Parliament.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Friday, October 8. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at two o’clock. > Some formal business having been disposed of, The Hon. Colonel KENNY gave notice that he would move on Tuesday, that with a view to the settlement of matters in connection with the Piako Land Exchange Bill, it is, in the opinion of the Council, expedient that the Bill be withdrawn by the Government, and that they afford Mr. Whitaker every facility to arrange for the survey of the land awarded to him by the commisioner. BILLS INTRODUCED. The following Bills were introduced by the Hon. Dr. Pollen, and read a first time :—An Act to Authorise the Governor to Grant to the Auckland Harbor Board certain Lands, being part of the soil of the Harbor of Auckland, an Act to Enable a Crown Grant to be made to the Bishop of Auckland of a piece of Land at Waiuku. The Hon. Mr. TAYLOR moved for leave of absence for the remainder of the session. He took this step in consequence of the report brought up by the Disqualification Committee. It appeared to him that one of two alternatives was open to him. One of them was that lie should disembarrass himself from all connection with those transactions with which his name had been associated ; the other was that he ought, perhaps, to resign his seat in that Council, as he felt he should not tsire to hold his seat under the disabilities arising out of the transactions to which reference had been made some time back. If he were desirous of carrying out the first alternative, it could only done by his holding a conference with all the other parties with wlfom he was associated. As to the other course, he did not think it would be desirable to act hurriedly in resigning, as he had been many years a member of the Council, and regarded it as an honor which he ought not lightly to give up. (Hear.) He therefore desired to take time for consideration, the more so as he saw a notice had been given to take action in reference to this matter. He therefore asked for leave of absence, in order that he might take the necessary steps to put himself in the position he would desire to occupy under the circumstances. BILLS. The following Bills were read a third time and passed : —Railway Companies Bill, Friendly Societies Act Amendment Bill, Evidence Further Amendment Bill, Abolition of Provinces Bill, Bills of Sale Bill, Imprisonment for Debt Abolition Act Amendment Bill, New Zealand Presbyterian Church Act 1875 Amendment Bill, Westport Municipal Reserves Bin. The following Bills were ordered to be read a third time on Tuesday next :—Municipal Corporations Act Amendment Bill, Oamaru Town Hall and Gasworks Site and Recreation Reserves Bill, and Evidence Further Amendment Bill. PIAKO LAND EXCHANGE BILL. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN moved that this Bill be further considered in committee on Wednesday next. The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON said he should not be in attendance at the Council on Wednesday and after ; and as he felt a burning desire to be present at the death of this measure, he hoped the lion, the Premier would fix its consideration for an earlier date. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN had no objection to indulge his friend’s desire to participate in the sport he anticipated, and consented to the the Bill being made an order of the day for Tuesday next. LICENSING ACT AMENDMENT BILL. In committee on the Licensing Act Amendment Bill considerable discussion took place. Eventually its further consideration was postponed until Wednesday. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE proposed certain amendments which the Council might consider in the interim. At 4 o’clock the Council adjourned until the usual hour on Tuesday next. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Friday, October 8. The Speaker took the chair at half-past two o’clock. , notices of motions, &e. Several notices of motions were given, and petitions, papers, and reports presented. QUESTIONS. In answer to questions, the Government said that provision would not be made in the supplementary estimates to meet the expense of sending representatives to compete at the groat rifle international match, open to the world, proposed to be held next year in Philadelphia during the time of the exhibition there. The expense would, it was found on inquiry, be very great.—That the lease of the Kawakawa railway provided for the carrying of public traffic. BILLS INTRODUCED. By Major Atkinson, a Bill to amend the Disqualification Act. By Sir Donald McLean, Equitable Interests Compensation Bill. By the same, Waiuku Native Grants Bill. ORDERS OF THE DAY. The adjourned debate was resumed on the question,—That this House approves of and ratifies the joint contract intcred into on the 23rd July, 1875, by Sir D. Cooper, Bart., and Mr. Thomas Russell, on behalf of the Governments of New South Wales and New Zealand, respectively, with the Pacific Mail Steamship Company, of New York (for whom Messrs. Elder and Co., of Glasgow, and Mr. Macgregor,M.P. for Leith, are sureties), for a fourweekly mail steam service between San Francisco and Sydney, and between New Zealand and San Francisco. The following amendment
was proposed thereto by Mr. Murray, —That the San Francisco mail service being advantageous to the citizens of the United States as well as to British colonists in Australasia, a fair proportion of the subsidy for such service should be paid by the Government of the United States. The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD moved an amendment, —That the contract should be ratified, subject to such an agreement being entered into as wourd keep the subsidy paid by New Zealand down to £40,000. He believed that the colony could get all it wanted for that sum. He would not let commercial interests be taken into consideration. It was not the place of Parliament to subsidise such interests. In the present condition of the finances, no money should be lavishly spent, and he could see no reason why the proposed extra £SOOO should be paid. His amendment left the Government unfettered in their arrangements with New South Wales. It was a matter for regret that the late Premier should, after the House had passed a resolution affirming £40,000 for the San Francisco mail service, have authorised an agent to contract for £45,000. It was true that Sir Julius Vogel had reserved the contract for the ratification of Parliament, but his action was nevertheless to be regretted, taken as it was in the face of a distinct resolution of the House. Mr. MURRAY withdrew his amendment in favor of Mr. Stafford’s. Mr. MACANDREW advocated the coastal service by the San Francisco boats for £40,000 a year, and quoted from a telegram from Dunedin to show that it would pay. If it could be accomplished in honor, he would be in favor of a mail line via the Strait of Magellan and South America. Mr. T. KELLY spoke to an amendment proposed by him, substituting an alternative route for that agreed upon by Mr. Russell, and terminated by withdrawing it.
The Hon. Mr. BOWEN said that the real question to consider was whether for an extra £SOOO a year the House would refuse to ratify the proposed contract, a contract under which great advantages would be gained, and in fact a present outlay of £2500 for coastal service as at present carried on would be saved.
The Hon. Mr. FITZIIERBERT spoke in opposition to the ratification of the contract for an additional burden of £SOOO a year. He objected also to binding the colony to a service for so long a period as eight years. He asked the House to adhere to the terms of its resolution —a subsidy of £40,000 a year for six years, and not to go beyond those terms. Messrs. Murray, Rolleston, and Andrew supported Mr. Stafford’s amendment.—Mr. Reid advocated a coastal service.—Mr. McGlashan supported the Government proposals. Sir DONALD McLEAN moved the adjournment of the debate in consequence of the number of amendments proposed, in order to give the Government an opportunity of considering the question as it was now presented. The debate was accordingly adjourned until Monday.
The second reading of the Immigration and Public Works Acts Amendment Bill was moved by the Hon. Mr. Richardson. —Messrs. Reid, T. Kelly, O’ Conor, Murray, and Shephard having spoken, and the mover of the second reading having replied, the second reading of the Bill was carried on the voices, and its committal was ordered for Monday. The House went into committee for the further consideration of the Stamp Duties Bill, which was reported with additional amendments. PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE AND MR. BRIDGES.
