POLITICAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXV, Issue 7865, 21 May 1886, Page 5

POLITICAL.

[By TELEGHirk.I

[from our special importer.]

WELLINGTON, May 20.

The general impression seems to be that the Committee, of the appoirtmentof which Mr Stout gave notice yesterday, in pursuance of the'agreement with Sir George Grey, will adopt a resolution sustaining the refusal of the Home Government to depart from the Pacific Convention. That is to say, if the last cable message on the subject is correct. If the British Government acts otherwise, the resolutions will be modified accordingly. What the British Government will do, nobody at present knows outside the Cabinet, except the officials, if anybody at all knows. This knowledge there is, thit the cable messages are not to be quite depended upon. They are well informed as to the rumours current, and reports believed in apparently well-in-formed circles in London, but they are not anything more. They do not tally quite with each other, for in one we road that the French Ambassador has been informed unofficially of the Government’s determination not to depart from the convention; and afterwards another informs us that the Prime Minister is going to send a courteous but firm communication direct to the French Government to the same effect. Such a course being very unusual, one is forced to doubt the statement. Then there is the British annexation of the Kermedecs and the cession of the group to New Zealand. When such things are being done, can Great Britain courteously but firmly (or in any other way) refer the French Eepublic to a convention prohibitive of policies of annexation ? The Kermedecs may be a sign of partition actually begun. Of course, I can only surmise, but I shall not be surprised, as I have said once before, for reasons of my own, to learn that the British Government intends, after all, to make an arrangement with France, at which the Premier more than hinted in his letter to the Presbyterian Moderators. But this will not, I believe, alter the verdict of the House as at present informed. Some of the Ministerial side hope to get an approval of the cession of the New Hebrides on terms which will give Earatonga and Eapa to the New Zealand Government, and stop French convictism in the Pacific. Great efforts will he made to get the Committee to adopt a resolution to that effect, but the House has a majority of two to one against it. That majority may be converted by documentary evidence now not in the field of vision, but it is not likely, as far as. I can see. The religious Missionary element, the Federal and the commercial element have banded together strongly, and employed the cement of the Opposition party to make the mass compact. The fencing between Sir George Grey and the Premier, which gave life to the debate, is the gossip of the lobbies. Sir George attacked with vehemence and was met with vehemence. Sir George pointedly addressed his criticism to Lord Granville, but everyone knew he was calling Mr Stout a trickster. The Premier parried the •stroke gently by reminding Sir George Grey that he really must not allow his old feu d with Lord Granville to run away with him- Sir George studiously and pointedly deprecated all party considerations. The Premier retorted that a man who ignored both the leader of the Government and the leader of'the Opposition was a party man in the narrowest sense. The Premier declared that Sir' George onght not to be in communication with the Victorian Government o:\ such important subjects. Sir George had never said that he was. The Premier demanded Sir George’s authority. Sir George said, “A gentleman.” The Premier pressed him hard, and with all the skill of an experienced crossexaminer ; but Sir George kept his secret with great readiness and self-possession. There were many other such passages, the interchanges being rapid, close, logical, and keen, culminating in the Premier’s attempt to construe Sir George's final explanation into an apology . Cm !b >

whole, it was a very fine exhibition, and instructive of how a brisk fire can be carried on, and ought to be carried on, without roughness, personality, or the slightest loss of consideration or departure from politeness. A short session is already the prayer of some members. They say they want to go to London to see the Exhibition. At the other extreme are the people who declare that the session should last all the year round : “ Pay the members; have less of them; make them work all the year round, so that the good of the country will regulate our business. At present the great thing is the shearing of sheep and digging of potatees.” Between these extremes of desire, it is impossible (o predict anything as yet. When the statements of Ministers are out, or getting nearer, we shall know more. The air is at present clear for anything. The statement has just been made that as the new census shows Dunedin to have 23,000 people against the 26,000 of the Wellington population, Dunedin ought to have three members instead of four, and Wellington four instead of three. That is about the whole of the grounds for the long and elaborate pretence of a straggle for amending the Representation Act which we have had during the last day or two.

This is, I have heard on the authority of the Otago Daily Times, the Hon LieutenantColonel Sargood, formerly the Victorian Defence Minister, and now in Auckland. The Times has been, apparently, more successful than the Premier.

At the meeting of the Colonial insurance Company, the statement was made and reiterated that Wellington is now the safest place in New Zealand for the investment of money. The report does not prove that Wellington is the place where the most flourishing Insurance Companies have their headquarters. By the dog-fancier, I mean the gentleman who has a fancy for dancing on dogs till they die in great agony after prolonged torture. How the dog-fancier came to attract the atttention of the member for Lincoln, nobody here can think of guessing, especially as the former is not one of the hon member’s constituents. At first, the impression was that Mr O’Callaghan wanted to know from the Minister if a sentence of four months was enough for the dog-fancier’s peculiarly brutal offence, but it transpired that Mr O’Callaghan wants the dog fancier taken but or prison. Whether he would like him to he poisoned, and kept in a glass case as a warning to other fanciers who are ungrateful to their friends of the brute creation, or whether he intended to let him go back to dog fancying with the idea that he is a misunderstood dog fancier, I have not taken the trouble to ascertain. Probably, I think Mr O’Callaghan has an imperfect knowledge of the case. Even members of Parliament are sometimes not quite well informed. There is great satisfaction among those who are bettor informed, that the Minister declined to sit upon Mr Baddeley for his very proper decision.

