PARLIAMENTARY NEWS AND GOSSIP.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVIII, Issue 6116, 24 June 1881, Page 5

PARLIAMENTARY NEWS AND GOSSIP.

[BY TELEGRAPH.—SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.] Wellington, Thursday. I POLITICS DULL. To-day has been the dullest even of this dull session as to political news and gossip— not even a. single Parliamentary paper has been laid on the table, or Bill circulated. PROGRESS OF BUSINESS. Ministers met in Cabinet to consider the Regulation of Elections Bill, which was amended in regard to various details, and is not even yet printed. Major Atkinson has obtained leave to introduce his Bill rendering Crown and native land ratable, and also that, in respect to collecting duties on estates of deceased persons, but neither is yet printed. LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Mr. Murray's resolution on local government reform produced an energetic debate this afternoon, ultimately talked out by Dr. Wallis until the hour of rising. There were three notable features :—l, The Ministerial statement, that it may not be convenient to declare the Government policy regarding local government at this stage, but that this woul■'. be done immediately after the Financial statement was deliv-jrocl;.2, Mr. Ormond's speech, in which, after lauding provincialism and condemning the county system he, to the obvious surprise and keen disappointment of the Opposition, wound up by expressing his opinion that the whole question should be relegated to constituencies, and Parliament content itself with passing as few Bills as possible before the general election. The third feature was Mr. Reader Wood's slashing onslaught on what he deemed waste of time over the Licensing Bill. He complained that a large number of gentlemen had been brought together from all parts of the colony to Wellington to deal with public business of the utmost importance, and nearly a fortnight had been wasted in teetotal lectures, unutterably dreary and useless. He denounced the course taken of wasting time on this frivolous teetotalism, while such urgent matters as finance and local government reform waited attention. On the latter point he remarked, "People ask bread, we give them stone ; they ask money, and we give them institutions." The speech was in his happiest vein.

THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT. I believe it is now practically settled that the Budget will bo brought down on Tuesday week. Friday next would be preferred, but there are difficulties in the way which may not prove insurmountable, but probably will. THE MINISTERIAL DEFEAT. There is still a good deal of talk about the Ministerial defeat on Mr. Andrews' motion yesterday, but it is clearly recognised to have occurred through mere carelessness and lax party discipline. The Post tonight says:—"There was very bad management somewhere in the Ministerial camp. Unless Ministers had been sure of their followers they should not have resisted the motion so strenuously, or allowed the • question to go to the vote at all. It was exceedingly poor generalship, to say the least, and the result may have consequences not yet discerned. Those defeats do a Ministry great harm. They injure a Government's prestige, weaken the allegiance of wavering supporters and encourage opponents. It is folly to court defeat by mere carelessness, and if Ministers be wise they will profit by yesterday's slap in the face to urge on their followers the necessity of stricter j>arty discipline and better organisation." LOCAL FINANCE. There.is a good deal of speculation as to the nature of the alterations in the local finance Bills since last session, but strict reticence is observed by Ministers on the subject. It is thought, however, that Major Atkinson's scheme of last year, if fully explained, and clearly apprehended by the public generally, would meet with a much better reception than hitherto seemed likely. Some who are well qualified to form an opinion on the subject, contend that the dislike manifested to the scheme of last year arose mainly, if not entirely, from want of comprehension of its real purport and scope, and that if the existing misconceptions were cleared away, Major Atkinson's plan will rapidly grow in popular favour. All parties seem to agree that local finance is the paramount question of the day, and must be definitely settled this session. THE ATKINSON-HARRIS CORRESPONDENCE.

The Atkinson-Harris correspondence closes with a letter from Major Atkinson, accepting Mr. Harris's explanation, but by implication censuring him severely for the license lie had allowed his tongue in insinuating so grave a charge of fraud. THE GOVERNOR AND MR. BRYCE. There is still a good deal of discussion about Mr. Bryceand the Governor's despatch, and a strong feeling prevails condemnatory of His Excellency's action. BROGDEN'S PETITION. The petition of Messrs. Brqgden and Sous, in regard, to their claims against the colony, which was presented to Parliament yesterday, has boon before Classification Committee, and is referred to the Public Petitions Committee. It sots forth a considerable length the alleged grievances of the petitioners. They state they were induced by representations and assurances of the Government and the Agent-General to sent out 1577 statute adult immigrants, of whom BS7 were women and children, a class much more valuable to the colony than to the petitioners, who only needed men to work on railway contracts. It was agreed that the Agent-General should forward these people to the colony, Messrs. Brogden paying passages and taking their promissory notes for repayment on the assurance of the Agent - General that the Government were dealing with the immigrants on similar terms. But directly after this agreement was made Government began taking out their own immigrants in the same vessels with those of Messrs. Brogden, and upon more favourable terms, thus creating jealousy and discontent, while subsequently Government immigrants were conveyed free of charge, so increasing the bitter feeling of others, who accused Messrs. Brogden of defrauding them, and used every device to evade payment of the promissory notes. Government ceased endeavouring to recover their own promissory notes, thus, it is contended, showing the erroneousness of their assurance to Messrs. Brogden that these would bo effectual securities, and at length all possible chance of recovery was extinguished by the repeal oE the law for arrest for debt. Yet the Government claimed to remain a creditor of petitioners', after having destroyed the security which the AgentGeneral had assured them was ample to protect them from loss. Mr. Brogden thereupon claimed to be relcivcd of a liability for £15,240, on account of passage money on transferring to the Government the immigrants promissory notes. This was refused, and the Government retained, out of the moneys due to the petitioners, on account of railway contracts, £20,739, being the sum referred to, with interest added. The matter was referred, in IS7S, to a Select Parliamentary Committee, who reported that

the petitioners had not substantiated their case, but it subsequently appeared that all the information had not been laid before the committee, including an important letter from the Agent-General, who recommended the proposals made by the petitioners for a settlement of their claims to the favourable consideration of the Government. The petitioners, therefore, pray to be compensated for loss they have sustained, or that such other relief may be granted as Parliament may think proper.