Mr. READER WOOD stated that he had been instructed by the Public Accounts Committee to report to the House a resolution they had come to upon a question connected with their inquiry. He was directed to report the evidence given by Mr. Bridges, of the National Bank, and to inform the House that he had refused to answer any further questions, and at the same time had made grave imputations affecting the character of certain members of the Legislature. The committee hoped that the House would prosecute the inquiry. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said the report read by the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee was considered by the Government to be a matter of such great public importance that, after having carefully considered the matter, they had determined to ask the House to order Mr. Bridges, manager of the National Bank of New Zealand, to attend before the bar of the House at three o’clock on Monday, in order that the enquiry might be continued. It was quite impossible, in the opinion of the committee and the Government, that the matter should bo allowed to rest where it was. Therefore, he had to move that Mr. Bridges be ordered to attend at the time and hour above stated. Carried. OTHER BILLS. The New Zealand University Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday. The Government Apprentices Bill passed through committee and all its stages. The Immigration and Public Works Appropriation Bill was read a second time and ordered to bo committed on Monday. REPRE.SEN TATION BILL. Mr. ROLLESTON having made a few remarks as to the representation of minorities, The Hon. Mr. BOWEN replied. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday next. SUPPLY RESOLUTIONS. Resolutions reported from Committee of Supply were read a second time. NATIVE LANDS PURCHASE DEPARTMENT. Onthemotion to go into Committee of Supply, Sir GEORGE GREY brought forward 'a resolution with reference to the acquisition of native lqnds, which he hoped the House would permit him to divide it into two parts, because the first part might at once meet with approval, and discussion would therefore be saved. Having that permission, he proposed that the first resolution should take this form : “ That the purchase or leasing of native
lands, directly or indirectly, to their own 1 interest or advantage, or for other persons, by Government officers or agents whose duty it is to purchaso native lands for the public, is contrary to the public interest.” He did not intend to detain the House for any length of time. It would be known to the House that the officersof the Government had had placed in their possession large public funds for the purpose of acquiring lands for the public; they also had a certain status given them in the country from their position in the Government service, which must give them large influence with the native population. In addition to that, they possessed extraordinary means of collecting information, which gave them great advantage over others in the acquisition of native lands. It must be conceded that these gentlemen had no right to purchase these lands either for themselves or for other persons. No agent acting for a private person would dare, if he were employed to purchase land for his principal, to purchase landed estate for himself or any other person. Such an act would not bo recognised by law ; and if such was the case as regarded private transactions, it was clearly of greater importance that such a rule should be observed in reference to public purchases of land. Indeed, the effect of the first resolution was so obvious that he would content himself by moving it. The second resolution was to this effect, “ That it is desirable that the Government should during the recess prepare a Bill enacting that all such lands so purchased or leased since the date of the passing of the Immigration and Public Works Act, shall bo taken and deemed to bo part of the public estate, and that the colony refund to such purchasers all sums proved to have been actually expended by them in the purchase of such lands.” He believed that the public generally had misunderstood this question. What he asked the House to do in this case was simply to confirm the law. He asked them to do nothing to which honest objection could be raised. He simply asked them to say that that which was the law of the land must be observed. He would, with the permission of the House, read some legal opinions touching upon the subject. [Sir George proceeded to quote from Story, St. Leonards, and Eldon.] Those opinions were in perfect accord with the resolutions he had just placed before the House. Now, with regard to the nature of the agency of these individuals. There could be no doubt, in the first place, as to the character of the office held by the Native Minister himself—that he was an agent employed by the people to purchase lands for them. He held the high office of a Minister of the Crown in this colony, charged especially with the welfare of the Native department, but charged also publicly with the interest of the public at large. For the purpose of enabling him to discharge his duties large sums of money were placed under his control. He had also entrusted to him powers over the confiscated lands, and powers over the expenditure of sums acquired from the sale of those lands. Then, as Defence Minister he had further control and power, and the assistance of paid agents who could give him the most accurate information with respect to the lands of the colony, their nature, value, and extent, as well as with respect to the feelings of the natives. Then, for the acquirement of a landed estate for the North Island £700,000 was granted. He believed that no part of that expenditure had been regularly audited or accounted for. The Native Minister was to all intents and purposes chief of the Land Purchase department of this colony ; therefore, any land purchased by him must be regarded as the property of the public of New Zealand.
Sir DONALD M’LEAN replied. With reference to the first resolution, he might state that it inclined in the direction of the principle which the Government intended to carry out ; and ho might also state, in reference to the land purchase system, that the Government had found it necessary to adopt the course they had with reference to native lands. But some of the land purchases had not been completed, and it was the intention of the Government before that not to proceed with any purchases on a large scale until they were completed; and he thought it would not bo necessary to make any extensive purchases for one or two years to come. He quite agreed that officers employed to purchase lands for the Crown should not be permitted to purchase for themselves or any third party ; and that principle was one upon which the Government intended to insist. With reference to the second resolution of the member for City West, he could only say that the proposal he had made was one which ran in the direction of general confiscation. As to the remarks of Sir George Grey which had taken a personal form, he must say that lie saw no reason why a person should not acquire lands, as lie (the speaker) had done from the Crown, that was, under Crown grant; and he failed to see what there was in that to which the lion, gentleman could take exception. Had he gone into the native districts and acquired land which had not passed through the ordeal of a court of enquiry, then ho was prepared to admit it would not have been the correct course to pursue ; but when the land had passed through the Native Lands Court the ease was altered. He would state in conclusion that it was not the intention of the Government to push on any additional purchases during the year; but they intended to make considerable reductions in the staff of agents which had hitherto been in their employ. Up to the present time there had been an absolute neeesity for the employment of these agencies, inasmuch as they had to meet the circumstances as they arose, and the circumstances had been such as to havo removed the cause. The Government had taken the only course which would have carried out the wishes of that Assembly, as expressed on a previous occasion, namely, the acquirement of a territorial estate for the North Island. As to the remarks of the hon. member with
regard to certain largo sums of money not having been audited or accounted for, ho might state that only one half of the £700,000 alluded to had been spent, and of that which had been spent every item had been audited except £22,000. Messrs. Fitzherbcrt, Atkinson, Tribe, T. L. Shepherd, Sheehan, and Rolleston followed. On the question being put, a division was taken, which resulted in the original motion, to go into Committee of Supply, beiug carried. COMMITTEE Of SUPPLY. _ The House having gone into committee, considerable progress was made with the Estimates, with little discussion ; but ou arriving at the estimates for postal services, a division of opinion occurred, and the item of £SOOO, for steam communication to Queensland, gave rise to a short debate. A division was taken on the question to erase the item, the result being as follows : —Noes, 21 ; ayes, 15. The House then adjourned.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Monday, October 11. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m. NOTICES. A number of notices were given ; one by Mr. Luckie, to ask the Government whether it was intended to reduce the telegraphic charge for 500 words to evening papers. MR. BRIDGES BROUGHT TO THE BAR OF THE HOUSE. ■*" The SPEAKER at three o’clock informed the House that the hour had arrived at which Mr. Bridges was to appear in obedience to an order of the House. That order had arisen thus : Mr. Bridges, on being examined before a select committee of the House, after making certain statements which, in the opinion of the committee, affected the character of certain members of the Legislature, refused to answer any further questions. The committee reported this refusal to the House, and it was ordered that Mr. Bridges should attend. Since that he (the Speaker) had been informed that Mr. Bridges desired to be represented by counsel, and this the House must decide. Mr. MACANDREW said before the House proceeded further in this matter he wished to state that, in his opinion, the only pressure brought to bear upon the Colonial Government in reference to the Port Chalmers Railway was brought by the Provincial Government of Otago, who acted in the public interest, or what he (Mr. Macandrew) believed to be the public interest. It had been currently reported that the Superintendent of Otago had an interest in this railway. Hence the pressure brought by the Provincial Government. He thought it right to. state that not only was the report without the slightest foundation, but it was absolutely false ; and he thought it more than likely that it would be found that Mr. Bridges had got hold of a “ mare’s nest.” (A laugh.) With regard to the Colonial Executive, he thought it weuld be shown that if any pressure was brought to bear upon it, it was brought by the Provincial Government in the public interest, and he did not believe any pressure was brought by the Bank of New Zealand, because that institution had had nothing to do with the matter. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said he was very glad to hear the explanation which had been offered by the hon. member, and he could testify as to its correctness, because the negotiation for the purchase of this railway had devolved upon him (Mr. Richardson). As far as he could say, the only pressure brought to bear on the Government was the pressure indicated by the hon. member for Port Chalmers.
