government, as he believed the members of it were in earnest, as well in the financial part of their policy as in other parts, for he believed it to be unavoidable.
Mr. Wilson alluded to opinions formerly expressed by him in favour of confiscation, which were received with anything but satisfaction. He congratulated the House on the opinions which it now held. The hon. member then adduced evidence to show that the present Ministry were justified in undertaking the Wanganui campaign. Mr. G. Gra.ua.ai said he had been pleased with the present Government in some respects, for their policy had generally been moderate; but ho was very much opposed to the policy of confiscation which they appeared to be initiating. Mr. Reynolds said that the financial statement, although very clearly expressed, was unsatisfactory to many members, including himself. It was proposed to increase the tariff, contrary to the anticipations of the Government last session, and also to repeal the Surplus Revenue Act, a step which would be disastrous to the whole colony, as the provinces would thereby be ruined. Before the House consented to any fresh taxation, it should have a distinct understanding as to what the Ministry would do under the Native Settlements Act, On the motion of Mr. Mantell, the debate was then adjourned to the following day. NEW BILLS. The following Bills, brought from the Upper House, were read a first time—Religious Charitable and Educational Trusts Bill and Prisoners Removal Bill. MILITIA. ACTS REPEAL BILL. The adjourned debate on the second reading of this Bill was postponed till Tuesday next. MARINE BOARD AMENDMENT BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed, and then the House adjourned.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LT18650914.2.3
Bibliographic details
Lyttelton Times, Volume XXIV, Issue 1485, 14 September 1865, Page 2
Word Count
14,986GENERAL ASSEMBLY. Lyttelton Times, Volume XXIV, Issue 1485, 14 September 1865, Page 2
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in