The incident of the afternoon session was an unexpected debate on the Land Question, during which the whole administration of the lands was discussed. For two hours tho House debated the merits of the homestead system, the deferred payment system, the perpetual lease system, and many other of our numerous systems. The position of the Waste Lands Board came under review. Statements from all sides of the House of the great want of lands for settlement poured down, and complaints of inability, in many districts, of bond fide settlers to get lands for settlement were neither few nor far between. The whole thing arose out of a motion of Mr Montgomery’s, for a return of land in each district surveyed into allotments for occupation'under the homestead system. It will be remembered that Mr Montgomery has from time to time championed the homestead system, his last reference having been at Aaaroa the other day. His speech there, containing the expression of his wish to see a hundred thousand families settled under that system, will be still in many minds. In asking for information, Mr Montgomery explained that he understood that in Canterbury, Hawke’s Bay and Wellington no provision whatever had been made for the homestead system, and he spoke in a very conciliatory manner, without, however, hiding his intention to criticise very fully the information he might obtain. The Minister of Lands, after promising to give the information, and to supplement it with some more, went on to dwell upon the ordinary objections to the homestead system and its too extensive use. Among others he dwelt on the necessity for the long distance of blocks under that system from the blocks under all the systems of purchase —a distance suggested by justice to the purchasers. He pointed out that roads to them would be expensive, and as they must be made before sending settlers into tbe wilderness, time must be given. Last year he said, for instance, the Government had spent £60,000 on roads required for opening up lands for sale. For all that be promised that the homestead system should have a'fair trial.

This speech set the House going over the ground I have mentioned, and it went at a good brisk pace. One of the most interesting instances given was of applications for perpetual leases which would cover thousand of acres, in Westland, of the country now reserved for the West Coast Bail way. Southern Westland was also mentioned during the debate as a country with a grand future in the way of settlement before it. Criticisms of the neglect of the Government to administer the law as they found it were not infrequent, accompanied by taunts at the special settlement system, which the Minister of Lands was said to favour at all hazards in preference to any other. Surveys, it was roundly asserted, had been mostly stopped, and were very backward, and to that cause was attributed the delay of settlement. The bulk of the speakers were against the Government ; many were against each other. The Premier showed that 130,000 acres had been disposed of under the deferred payment system during the last 18 months, being more than had been disposed of in many previous periods of similar length, and proved that the surveys were never more forward, inexpensive, or efficient, especially in -the districts whence the greatest complaints had come. He warmly combated the proposal that the systems should be merged in the homestead system, on the ground that the Colony cannot afford to give away all its land in order to raise gigantic loans to make them accessible. It would be unjust to future generations, he said, with considerable emphasis and some variety of instance. Before he sat down he gave the House the gratifying intelligence that before long a very great quantity of land would be freed for settlement on the West Coast.

Sir George Grey, of course, broke a lance with the Premier. “ You give us a list of so many occupiers,” he said, " but what do you say of those who cannot become occupiers at all ? You have answered the question with an irrelevant statement.” By the usual subtlety of transition. Sir George next got to denouncing the Agricultural Company, the West Australian land ring, and others which had monopolised the public lands. He would like to know how much money had been made by the promoters of such Companies. He had aeon a letter from a person who had been ruined by investment in one of these Companies. The mischief they did by running up the price of land by false statements, and selling it to unhappy settlers at a price far above its value, was incalculable. He was sure that the profits made by the promoters of companies in this way would make hon members stand aghast if they only knew them. He intended to move for a Committee of Enquiry into the affairs of r u. of these companies, for such things

prevented people from coming to the country, and drove out those who were there. " The people cannot get the land to settle on,” he cried, "and the people’s heart is broken.” Another thing, he maintained, the debate had brought out, viz., the utterly unsuitable character of nominated Waste Lands Boards, for which reason he would bring forward once more an old Bill of his for the election of such Board. On the whole. Sir George Grey made for himself a good innings on the Land question; his speech and the Premier’s, with Mr Montgomery’s reply, stand prominent above the level of the rest of the debate.