Mr. REID said after the explanations which had been made he did not think it necessary that Mr. Bridges should be heard, either by himself or by counsel. It appeared to him that the House had rather too much to do to allow of its time being taken up by persons being brought to the bar. He had seen such a course followed on several occasions, but had never known any result from it further than that the House for a certain time neglected its proper functions, and had made an exhibition of itself not at all calculated to raise it in the estimation of the public. He should like that any information Mr. Bridges was prepared to give, or which could be forced from him with any reasonable pressure, should be taken before the select committee, and not at the bar of that House. If it were necessary to pass a resolution or an Act placing him in a position of greater security—for ho understood it was the want of security that caused the refusal to give evidence —he thought that should he done without bringing Mr. Bridges up to the bar. They did not wish to lose a day listening to Mr. Bridges or his counsel, and, as far as he could see, without any result. Let them take any action that might ho necessary, but not lose time at that late period of the session. He did not see anything about the matter on the order paper, or he would move that the House proceed to the next order of the day; but ho should like the Speaker to iifform him which would be the best course iir order to give Mr. Bridges the protection he desired, free him from responsibility, and allow him to give his evidence in the committeeroom, which was the proper place, and not in that House, which was not the proper place. The SPEAKER said the hon. member would be in order in moving that the House proceed to the orders of the day, or a resolution or an Act might be passed, giving Mr. Bridges the indemnity he required. Either course would he in accordance with parliamentary practice, hut hon. members must remember that Mr. Bridges had made statements reflecting upon the character of members of the House, and had, when asked to give further explanations, refused to answer the questions put.
After a few words from Mr. McGlashan, Mr. J. E. BROWN said tko House must recollect that the committee had reported a fact, viz., that a person refused to give evidence. or to go any further unless given an indemnity. That was the position of affairs at the present moment, and in his opinion the
House must either commit witness for contempt or give him an indemnity, so that whatever lie chose to state before the committee should be privileged from any injurious consequences that might follow. That was his idea of how the matter stood; and if he were correct in his premises, he thought the first thing the House ought to consider was whether the witness should be granted an indemnity. Under the rules of the House, rule 219, a witness giving evidence was to a certain extent protected, and if the House gave further protection it was in this position, that the witness might make a statement of the most reckless character, and no one could proceed against him. He would be free from all responsibility. The Privileges Act of 18(55 allowed the House to take proceedings against a person for perjury, and did not give power to anyone to make reckless assertions before a committee. When the witness came before the House the members would have no power to ask questions ; all the House could do would be either to oblige the witness to give evidence before the committee or commit him for contempt ; though he took it that that House was in the same position as the Supreme Court, and that a witness need not give evidence to criminate himself. In this case he did not objeot to answer questions because he might criminate himself, but somebody else. lie believed witness should be placed in the same position as if he were in the Supreme Court, and that he should be compelled to answer the necessary questions, and compelled to stand the consequences if his statements were false.
On the question being put, it was resolved that Mr. Bridges be requested to attend; and the Sergeaut-at-Arms conducted him to the bar of the House.
Mr. Bridges : I am desirous of my counsel being here. Can Ibe heard by counsel. The SPEAKER : You may have counsel, but you must yourself answer the questions which the House may be pleased to put to you.
Mr. Travers then entered the Chamber in professional costume, and took up his position alongside Mr. Bridges. The SPEAKER then recapitulated the questions which had been put to Mr. Bridges by the committee, inquiring if the committee had correctly reported that he had refused to answer the questions; to which Mr. Bridges replied that he had done so. The SPEAKER : Why did you refuse to answer these questions ?
Mr. Bridges : Because I believed I should by answering them render myself liable to legal proceedings for libel. The SPEAKER: If you were again examined before the committee, would you still persist in your refusal to answer these questions on that account ? Mr. Bridges : On that account; —yes. Mr. BUNNY : Would you object to answer the questions supposing an Act of Indemnity were passed by the Legislature ? Mr. Bridges (After considting with Mr. Travers for a minute or two) : I have no objection to answer the questions if an Indemnity Act is passed. Mr. BUNNY : Then, sir, I think we should adjourn this inquiry, to allow the Government to at once bring in a Bill to indemnify Mr. Bridges from the consequences of his answers to these questions. It is very important that this matter should be thoroughly sifted. If what he says is true, let it fall upon the right shoulders ; and if Mr. Bridges be mistaken, it is only fair to those said to be implicated that an inquiry should be held, in order that the public mind may be freed from any such impression as would result from the matter not being cleared up. The Government should at once—this 'very day—bring down a Bill indemnifying Mr. Bridges from the consequences of any statements he may make.
Mr. Bridges : I am desirous of making a statement which will prevent difficulty. Since I gave evidence, on Saturday last, I have received information which shows me that the evidence I had previously given when I expressed the opinion that pressure had been put upon the Government by the Bank of New Zealand to purchase the Port Chalmers railway, was made upon incorrect and erroneous grounds. Therefore, I desire to retract the whole of my evidence upon that subject. The SPEAKER then further examined Mr. Bridges upon some of the fencing answers he had given to the committee, after which Mr. Bridges said : I desire to say that I did not volunteer any of the evidence given by me. I merely replied to questions. I wish to point out that to the committee I only expressed an opinion, and said I did not know that I could prove what I said. Nothing was stated as a positive fact. After some further remarks, the Speaker told Mr. Bridges to withdraw. Mr. Bridges, with his counsel, Mr. Travers, withdrew accordingly. The statements were re-read by the Clerk, such being the wish of the House. Mr. LUCKIE stated that he had given Mr. Bridges the information which had induced him to retract in the manner hq had.
Mr. CUTHBERTSON wished to state with regard to the purchase of the Port Chalmers line, that he had been informed that pressure had been brought to bear upon the Government by Mr. Macandrew, and that the tenderer would not have sold the line for £50,000 had it not been quitted at the time it was; and that after the bargain had been made he was quite prepared to give £20,000 more. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said it was most desirable that everything in connection with the Government should be clear and above suspicion. With regard to this transaction, Mr. Bridges had made serious charges against the character of certain of their public men; therefore he submitted that it was the duty of the House to probe the matter to the bottom. The retractation—or whatever operation it was that Mr. Bridges wished to go through—would not be at all satisfactory under existing circumstances. The proper course would be to pass an Indemnity Bill, to secure Mr. Bridges from any consequences of an
injurious character, and to remit the matter to the Public Accounts Committee for a thorough investigation of the whole circumstances of the case. If that met the views of the House, the Government would be prepared, in the course of a few minutes, to introduce a Bill indemnifying Mr. Bridges from any consequences of the evidence he might give. The Government would have taken the initiative in the matter, but the Speaker had considered that the more constitutional way would be to give the House an opportunity of expressing some opinion on the subject.
The Hon. Mr. FITZIIERBERT expressed concurrence in the sentiments of the Colonial Treasurer. It seemed to him that that gentleman apprehended most exactly what was the duty of the Government on the present occasion, but he would make one recommendation to the hou. gentlemen, which was that in the Bill lie intended to introduce he should extend the indemnity beyond Mr. Bridges to all who might be concerned in facilitating the discovery of truth by giving evidence on the enquiry. The SPEAKER having explained the practice which obtained in the House of Commons,
Mr. GEORGE McLEAN asked if this Bill alluded to would relate simply to the Port Chalmers purchase. Mr. SHEEHAN had no doubt the Speaker was right as to the law laid down regarding witnesses, but as the existence of a doubt was admitted, he suggested that the proper course to pursue would berio frame a general law, by which witnesses giving evidence before these committees should be assured of protection from all the consequences of their evidence.
