PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 9293, 31 August 1893, Page 6

PARLIAMENT.

(BY TELKQRAPff.PRESS ASSOCIATION.] LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wednesday. The Council met at 2.30 p.m. LOCAL BILLS. The Gore Electoral Lighting Bill was put through its final stages. The Oamaru Loans Consolidation Bill was read a third time and passed, a hostile amendment being defeated by '26 to 9. Tho Gisborne ' High School Bill, the Mokoreta Cemetery Bill, the Kiwitea County Bill, and the Wellington City Suburbs Sanitation Bill passed their final stages. \. : THE ELECTORAL BILL. The Electoral Bill was further considered in committee. , An. amendment to Clause 3 proposed by the Attokney-General to strike out "or leasehold" in tho interpretation of "nonresident . qualification," was debated at considerable length, and was eventually lost on division by 27 to 12. ' Sir George . Whitmobe proposed an amendment to the next paragraph in the clause with the object of providing that women shall not be allowed to exercise the franchise.

The debate was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment. . The Council resumed at 7.30, in committee on the Electoral Bill.

Sir G. Whitmore's amendment against the extension of the franchise to women was discussed for upwards of an hour, the arguments being for the most part the same as those used by the various speakers during the debate on the second reading of the Bill. On division, the amendment was rejected by 20 to IS, and the paragraph conferring the . franchise on women was retained in the clause. The division list is as follows :—

For Sir George Whitmore's amendment (18): L. Walker, Richardson, Bonar, Kelly, Whitmore, Swanson, Shrimski, Stevens, Kerr, Kigg, Wahawaha, W. C. Walker, Fold wick, Bo wen, Grace, McLean, Manteil, Peacock. '..

Against the amendment (20): Reynolds, Stewart, Barnicoab, McCullough, Pharazyn, Williams, Bolt, Jennings, Jenkinson, Dignan, Whyte, Oliver, Acland, Ormond, Johnston, Pollen, Hart, Holmes, Montgomery, and Buckley. Mr. Scotland was paired for the amendment, and Mr. McGregor against. Mr. Peacock moved a further amendment to provide that only adult women who were freeholders or leaseholders should be entitled to exercise the franchise.

On division this was lost by 24 to 14. Mr. Jenkinson moved a further amendment on the interpretation clause, the effect being to give electoral rights to the shearers.

This was rejected by 23 to 14. Sir Geo. Whitmore and Mr. Shrimski expressed the opinion that ib was idle to tight the other clauses in the Bill, and said the best thiug to do was to let the remaining clauses go by default. The clause as amended was agreed to. In Clause ti "Qualifications, male or female," Mr. McLean proposed an amendment, by which leasehold qualification should be added.

This was negatived by 17 to 14, and the clause was adopted. Ayes, 14 : Boiven, Feldwick, Grace, Hart, Kelly, Kerr, McLean, Richardson, Shrimski, Swausoii, L. Walker, W. C. Walker, Wahawaha, Whitmore. Noes, 17 : Acland, Barnicoat, Bolt, Buckley, Dignan, Jenkinson, Jennings, Johnston, McCullough, Montgomery, Oliver, Ormond, Pharazyn, Pollen, Stevens, Williams, Stewart. Progress was then reported, and the Council rose at 9.2.1. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wku.vesimy. The House met at 2.,'i0. p.m. ANSWKKS TO QCKSTIOK3. Replying to Mr. \V. C. Smith, Mr. StMJDo.v said the usual course would be followed with respect to placing a sum on the Supplementary Estimates towards the annual lire brigades' competition. Replying to Mr. W. Hutchinson, Mr. Rekvks said a Bill was being considered by the Cabinet, and if the House thought it a matter of urgency it might be passed this session, to deal with the question of Baby Fanning.

Replying to Mr. Buckland, Mr. Skddon said there was only one of the ministerial residences unoccupied, and ho was afraid that at the present salary given to Ministers, they could not afford to occupy Tinakori road residence. Replying to Mr. Taipua, Mr. C'Ai'.uoi.Lsaid steps had been taken to relieve any urgent cases of distress caused by the recent floods at Waikuto.