Mr Montgomery, in reply, warmly defended the homestead system, and denounced the present high upset prices under the other systems as driving people to the money-lenders to borrow money at 9 per cent to make roads, for which Government could get the money at 4 per cent. The road argument, he replied to by declaring that the class of settlers favoured by the homestead system would not require roads for a time, all their energies being at first confined to making themselves comfortable. In Canada and the United States, lands were sold at 2d per acre, and nobody thought of making roads which people would be able in time to make for themselves. After Mr Montgomery’s glowing little peroration, the motion for the return was passed as a matter of course. The House, after some formal business, adjourned, thoroughly pleased with itself for having had such an exhaustive and satisfactory talk about the Land question. This is, so far, a session of surprises. No sooner had the Orders of the Day been disposed of at the evening sitting, than the House found itself suddenly plunged into a discussion upon the East and West Coast Bailway. The member for Mataura had a motion on the Notice Paper for the production of a plan of all the blocks of land proposed to be given to the Company for the construction of the railway. That seemed harmless enough, but when the member for Kumara rose and proposed an amendment, the thing began to look a little dangerous. The amendment, however, was not very terrible. Instead of the blocks proposed to be given, Mr Seddon wanted a plan of the whole of the lands reserved. Nobody thought that would cause a fight. The Treasurer promptly came forward with the statement that there are no blocks of land set apart for the Company, as the Company and the Colony are to have alternate blocks, and the selection has not been made. For that reason, he asked the member for Mataura to withdraw his motion, as uncalled for. He then admitted the inconvenience of delay to the unexpected demand for settlement that had arisen, but he explained that the Company proposed to make its choice in a short time. In making his explanation, the Treasurer replaced in a clear light one of the modifications proposed in the contract. Under the contract the land would not be all selected until the completion of the line. The modification proposes that the Company shall make its selection immediately. It surprised the House very much to hear from Mr Seddon, as it had astonished him to hear the same from Mr Bevan, during the debate on Mr Montgomery’s motion, that such a demand had suddenly sprung up for the West Coast lands. But the Treasurer's explanation was re-assuring, inasmuch as it showed that there would be a minimum of delay. Neither the mover nor the seconder, however, would withdraw—the mover, because he declared that there is not enough land in the vicinity of the line, to furnish the concessions of the contract. At this juncture Sir George Grey rose to his feet. It was evident to the meanest capacity that a row was inevitable. Sir George declared solemnly that he was against the principle of giving ;land to syndicates for railway construction, and announced his intention of asking for a Committee to consider the question of granting lands for railway construction. Very shortly the amendment of the member for Kumara, who made a bold speech about the danger the mining interest was in from a railway syndicate, was refused oh the voices. Then Sir George Grey had his innings. It was the old story. Sir George said all he had said so many times against the principle of devoting public lands to railway construction. His heart was filled with horror when he contemplated the injustice about to be done to the people of this Colony, both present and unborn. He contrived also to bring in the Australian syndicate, which he keeps for State occasions when he brings them before the House, as gigantic monopolies of freeholds. Lord Carnarvon and the Hon W. Herbert were placed, as usual, in the criminal dock, convicted of being the only great officers of the Crown who had done such shameful things, and sentenced to eternal oblivion. After that. Sir George entreated the friends of the railway to vote for his Committee to throw over the horrible syndicate, and absolutely promised to help them to get the railway made by the Colony, a thing he had always been in* favour of all his life. Sir Julius Vogel, who promptly followed Sir George Grey, showed how extremely loose and unreliable his illustrations are, by the simple statement that the so-called monopolies were only part of the ordinary Australian practice under which the whole Continent was taken up for pastoral purposes under lease only. The Treasurer continued with an earnest appeal to the House to be consistent, to have some regard for its honour, to respect its own decisions. There the matter ought to have dropped, but the spirit of mischief was aroused, and insisted on talking. One or two like Mr Sutter endeavoured to make their peace with their people by making a public declaration in favour of keeping faith with the Company. The.rest went at the Company and its prospectus. Some denounced the iniquity of granting so much land to the Company. Others thought it shameful to take the poor Company in. It seemed as if all the old battles were about to be fought over again. But soon after 10 the debate died out, almost as suddenly as it had arisen, and Sir G. Grey found himself in a considerable minority. During the debate Mr Seddon was for some reason very prominent on Sir G. Grey’s side, and very determined. Mr Fergus was also very active and energetic and fluent against the principle of the land cession, but careful to explain that he would uphold the House’s honour. The Premier fought for the railway, convicting Mr Seddon of mistakes, which Mr Seddon would not acknowledge, and Mr Hursthouse behaved like the sharp keen champion that he can he on occasions. One of his most effective hits was his reminder to Sir George Grey that he had only lately, on a Christchurch platform, declared solemnly that he would never consent to carrying the railway past Brunnerton.

Sir G. Grey’s amendment disposed of, the motion was thrown out by a majority of 10, and so ended an unexpected and rather breezy episode. The evening sitting closed after two things:—The Premier read a telegram received from the Victorian Government, confirming Beater’s messages that the English Government will not agree to the French occupation of the New Hebrides; and Major Atkinson asked when the Financial Statement would be down, and was informed by the Treasurer that it would be down before the time usual in former years, excepting last year, when it was produced unusually early. “From information received,” as the policemen say, X hear that a breeze is brewing. ___________