Mr. MACANDREW wished to learn whether Mr. Bridges would be prepared to give any further evidence after the Bill of Indemnity was brought in. Mr. REID said it appeared to him to be a work of supererogation to pass a Bill to indemnify a man for giving evidence in a case, when he had stated that the evidence already given was based on wrong information, upon finding out which, he had withdrawn the statements made. It appeared to him that they were making too much of it. Mr. BUNNY thought they could not make too much of this matter. He hoped the matter would be sifted to the bottom.
Mr. J. SHEPHARD supported the Colonial Treasurer’s proposition. Mr. Bridges was then recalled. Having arrived at the bar, The SPEAKER said the House was not satisfied with the position in which the matter had been left by the statements he had made. Imputations of a very serious nature having been made by him (Mr. Bridges) affecting the character of public men, the House insisted upon such an investigation being carried on as would enable the absolute truth or falsity of those imputations to be determined. However, as there was some doubt about the extent of responsibility in giving evidence in proof of the statements made, it was the purpose of the Government to introduce an Act of Indemnity, by which he would be entirely protected. The pleasure of the House, therefore, was that he should now withdraw, but he must not consider himself discharged until the House had determined upon what course it would pursue. Should the Act pass, he would be required to attend on the committee again for the purpose of giving further evidence. BILLS INTRODUCED. On the motion of Mr. Thomson, the Native Lands Purchase Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Wednesday next. RAILWAY COMPANIES BILL. The above Bill was received with a message from the Legislative Council. The amendments made by the Council were agreed to. THE PORT CHALMERS RAILWAY. Mr. GEORGE McLEAN asked if the Government would be prepared to lay on the table a return of the purchase money of the Port Chalmers railway. So much had been heard about it of late, that it was desirable a complete statement of the cost should be in the possession of the House. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON stated that full particulars would be found in page 25 of the printed papers laid before the House in the session of 1873. IMBECILE PASSENGERS ACT. The above Act, which provides for the extension of time within which informations may be laid against captains of vessels, was read a second time on the motion of the Hon. Major Atkinson; its third reading being made an order of the day for the day following. STAMP DUTIES BILL. The report on the Stamp Duties Bill having been read, the Bill was read a second time. INVERCARGILL PUBLIC OEEICES SITE BILL. The Invercargill Public Offices Site Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed next (this) day. GOLDFIELDS ACT AMENDMENT BILL, NO. 3. The House went into committee on the Goldfields Act Amendment Bill No. 3, Amendments to which had been made by the Legislative Council. On the proposition to pass the amended clause referring to compensation, by which all sums were made chargeable against the goldfields revenue, Mr. J. C. BROWN asked the Government for some reason for submitting to the dictum of the Legislative Council. The Hon. Major ATKINSON stated that the Bill was one of great importance to the goldfields, and feeling sensible of this, the Government desired to make such concessions as would make the Bill acceptable to the Upper House. Messrs. T. L. Shepherd, Reid, aud Macandrew supported the clause, which was ultimately carried. The Bill was reported with amendment to the House, read a third time, and passed. WELLINGTON RECLAIMED ACT AMENDMENT BILL The above Bill was read a second time, and , ordered to be committed next (this) day.
OTHER BILLS. The New Zealand University Reserves Bill passed through committee and all its stages. The committal of the Registration of Electors Act Amendment Bill was postponed for one day. SAN FRANCISCO MAIL SERVICE. The House went into committee to discuss Mr. Reynolds’ motion for the ratification of the contract. The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD having withdrawn his amendment, The Hon. MAJOR ATKINSON moved the following amendment in the resolution moved by the lion. Mr. Reynolds relative to the San Francisco Mail Service: —“That the words ‘approved of, and,’ in first line be struck out. He said the Government deemed it advisable to make some modifications in the resolution, but at the same time it must be clear to every one that the contract having been entered upon should be ratified. What Mr. Vogel had done must be regarded as the action of the Government, and the original letter, in which the terms of the contract were stated, would have been laid before Parliament if it had not been for the hurry and bustle of the closing of the session last year. There had been no attempt to encroach upon the authority of Parliament, although he could not defend what had been a great oversight. In the letter to the agents, and in the contract itself, it was specifically laid down that the contract must be ratified, and the Government therefore could not be so very blameworthy. The House had not been consulted as to the terms of the contract, but power was reserved to Parliament to ratify or reject it ; and considering that the limits were only slightly exceeded ; that the Government were mixed up in the transaction with the Government of another colony, whose Parliament had ratified it; and that the directors of the company had already made arrangements for its boats, he thought it would be ■wise of the House to spare the extra £SOOO, and ratify the contract.
Sir F. D. BELL said the House last year had been asked to vote a certain amount for the service, aud to enter into certain arrangements, and the House agreed to this. Those terms had been departed from, and he cast the blame upon Sir Julius Yogel. He contended that it had not been done by accident, but that it had been done intentionally, and that a very great wrong had been perpetrated on the colony. The House had agreed to vote £40,000 for a period of six years, or a total amount of £240,000 ; but while the House was sitting Sir Julius Vogel had deliberately authorised as ambassador to enter into a contract binding the colony for ten years at £45,000 a year, or in all an expenditure of £450,000, or £210,000 above what the House had authorised. In further remarks he said the persistent disregard with which Sir Julius Vogel had treated the House, and the contemptuous manner in which he had treated the Parliament, deserved a strong expression of opinion from the committee. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said it was a fact that Sir Julius Vogel had intended on the morning of the last day of the session to apprise the House of the terms which had been forwarded to Mr. Russell, but in the hurry of business and pressure of other considerations the desired explanation was not made.
Mr. CUTHBERTSON was sorry that the explanation was not accurate in all respects, for a letter written to Mr. Thomas Russell three days before the session closed contained instructions to Mr. Russell, and in this letter there were three deviations from the terms laid down by the House. First, the rate of speed was reduced from twelve knots to ten knots, the subsidy was increased from £40,000 to £45,000, and the time was increased from six years to ten years. Sir Julius Vogel gave an explanation of what had been done on the last day of the session, without referring to the deviations which had been authorised. It was not convenient to make that explanation, and therefore it had been suppressed. In reference to the amendment of the Government, he should like to know what could be saved by the useless coastal service, for he hoped the amount could thus be reduced to £40,000. The whole matter lay in a nutshell. Mr. Vogel entered into a contract for a mail service at 50 per cent, more than the House authorised, and now it was to be reduced to the original sum ; but the House had a right to have explanations, so that it might know exactly what the country was to have.
Mr. SHEEHAN thought the House should accept the amendments of the Treasurer, but animadverted upon the conduct of Sir Julius Vogel, who had not acted properly. He said the House must accept the contract or suffer in reputation, and then proceeded to refer to the conduct of the members of the Government in that House, in having damned with faint praise their absent colleague Sir Julius Vogel. He said although in opposition he should have been much pleased to have seen the Government stick to him on whose words and breath they had lived for five years, and say, “His mistakes are our mistakes, and if you don’t like it turn us out.” That would have been a manly course, but in dropping him for a single error of judgment they had acted just as was done by low publicans, who got all they could out of a man, and then when his money was gone kicked him out. It was a spectacle that he hoped never to see repeated.
