New Zealand Mail. PUBLISHED WEEKLY. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1875. THE ABOLITION BILL.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 209, 11 September 1875, Page 12

New Zealand Mail. PUBLISHED WEEKLY. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1875. THE ABOLITION BILL.

Tiif, Abolition of Provinces Bill was committed on Wednesday morning, shortly after midnight, a division having previously been taken on an amendment by Mr. Stout, with the object of referring the measure to the constituencies. The numbers on this division were—against the amendment, 44 ; for it, 22. Thus the Government carried the question by a majority of two to one. The majority on the second reading was over three to one. The Bill will be considered in committee to-morrow at half-past two o’clock, and from the statement made by Sir George Grey, on behalf of the Opposition, we may anticipate a long and protracted discussion. Touching the amendment, it can hardly be regarded as a test of the ultimate feeling of the House, because the Government express their willingness to consider amendments in committee which do not go to traverse any of the principles of the Bill. Members could not reasonably be expected to support a proposition which would have the ell'ect of stopping further debate ; and only those who take up a very decided stand in opposition could go with the member for Caversliam. Indeed, we think the country would have had just cause to complain if the House had accepted the amendment, because, notwithstanding the torrent of speech that has been poured out already, the practical details of the measure have scarcely been touched. And it is this omission which the debates in committee will supply. Mr. Stout has recorded his protest in the Journals of the House, and there it will stand as a record of his zeal on behalf of a failing cause. That is the only purpose the division on the amendment can serve, and we give him credit for honestly stating that this was all he intended by it. The debate on Tuesday was remarkable for the statement made by the Colonial Treasurer, in reply to Mr. Moxtgo.mery’.s criticism of the financial results of provincial abolition. It was an exceedingly candid statement, but we take leave to doubt its advisability. We think the Colonial Treasurer was not called upon, by reason of anything which fell from the member for Akaroa, to make an anticipatory financial statement for the year 1877-78, which in reality is what he has done. He had not sufficient data on which to go ; and he left himself open to the adverse comments which followed. Major Atkix, sox’s anticipations may or may not be realised ; his calculations are purely speculative, but they will be used as a weapon against him during the debate, and may possibly create a wrong impression in the country. At the same time, we give Major Atkixsox credit for his perfect candour and sincerity. He might have made things pleasant without much difficulty ; but he preferred to lay his finger upon the weak point of provincial finance, and show that two years hence, by the ordinary operation of the law as it now stands, the provinces of Canterbury and Otago would be in quite as bad a condition financially as Auckland or Westland are now. And there can be little doubt of the general accuracy of his conclusions in this respect. 7\ e shall not in this place refer at any length to the figures quoted by the Colonial Treasurer in his statement. There are so many points of interest in them that we prefer waiting until we have them before us in an authentic shape. As wo have said, however, it would have been better if the Treasurer had not anticipated the discussion on the financial proposals of the Government. It was unnecessary in our opinion. But there was one part of his statement which was required. We refer to his allusion to the land policy of the Government. He said the Government would not sell land for the sake of revenue. They were convinced of the absolute necessity for settling the immigrants on the land, and also of enabling young men born in the colony to acquire land for settlement and occupation, xks we have advocated this policy, we need only express our gratification that the

Government has pronounced so decided an opinion upon the subject. Further, Major Atkinson explained that the Bills proposed to be brought down would not in any way alter tho principle of the Abolition of Provinces Bill. He repudiated the idea that the intention of the Bill under discussion was to secure to the House tho voting of the surplus land fund. No such principle was in the Bill, and it was to remove any misapprehension of the kind that the other Bill was promised, ft would assure certain large communities that they would enjoy their land fund as long as it remained. The object of the Government was to secure the only possible colonial finance to New Zealand, and not to lay hands upon provincial revenue. The hands of law was upon tho provincial funds already, as by law tlio land fund of the provinces was pledged for interest and sinking fund on all railway expenditure within their bounds. This was not the doing of the Government. It was the act of the House ; and the Provincial Councils had pledged it to its full extent for at least two years to come. Under the circumstances the Government would press through their measures in the interest of the country, believing it to be with them. And so the question stands. The struggle, as wo have already intimated, began in committee on Thursday.