THE liquor HILL. Mr. RoiXKsroN resumed the debate on the third reading of the Alcoholic Liquor Sale Control Bill. He said the Bill had been carried through the House too hastily. The Bill made a new departure, but that departure was a wrong road. The Premier had stated it would satisfy all parties, but in common with most compromises he thought it did riot satisfy any body. He could not support the Bill which had been hastily put together and rushed through the House in an unseemly manner. This Bill and the female franchise question had not had fair treatment from Parliament, and he would not be a party to bringing women into conflict with the united action which those two Bills would bring about. They all admitted that the question of the liquor trade had to be dealt with, but to proceed on a wrong principle with tho solution of this great problem would be, he thought, to prejudice tho cause of temperance for a long time to come. He held that our present law had not been properly administered, and that it had been the victim of adverse influence and hasty legislation. This Bill if passed now would prejudice the chance of dealing with this great question next year on a comprehensive basis. Social reforms should proceed by evolution, not by violence. The proposals for prohibition were not only based on wrong principles and at variance with constitutional practice, but they aimed at results which experience had shown were practically impossible of attainment, and led to sly grog-selling and drinking in a humiliating manner. His opinion was that intemperance would not bo cured by intolerance, and great social reforms would nob be worked out by injustice. It had been said that publicans themselves liked this Bill, as it was practically a Publicans' Bill, and would be inoperative; bub if women were put on tho roll it would not bo inoperative, and it would have the effect of roducting tho number of licenses. He himself believed that licenses should be reduced, and he thought thoy should enforce tho provisions of the present law with regard to adulteration. Ho was also in favour of early closing, and of stricter police supervision. Ho thought the lawwould never bo satisfactorily administered till they had proper inspection by persons other than the police. His vote would go in the direction of avoiding extremes on all occasions. He should vote against this Bill, because it was crude and imperfect, and would not settle the great question with which it professed to deal.

Sir R. Stout thoughb Mr. Rolloston should have moved, after tho speech he had just made, that this Bill should bo read a third time that day six months. Ho should do so himself. Tho Temperance party did not ask Parliament for prohibition ; they merely asked that this question should be sent to tho people for their decision, and if tho pooplo decided thab licenses should continue, they must obey the voice of the people. This was simply a question of local control, and it was therefore unfair to say that the prohibition asked for by tho present Bill meant that tho minority was to control tho liquor traffic, and not a majority. Ho submitted, therefore, ib struck at the root of popular government. Ho admitted the extreme temperance party were in a minority, and he believed thoy would bo in a minority for somo time to come, but in somo districts thoy were in a majority. This Hill not only allowed tho minority to rule, but it gave to the poople a premium to stop away from tho poll, which he contended would destroy the principle of the ballot. Undor this Bill tho committer) had no power with regard to granting of licenses, oven though tho placo or neighbourhood might be evaded, and a license could bo transferred from Christchurch to Sydenham. lie had heard that tho Bill put an enormous premium on hotel property, and it was therefore a publicans' Bill, Ho could nob understand any

members pledged to local option voting for this Bill. This was apparently going to bo the question at the general election, and ho asked therefore that those who desired to trust people should trust them at that election. The Bill gave the people no control whatever, and the House was asked to go back on Liberalism, and that they should not trust the people. Prohibition was, unfortunately, not within a measurable distance in the colony, bub what he asked for was local control. His opinion was that if the Licensed Victuallers' Association had met and drafted a Bill they would have brought up a more reasonable Bill than the present measure. Ho moved that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. Mr. O. Hutchison' thought they would all agree that this Bill would not settle this great question. He condemned the proposal in the Bill to prevent women from holding publichouse licenses. This was a retrograde step, aud opposed to tho whole trend of their legislation. The condition as to one-half voting was also an absurd one. The greatest delect of all in the Bill was that it dealt only with retail in spirituous liquors, and would not affect rich men at all, as they could order their two gallons at a time, if they wished it. The Bill was only a partial treatment of the question, and even that treatment was full of inconsistencies.

Mr. Hogg supported the Bill. Mr. Fergus thought it very unwise of the Government to bring in this Bill at the present time, as it would be indissolubly connected with another one now in the Upper House, and the Government should wait for the result of that before they brought in this Bill. He objected to tho Bill, because in, country districts ib would absolutely take away all control of the licensing question, and ib would be impassible to brine up the number of people to vote that.was required by clause 15 of the Bill. He aereed that districts were too small'afc present, but this Bill took away all control whatever from the people. He objected also to the expenses that would be entailed by.local bodies in carrying out this measure. He should support Sir K. Stout's amendment.