Mr. THOMSON made a few remarks, after which
Sir DONALD McLEAN said the Government proposed to make the best arrangements they could during the recess, and would next year apply to the House to ratify their transactions. The Government had made the best arrangement they could, and the service as in the past would add greatly to the prosperity of the colony. The lion, gentleman who had remarks about the conduct of the Government in respect to Sir Julius Vogel, had not spoken fairly. The Government had always held themselves responsible for the acts of their absent colleague, and the remarks of the Treasurer that evening showed that. Sir F. D. BELL said the omission of
the words “approved of,” proposed by the Government, was a direct invitation to the House to censure Sir Julius Vogel. He disapproved of the omission of the words, because he thought the contract a good one. The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD pointed out that the effect of the resolution would be merely to ratify the contract, leaving it to subsequent adtion of the Government to make modifications. The Government in omitting the words had merely deferred to the wishes of a section of the House, and asked a ratification of the contract, without any expression of feeling on the subject. He did not consider there was any slur cast upon Sir Julius Vogel by his colleagues ; they merely deferred to the opinion of the House. Mr. CUTHBERTSON would not agree to the ratification of the contract, for he considered the authority of Parliament had been grossly violated; but he should prefer to pay the £45,000 rather than accept less value for their money, for that would be the effect of the reduction. He was not disposed to grant any more discretionary power to the Government, seeing that the House had been so unfairly treated. The Hon. Mr. RICHARDSON said it would be impossible to face the contractors, and ask for a modification of the contract, with a resolution expressing the approval of the House with the contract. The Hon. Mr. FITZIIERBERT did not think much of that. (A laugh.) When the Government asked the House to express approval, and then a member of the Government came down and asked the House not to give its approval, it was significant. That could not be got over. It seemed to him like inviting express disapprobation. In the letter to Mr. Russell, the Premier had said the Government would ask the House to “approve” such a contract, but the Government having first taken up the position the Premier promised they should take up, then deliberately receded from the position, and asked the House not to approve it. He disapproved of the contract, the want of skill in its negotiation, the want of regard for the authority of Parliament, and the concoction that the expressed opinion of Parliament should be laid aside. Looking at the correspondence, he observed that the reply of Mr. Russell had been ■written on the same day as the letter of Mr. Vogel to him, and therefore he concluded that the matter must have been concocted beforehand.
The CHAIRMAN then put the original question—that the words proposed to be inserted stand part of the resolution. Agreed to. The Hon. Major ATKINSON proposed the following new clause : “ That, in the opinion of this House, the annual chai-ge imposed on the revenue of New Zealand for the Mail Steam Service ought not to exceed £40,000, aud that it is the duty of the Government immediately to enter into negotiations to procure such modification of the terms and conditions of the contract as, subject to future ratification by this House, will effect that object.”
Mr. REEVES said he wished before the question was put to move the following amendment :—“That whilst the House disapproves of the action of the Government in authorising Mr. Thomas Russell to offer, without the knowledge or sanction of the House, £450,000, in face of the fact that the maximum sum authorised was only £240,000, and that it is in such action calculated to diminish the control over public expenditure, further expresses the opinion that the contract should be concluded in accordance with the terms already authorised by this House.” It was unnecessary for him to enlarge on the merits of the amendment, which spoke for itself, and included all the objections held by gentlemen who had spoken against the proposal. He could not for the life of him see how the Government had brought itself to such a position. They had brought down a want of confidence motion for themselves.
Mr. REYNOLDS replied, and before referring to the amendment first placed before the House, dealt with some of the speeches preceding it. The Government had already expressed their intention not to shirk from responsibility, and as to the question of modification, he believed that the contract might be so modified as to reduce considerably the amount, say to £40,000, or even below it. As to the amendment, he hoped the House would not give it countenance. With regard to what had been said about the House knowing nothing of the Premier’s intention last session, he might state that it had been the intention of Mr. Vogel to announce the fact ; iu fact, he (Mr. Reynolds) imagined it had been done. Sir GEORGE GREY said ho saw indications which told him that the beginning of the end approached. He perceived undoubted symptoms that at length the schoolboys, hitherto held in thraldom, -were about to rise up and revolt against their masters. He gathered from the countenances he saw around him, and from some words spoken that evening, that the limits of forbearance had been passed—that what the House and the country had so long submitted to would not now be much longer borne. The member for the Hutt had indisputably shown that there had been a concerted plan to set that House at defiance. No man accustomed to official correspondence could doubt that Sir Julius Vogel and Mr. T. Russell had agreed what the terms of their mutual letters should bo before those letters were written. Indeed, he thought there were undoubted proofs of those letters having been written in each other’s presence; and it was certain that the terms of those letters were such as to set at defiance the whole of the authority of Parliament. He looked upon it as an unexampled Act, and that in the terms of the resolution the House should express its disapproval of the action of the Government in this respect. The present attitude of the House was a revolt against constant misuse of authority ; why, it was a notorious fact that Sir Julius concealed from that Parliament his intention to return to England the moment he
had got rid of tho Assembly. He would ask was this Parliament —so august in its nature, and so skilled in debate—having no respect for its own dignity, to allow itself to bo thus treated. Each of these facts were insults to the Parliament—that Sir Julius Vogel should have gone Home in such a manner, and that before going he should have set this House at defiance. Then, when at Home he had remained there instead of returning to discharge the duties pertaining to his office. Mr. LUCKIE: Because he was ill.
Sir GEORGE GREY : If ill why did he not allow some other person to take his place, and content himself with his just salary ? He was astonished to hear the member for Nelson make such an answer. No sick man should draw such large sums as he had. But this Ministry also set the law at defiance in every respect. (Ministers : No.) He said yes. How many instances had been brought before that House. Even the name and attributes of their august sovereign had been used by the Ministry for unjust pin-poses. Mr. BUCKIE: And by yourself. Sir GEORGE GREY : How by himself ? What he said was a fact known to all. He could give instances. [The Speaker then proceeded to show how the Queen’s right of preemption had been used in the acquirement of native lands, and so using the Queen’s name to take away the rights of one subject in order to give them to another.] He for one hailed the revolt, and he should give his best support to the amendment proposed to the resolutions of the lion, the Colonial Treasurer. Mr. LUCKIE : It was not a difficult and not a courageous thing to assail an absent man. (Mr. Reeves : Hear, hear.) The lion, member for Selwyn said hear, hear ; but there were members in that House who would not have dared to speak as they had done, had Sir Julius Vogel been in the House. There was more noise made about the thing than it was worth, and he had no doubt that time would show the arrangement made was the best which could have been made.
Mr. BRANDON thought it high time that the House should assert its authority in the matter of contracts. He spoke of Sir Julius Vogel’s conduct in reference to other contracts, mentioning the Brogdens’ contracts, and trusted the House would accept the proposition of the Government. The Hon. Mr. BOWEN said the Government, were fully sensible of their responsibility in this matter, and thinking it right to ask the House to ratify the contract, did not think it right to ask the House to say it approved of it. The Government believed that the contract was a good one for the colony, but of course the Opposition might think otherwise, and he admitted that the Opposition had the right to consider otherwise. He defended the contract, and hoped the House would not refuse to ratify it. It was not perfect. Even Mr. Russell, who had negotiated it, was not satisfied with it, and in his letter, which had been laid on the table with other correspondence, expressed that opinion. In negotiating, he had to consider the other party—New South Wales—but when New South Wales come to see the benefit of the service, no doubt she would consent to a modification of this contract.
Mr. MONTGOMERY asked the Government had they received any further information from the Agent-General than had been already laid on the table ?
The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS replied in the negative.
Mr. MONTGOMERY then proceeded to remark upon the question. He did not blame Sir Julius Vogel, who was an absent man, but he blamed the Government for overstepping the limits of power assigned to them. They had seemingly conceived that Sir Julius Vogel as head of the Government could do whatever he might propose with impunity; but the time had come, as Sir George Grey had said, when the Parliament would assert its independence. In reply to Mr. Rolleston, who stated that the letter was not laid on the table at the end of last session, The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS stated that the letter, after much search, was found in a box belonging to Sir Julius Vogel. That was the explanation regarding the letter. Mr. G. McLEAN followed, and expressed regret at the shady appearance of certain matters connected with the contract. He read extracts from one of Harper’s papers—the Weekly News —one of which related that a gentleman had been examined before a tribunal as to the expenditure of £7OO, unaccounted for, on the Frisco contract. With regard to the office of Sir Julius Vogel, he regretted and thought it improper that' whilst the Government had an agent at Home they should have employed another. Mr. Pyke (who supported the Treasurer’s resolution), and Mr. McGillivray, then addressed the House.
Mr. DONALD REID opined that they were reaping what they had sown ; they were beginning to feel the effects of their past recklessness. But he was glad to see that the House were beginning to have a sense of their responsibilities. They were prepared to ratify what they had already agreed to, and if they were to ask an additional vote, the whole question should be opened up cle novo. Unless the service was not to be carried out in its integrity, they should open the question anew. He should vote for the amendment of the lion, member for Selwyn, and he believed that if the House acted from conviction in this matter, a large majority would vote for that amendment ; and further, he felt so assured of the large development of conscientiousness in some members of the Government, that they would retire from office did they not support the amendment.
Mr. WILLIAMS strongly opposed the amendment of the member for Selwyn, the latter part of which, to his mind, was a virtual repudiation of the contract already made. He would move an amendment to this effect “That this committee disapproves of the Government authorising Mr. Thomas Russell to put the colony to an expenditure for the California Steam Mail Service, in excess of the amount authorised by a resolution of this
House, and that it will ratify any contract involving no greater sum per annum than £40,000 for six years.”
Mr, MACANDREW again spoke in favor of the coastal service. Mr. WAKEFIELD said he should vote for the resolution of the Treasurer, because he trusted it would lead to other modifications of a desirable character.
Mr. CARRINGTON said he should vote against the amendment of the lion, member for Selwyn, because he believed it was a want of confidence motion.
The original resolution was put, and upon the .Chairman declaring the ayes to have it, a division was demanded.
The division list showed—Ayes, 46; noes, 18. Mr. MACANDREW moved the following addendum to the foregoing resolution, —“ Provided always that the terms of the said contract shall be so modified as to comply with the conditions sanctioned by the House in a previous session, that is to say, that the term shall not exceed six years, and the cost not to exceed £40,000 a year ; and that the outward route shall proceed through to San Francisco, calling at Port Chalmers, Wellington, and Auckland.”
The Hon. Major ATKINSON said it was impossible that the Government could accede to such a proposal, which would be stultifying their previous action. After some further discussion, in which Messrs. Fittzherbert, Gibbs, Wales, and Bunny took part, Mr. Macandrew’s motion to add the proviso was put, and on a division being taken was lost by 18 to 46. Mr. WILLIAMS moved another addition to the original resolution, after the word Francisco in the last line, —“That the committee desires to express its disapproval of the Government having authorised Mr. Thompson to put the House to an expenditure in excess of the amount authorised by a resolution of that Plouse.”
A division was taken, which resulted in the motion being negatived by 39 to 21. Mr. WHITE proposed another amendment, “ That although this House has approved of this transgression of the authority of the House, it expresses the hope that Ministers will abstain so far as they can in future from committing similar excesses.” (Cheers and laughter).—This amendment was negatived on the voices. The main resolution was then put, and declared to be carried on the voices. Mr. MURRAY called for a division, which was taken with the following result]: —Ayes, 41 ; noes, 11. On the amendment of the Hon. Major Atkinson being put, Mr. ROLLESTON moved the insertion of the following words :—“And the duration ought not to exceed six years.” The amendment was negatived on the voices, and a division taken on the main motion, which was carried by 30 to 24. Mr. WALES moved a proviso to the above, that such a modification shall not extend the time of the contract, nor alter the sth clause thereof. The amendment was negatived on the voices. The resolutions were then reported to the House. The Hon. Major ATKINSON moved that the resolutions be agreed to, which was carried. PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE ACT. The Hon. Major ATKINSON moved for leave to introduce a Bill entitled as above. Mr REID being assured that the Government intended to carry the Bill through all its stages that morning, hoped they would not do so, inasmuch as he should wish to see the Bill made applicable only to the particular case they had to deal with. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said the Bill was simply to clear up doubt. Mr WILLIAMS objected to persons being protected from expressions of opinion, which might be of a most libellous character, as he believedwouldbe the case with Mr Bridges, who, he believed, was actuated solely by malice. The Bill was read a first time, and on the motion to read it a second time Mr. REID proposed to insert a clause that the Bill should not have effect until after the prorogation of next Parliament. He spoke to the motion at great length. [Left sitting at 4 a.m.] LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Tuesday', October 12. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at the usual hour. PAPERS. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN presented reports of officers in native districts. NOTICES. Several members gave notices of motions. THE MAIL CONTRACT. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE asked the Hon. Dr. Pollen whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce into the House of Representatives a Bill to give effect to the postal contract entered into by Mr. Thomas Russell, on behalf of the Government, and certain other parties in England, or Yvhether it was his (Dr. Pollen s) intention to bring in a measure there, in order that the Councirmbdit ratify the contract ? The Hon. Dr. POLLEN stated that, so far as he could answer on so short a notice, he understood it was not necessary to bring in a Bill to legalise the contract. The voting of the money and ratification of the contract by the other House was quite sufficient authority to carry out the contract. NATIVE LAND PURCHASES. The Hon. Mr. MANTELL moved that, in the. opinion of this Council, the purchase of native lands by the Government should, in due regard for the best interests of the colony, be conducted ivith the most scrupulous integrity and honor; and that, therefore, it was incumbent upon, the Government to exercise the greatest care in the selection of agents for that important duty.
The Hon. Dr. POLLEN expressed himself in favor of the principle contained in the above resolution.
The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE spoke at some length on the subject of native land purchases in the North Island, and he cited a case within his own experience, in which a man of improper character, and who had been discharged by him in his official capacity on the East Coast, had been employed again by the Native Minister. In conclusion, ho suggested that the Government should either throw open the lands again to general purchase, or carry out the system thoroughly, by making it penal to interfere with lands which the Government were desirous of acquiring. The Hons. Messrs. Waterhouse and Johnson having addressed the Council, Mr. MANTELL replied, and in the course of his remarks dwelt ivith sorrow on what he had discovered to be the nature of John Bull. When he, on behalf of the Government, had held out promises to the natives in order to the acquirement of land, he anticipated that they would be fulfilled ; but he had discovered the collective John Bull, much to his regret, to be a most unprincipled rascal. The motion was carried. DISQUALIFICATION. The Hon. Dr. MENZIES moved that, in the opinion of this Council, it was expedient that the Government should bring in a Bill this session to amend the Disqualification Act, 1870, in order to bring the letter into conformity ivith the spirit of the Act.—Carried. The Hon. Dr. MENZIES moved that as some doubts existed as to ivhat might be the legal interpretation of various provisions of the Disqualification Act, 1870, it was expedient that any Bill proposing to amend the same should bar the recovery of any penalties under the Act in any way other than the Amendment Act may direct. After some little discussion, The Hon. Dr. POLLEN stated that a Bill was now before the other branch of the Legislature, and when it arrived there (in the Council), members would have an opportunity of discussing the question introduced by the motion of Dr. Menzies. LEAVE OF ABSENCE. The Hon. Mr. STOKES moved that leave of absence be granted to the Hon. Mr. Acland for the remainder of the session, on urgeut private affairs.—Carried. MR. WHITAKER AND THE GOVERNMENT. The Hon. Colonel KENNY moved that ivith a view to the settlement of the matters the subject of the Piako Land Exchange Bill (No. 1), it was expedient, in the opinion of the Council, that that Bill should be withdrawn by the Government, and that the Government should afford Mr. Whitaker every facility and assistance in arranging with the natives for the survey of the land for which he had been awarded a Crown grant by the Land Claims Commissioner, or in otherwise effecting an equitable arrangement ivith the natives. The lion, gentleman asked for permission to add the words “ in accordance with the existing law,” because he thought it might be possible to act outside of the law. Permission being granted, he continued to explain his object in moving the resolution, which was to effect a settlement with Mr. Whitaker, and to acquire the large block of land spoken of by the Government, without there being any exchange of land between Mr. Whitaker and the Government.