Mr. Fish said he had some difficulty in deciding whether or nob he should support the third reading of this Bill, because he did nob think it went far enough in the matter of justice to the liquor trade. Ho considered, however, that it gave the temperance party a portion of what they wanted, and it gave the liquor interest a little greater security than it had at present. That being so, he should accept the Bill as a reasonable compromise. Mr. Duthik recognised that prohibition was nob possible at the present time. The Bill did nob bring about all that he could desire, but ho should vote for the third reading, inasmuch as it gave local option to the people. The debate was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr. Tanner complained of the faulty manner in which the present Acb was administered, and said they were told last year by Captain Russell that when that hon. gentleman was in office fie found so many evasions of the law thic he had warned the police on the West Coast that if they did not secure some convictions for these offences they would all be dismissed. He regarded the present Bill as not»b all satisfactory. There were, no doubt, tome good points in it, inasmuch as it abolished 400 licensing committees, it, however, substituted one evil for another by makinglicensing districts far too large. There was no finality in the Bill, bub as it had now reached its third reading he should offer no further resistance to a measure which contained the principle of local option. Other Parliaments would correct the errors which the Bill contained.

Mr. E. M. Smith supported the Bill. He strongly condemned the action of the Prohibitionists, and said that if the Government of the country fell into the hands of these men, much a* he loved the country he would pack up his traps and leave it. These Prohibitionists had the audacity to state they would contest every election in the colony, but he challenged any one of them to stand in his district, and he would meet them.

Mr. Willis said when the Premier had stated he would bring down a Bill that would please all parties there was derisive laughter, but when the Bill did come down the laughter was changed to applause, and it was acknowledged that the Premier had accomplished a most diifieub task in preparing such an acceptable measure as they were now considering. He thought the Premier was to be congratulated on the manner in which he had carried this Bill through Committee.and hehoped the House would support the third reading.

Mr. BUCK LAND was prepared to support the regulation of the liquor traffic, believing as he did that there were too many publichouses in the colony. He was perfectly prepared to support a majority of votes on the roll, and he recognised government by the people, through the people and for the people. He thought it was wise to pass a throe-fifths majority, as a bare majority might not pass the Upper House. He hoped the Bill would have a fair trial, as he supported direct veto without compensation.

Mr. Bkuck regarded the Bill as largely of an experimental character. The vital principle of the measure was giving the regulation of the liquor traffic to the people instead of leaving it to committees. It had been said this was a publicans' Bill, but it appeared to him to be a moderate measure, and placed in the hands of the people the power to absolutely extinguish the liquor traffic if they desired it. He much feared that in country districts the Bill would in many cases prove inoperative, bub it would no doubt do good in the cities, as it must reduce licenses. Another defect of the measure was that it placed too much expense on tho local bodies.

Mr. Saunders said the Bill violated some of the greatest principles of self-govern-ment. The great blot in tho Bill was the provision requiring one-half the electors to vote. lb meant that those parties who were interested in maintaining the traffic, no matter what it cost—blood and groans and tears —would bo placed in a superior position to those who had no interest in the matter except the welfare of humanity. This provision encouraged roll - stuffing, and with ib the Bill was a sham. There was some good in the Bill as a Licensing Bill, but as to the veto it was a delusion. He believed the Government should have loft the question to bo dealt with by Sir R. Stout, whose sympathies on this subject were in tho fight direction. By their action the Government had placed their temperance supporters in a false position. Mr. Mackintosh thought on the contrary ib was the duty of the Government to introduce the Bill. It was a vast improvement on tho present law. He held that the time was not far district when the cursed drink traffic would bo extinguished, and this Bill could not be introduced by any bub a powerful Government, and he believed the Government had given fairplay by the Bill. Mr. Reeves said they had the unusual spectacle of a Bill passing the second reading on tho voices and then violently criticised on the third reading. The Government were, however, nob surprised at the result, as they did not know how tho Bill would be received. The Bill had been described as a mockery and delusion because it had been accepted by the publicans. The reason ib had boon accepted by them was because they thoughb ib was tho lesser of two evils, and the choice was between reform and annihilation. They accopted the Bill as tho best they could got. He referred to the Bill brought in by Sir K. Stout earlier in the session, the second reading of which had been carried by an enormous majority. The Government were, however, told thoy should not leave this matter to a private member, bub should take it up and deal with it as a Government should, and they had done so by bringing in the present Bill. That Bill, firsb of all, popularised tho franchise. It also reduced the number of committees, and in so doing, they were true to tho principles of local government reform. They also increased tho size of tho districts by the Bill. It also onactod thab districts whoso populations wore stationary should have no increase of licenses. A further provision was made that in three years power was given to close 25 per cent, of tho housos if a bare majority desired ib, and that was, virtually, prohibition. Tlio Bill also took away from the committee and transferred ib to the ratepayers the power to roduce tho number of licenses. Tho result of the administration of those committees had been tho steady and enormous increase in tho number of licensed houses, and that was stopped by tho Bill. It also regulated tho clubs of tho colony, and virtually pub ib in bhe power of. the people to grant or refuse new

charters to these institutions, and yet too Government were blamed for bringing in a Bill of this kind. It was said that all the Prohibitionists wanted was not prohibition but direct local control. They recognised they were in a minority, but he held the minority should nob shape the legislation of the House, and they should recognise it was the right of the majority to do this. Prohibition was not control, it was annihilation, and they should not allow the public mind to be confused on that important issue. He believed the first result of this Bill would be that there would bo such a reduction of licenses in Chrisbchurch in 12 months that all the Prohibitionists and temperance reformers could not bring about. He asked the House not to allow the licensing question to become the happy hunting ground of extremists on either side. He strongly resented the remarks of those*members who said those who supported this Bill were not true Li bet als, and asserted that the members of the present Ministry and other members in the House were men who stood in the forefront of liberalism for years past. Mr. Sakdkord did not think the Premier had quite fulfilled the pledge he made when lie promised to bring down a Bill that would please all parties. To his mind the Premier made a great mistake in inserting the three years' license clause, and he hoped in another place that would be struck out. He thought also the Premier might have given way in the clause providing for one-half of the voters. He himself was not allied to either Prohibitionists or the liquor party and sometimes he had voted with Sir It. Stout and sometimes against him. His opinion was that the majority of the people of the colony were not ardent prohibitionists, bub were moderate in their views. Reference had been made to the size of the districts but be held the alliance were in favour of the electoral districts as licensing districts. Mr. Earsshaw regretted that for the first time in the history of this Parliament there would be a division in the Labour party on this question. He held that this battle was being fought on the side of the licensed victuallers.

[ _ Mr. O'Cokob thought the Bill was a distinct advance on the present law, and he hoped he would be here next year to endeavour to effect any amendment in the Bill that might be considered necessary. He supported the third reading. Mr. I'ikkbbtos objected to the provision requiring that half the number of electors should vote. He referred to several other objectionable features of the Bill, and said he should vote against the third reading. Mr. Allen said iMr. Reeves had told them that the referendum was bad, but the direct veto wa3 worse, according to his own, showing; therefore he had introduced a Bill containing everything that was bad. His (Mr. Allen's) opinion was that the Bill was no advance on the present law, and for that reason he should vote against the third reading. He regarded the triennial license as the most serious blot in the Bill, and said the committee had no discretionary power at ail by the Bill. Mr. McLkax said he was elected to support the Government and their Liberal measures. He did not belong to the liquor ring, nor did he belong to the other party, and the question of liquor reform was not before the electors when he was returned. There was no fear of polls being void under the Bill. He should do his best to improve this trade; but he could not agree that property should be swept away in one day by a prohibition vote. Mr. Harkness opposed the Bill, and ss»id it would not give satisfaction to those who were desirous of controlling the liquor traffic. The best feature of the Bill, if it could only be carried out was the reduction of licenses every three years. Mr. Meredith took exceptions to several features of the Bill, but there was a good deal in it that he approved of. He should, however, vo'ie against the third reading. Mr. Swan said he intended voting for this measure not because it was in the interest of the brewing trade, but because it was not of such a drastic charactf r as jir R. Stout's Bill.

Mr. Hall Jones said he was well pleased they had reached this stage of the Bill. The whole Bill was an intuit, and he should vote against it.

Sir R. Stout's amendment was then put and lost by 35 to 13, and the Bill was read a third time.

[Left sitting at two a.m.]