The Hon. Colonel BRETT objected to the motion as a member of the committee to which the Bill had been referred for consideration. The investigation had been most satisfactory. The inquiry into the merits of Mr. Whitaker’s claim had been most searching, and he had heard nothing in the remarks of the Hon. Colonel Kenny to induce him, as one of the committee, to alter the opinion generally expressed in the report submitted to the Council.
The Hon. Mr. MANTELL would oppose the motion unless all the words after “ Government” were struck out. He read a telegram from Mr. Heale, asking him to request the Council not to pass the Bill until other claims had been heard.
The Hon. Mr. HOLMES referred to the Act of 1856 to show that Mr. Whitaker could not obtain redress through the Government. No grant could be made until a proper survey of the land had been made and deposited with the commissioner. He had no objection to Mr. Whitaker getting the land, if he could obtain a secure title in the ordinary way, but he objected to his implicating the Government in his transactions. That Council had nothing to do with the matter, and he should oppose the Piako Exchange Bill at every stage. The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON opposed Colonel Kenny’s resolution. He did not see Mr. Whitaker had any claim upon the Government at all. He should go back to the people from whom he bought. This resolution however not only provided that the Government should put Mr. Whitaker in possession of a Crown grant, but asked that the Bill should be withdrawn by which the Government proposed to secure a large area of land for settlement purposes.
The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE said there appeared to be confusion “in the multitude of Councillors.” They seemed to be getting more involved as they proceeded. At first he had expressed himself unfavorably regarding the Bill, but since then he had obtained greater information on the subject (previously having known little of the merits), and he had come to the conclusion that the Bill was one which, in the interest of the public, it was highly desirable should pass.
The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY said the majority of the Council were opposed to the Bill. _ Tho Hon. Dr. MENZIES said tho opposition of the Council arose from a disinclination to authorise tho Government to effect an exchange with Mr. Whitaker. He ought to be compensated in money; but in the face of the telegram read by the Hon. Mr. Mantell from Mr. Heale, he thought tho Council should proceed with still greater caution; and should not, until they received further information, pass a Bill which should vest the property entirely in Mr. Whitaker.
The Hon. Dr. POLLEN said, with reference to the telegram, that in his opinion Mr. Heale thought it was proposed to give compensation for loss arising out of connection with tho piece of land which was locked up. But this, ns he (Dr. Pollen) had previously explained, was not the object of the Bill. Its object was simply to facilitate the acquisition of a large piece of land from the natives, but to do which it was necessary to sacrifice a piece of laud to which Mr. Whitaker had a just claim ; and it was proposed, therefore, to give him in exchange part of the land to be acquired. The Hon. Colonel KENNY replied, and the motion was then put, and negatived on the voices.
I’ARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGES AMENDMENT BILL,
The Hon. Dr. POLLEN moved the second reading of this Bill, received from the House of Representatives, with a message requesting tho Council to use all expedition in passing it through its various stages. The Hon. Colonel BRETT hoped the Council would pause before passing the Bill. He thought it would be monstrous to give Mr. Bridges the power to villify anyone with impunity.
The Hon. Mr. HART said the last speaker had evidently mistaken the principle of the Bill. It was simply to give to ivituesses giving evidence before committees the same indemnity they would have in a Court of Justice, and by so doing to take away from them any reason for excuse, in refusing to answer questions put to them because of consequences to follow. The Bill had been rendered immediately necessary in consequence of a ivicness having refused to answer questions put to him by the Public Accounts Committee, and who had asserted as his reason for so refusing, that he might render himself liable to an action at law. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN did not reply, as the Hon. Mr. Hart had explained exactly what he should have expressed. The Speaker then left the chair, and the various clauses of the Bill having been passed in committee, the Chairman reported to the Council, and the Bill was read a third time and passed. The Council adjourned till half-past seven. On resuming, the orders of the day were proceeded with. DEBTORS AND CREDITORS BILL. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN moved the second reading. The Bill had been fully discussed in the House of Representatives, and amended in some particulars. The previous Acts were very voluminous, and it would be impossible for him to epitomise them in reasonable space. The existing law had not been found satisfactory, evidence of which might be found in the incessant attempts which had been made to amend it. The present Bill imposed upon creditors the necessity of looking after their own affairs in bankruptcy. That was the main principle of it. It provided that when a debtor was in embarrassed circumstances he should first call a meeting of his creditors, before doing so filing a complete schedule of his affairs. The first meeting having taken place, trustees could be appointed. The estate being wound up by the trustees, a general meeting was called, and at that meeting it was competent for the creditors to arrange for the debtor’s discharge ; and if the discharge be refused, it would be competent for the debtor to appeal to the Supreme Court. The question for discussion was whether it was not advisable that a change in the bankruptcy laws should be made, in order to simplify such cases, and reduce the enormous expenditure sometimes entailed. He moved that the Bill be read a second time.
The Hon. Mr. HART wished to say a few words before the second reading was decided upon. Of all complaints of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the changes in the bankruptcy law was the cause of the most frequent complaints. The expense of ascertaining the interpretation of the law incurred large cost, and lie saw nothing in the present Bill to suggest that the cost would be less when it was brought into force. This was a shorter act, but without a much more clear explanation of the effect and operation of it, he should be indisposed to assist in passing it through the Council. A former Act (which did not pass the Lower House) contained one of the desirable provisions in the present Bill, while it was in other respects more satisfactory, and might be dovetailed into the existing law, and lessen the expense of bankruptcy proceedings. The Hon. Mr. HOLMES agreed that the Act alluded to by the Hon. Mr. Hart was a superior one, but as he took it, the question was, should they adopt this Bill or permit the law to stand as it was. He suggested they should prove the Bill in the working. The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY objected to several points in the Bill. It appeared that unless the creditors appointed a trustee in the estate of a bankrupt, there ivas no provision whatever made for winding it up. He thought a provision should be made giving the Court power to take action where the creditors failed to do so. He also objected to Clause 12, by which tho debtor might be constantly appealing against the action of creditors regarding the treatment of the estate. He thought the Bill, if passed in its present state, would be found to be very unworkable. After further discussion, and the Hon. Dr. Pollen’s reply, The question was put, and a division taken. The ayes were 13, noes 6. CANTERBURY FENCING BILL. The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY moved the second reading of the Canterbury Fencing Bill, which provided for dividing fences, cost of erection, and, where disputes arose, to refer the decision to the nearest court. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN said it would be inconvenient to take up the functions of the Provincial Government of Canterbury, in view of the general legislation which would take place next year. After several members had spoken, The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY pointed out, in reply, that delay would result in serious inconvenience and annoyance ; on this ground he thought it unwise to have determined that the Councils should not agaiu meet.
The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to bo committed presently. DILLS COMMITTED. The Council went into committee. The Debtors and Creditors Bill passed through committee without amendment, and on the Speaker resuming the chair, was read a third time and passed. The Outram Telegraph Stations Bill was reported without amendment, read a third time, and passed. The Canterbury Fencing Bill (in committee) was thrown out, on the motion of the lion. Mr. Robinson to report progress. NAPIEK HARDOII BOARD BILL. The second reading of the above Bill was moved by Colonel Whitmore. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN said there was a similar Bill on the order paper of the Lower House. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE stated that the Superintendent of the province had withdrawn that Bill, and had asked him to introduce one in the Council. His object was to facilitate its passage through the Legislature, there being so much business before the other House that there was little chance of its meeting with consideration. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE objected that the Bill interfered with the public revenue. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN thought the mover would not secure any greater expedition in pressing the Bill there, because it dealt with the public revenue, and would probably lie returned by the other branch of the Legislature. The other Bill stood on the order paper of the House of Representatives to be committed, and would shortly come on for consideration. The Hon. Colonel KENNY wished for the Hon. the Speaker’s mling as to whether two similar Bills could be on the order papers of both Houses at the same time. The Hon. the SPEAKER was of opinion that they must place implicit reliance on Colonel Whitmore’s statement. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE, after saying that the Superintendent of Napier had that evening told him the other Bill was withdrawn, stated that he would not withdraw the Bill on a frivolous technicality such as that raised by the Hon. Mr. Waterhouse. He thought it would be hard upon the province of Hawke’s Bay not to be allowed the collateral security ; but he would prefer to give up that clause, rather than have the Bill thrown out, and have the harbor of Napier hemmed in by shingle. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed next day. BILLS READ a THIRD TIME. The Municipal Corporations Act Amendment Bill was read a third timfe and passed. The Oamaru Town Hall and Gasworks Bill was read a third time and passed. The Evidence Further Amendment Bill was read a third time and passed. EMPLOYMENT OF FEMALES BILL. The Hon. Mr. MILLER moved the second reading of the above Bill. He thought it a most reasonable request on the part of persons interested in factories to ask that their machinery should not be kept idle sixteen hours out of the twenty-four. The only argument he had heard against the Bill was that on the system of relays being introduced, means would be taken to evade the law by operatives -working more than the eight hours on one shift; but in this colony, where the factory workers were so few, that argument had no force. There had been a great deal of of tall talk about the Bill, and that it had been framed in a spirit of cruelty and greed. But there had been too much said about the Bill : they might almost call it pseudo-philanthropy. He would not be found a supporter of it did he believe for one moment that it would have any of the baleful effects stated, and he firmly believed the hou. gentleman who had introduced it in the other House held the same opinion.
The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE was of opinion that they should assimilate their law as much as possible to that of England, and in so far as legislation of this class had been found necessary at Home, it would be found necessary to introduce it here before long. But they must recollect in considering the question that it was not how they should employ their females, but how they were to get females to employ. There were in the colony altogether only 147,000 females as against 194,349 males. It was not therefore desirable to legislate so as to stimulate the creation of factory labor. He did not believe that the employment of women and children in factories was calculated to advance the moral welfare of the people. But it was highly desirable that every provision should be made for their protection and education, and he thought that they should introduce some of the provisions of the English legislation of last session, many of the clauses of which might be adopted with advantage, such as those limiting the age at which children might be employed, and providing for their education. He suggested, in conclusion, that the Bill should be referred to a select committee, with the object of carrying out the idea expressed above.
The Hon. Dr. POLLEN alluded to the Victorian law, and said he would prefer to have had power placed in the hands of the Governor to relax the provisions in particular cases. The particular advantage of this would lie, that if any abuse should creep in under the existing law, the Governor would have the power to take such steps at once as would prevent its continuance.
The Hon. Mr. MENZIES supported the Bill, and saw nothing in the relay system at variance with the broad principle that females should not be allowed to work more than eight hours. He objected to the discretionary power suggested by the Premier. The Hon. Mr. MILLER, in reply, expressed his entire concurrence in the views expressed by the Hon. Mr. Waterhouse and the Hon. the Premier, and moved that the Bill be referred to a select committee, to report on Thursday.
The Bill was then read a second time, and referred to a select committee. ORDERS POSTPONED. The Bankruptcy Laws Amendment Bill (second reading) was made an order of the day for next day. The Stamp Fees Bill (second reading) was also postponed for one day. The Council adjourned at twelve o’clock. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tuesday, October 12. The Speaker took the chair at 7.30 p.m. Several notices of motion were given. committees’ reports. Mr. REEVES brought up a report from the Immigration and Public Works Committee. questions. Mr. LUCICIE, who had given notice of his intention to ask the Commissioner of Telegraphs whether he would relax the rules respecting Press telegrams, so as to permit the transmission during the day of five hundred words at evening rates, said ho understood that the matter was in the hands of the lion, member for Auckland City West, therefore he desired to withdraw the notice he had given.—Leave was given. In reply to Mr. Von Der Heyde, The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS said the delay in the publication of the table of statistics arose from a press of work at the printing ofliee, hut most of the information was before the House in various forms. Mr. VON DER HEYDE remarked that many questions would be rendered unnecessary if these statistics- were laid before the House at the commencement of the session. NEW BILLS. The Vincent Land Purchase Bill (introduced by the Hon. Major Atkinson), and the Religious, Charitable, and Educational Trusts Act Amendment Bill (introduced by Mr. Ward), were advanced a stage. DAVIDES SUCCESSION BILL. This Bill was read a third time, and passed. OTAGO HARBOR BOARD EMPOWERING BILL. This Bill was considered in committee, and reported with amendments. CLUTHA RIVER CONSERVATORS BILL. Passed through committee. REPRESENTATION RILL. As soon as the House went into committee, Mr. O’CCNOR moved that progress be reported, in order to allow of bis giving notice that Hansard reporters be instructed to report the discussion. Mr. MURRAY also desired that the debate should lie reported in Hansard. Motion negatived. Mr. MURRAY moved that clause 2, fixing the number of members at eighty-six, be postponed. Mr. GEORGE McLEAN supported the postponement, because it was clear if it were not postponed there would be a regular jumble. Mr. O’CONOR asked for a Ministerial statement as to how they viewed the amendments proposed by members. He complained that no copies of the Bill were to be had. The Hon. Mr. BOWEN said the Government would not oppose alterations in boundaries, but in some cases they could not consent to the proposals for additional members. Sir F. D. BELL complained of a want of principle in the Bill, and considered it would be unfair and mischievous for the House to attempt to deal with representation in the manner proposed. He pointed out that Mataura had more right to another member than many of the proposed new electorates, and referred to other inconsistencies. He hoped the House would report progress.
Mr. ORMOND considered Hawke’s Bay had less representation than any part of the colony except Westland —whether as regarded population, extent of country, products, exports, or contribution to the revenue. All these things should be considered. With regard to population, he found that according to the present population Auckland had sixteen members, or a member for every 4770 people ; Taranaki had a member for every 2295 ; Hawke’s Bay, a member for every 6372 ; Wellington, a member for every 4218 ; Nelson, a member for every 2325; Marlborough, a member for every 3041 ; Canterbury, a member for every 5387 ; Westland, a member for every 7998 ; and Otago, a member for every 5367. Thus it would be seen that after the extreme case of Westland came Hawke’s Bay, and he thought there was no objection on that score. Then again, looking at the imports, he found that Napier, with two members, paid duty last year to the amount of £214,182, while Nelson, with its nine members, (A Member: Seven members). Well, with its seven members, paid £354,000, and Auckland, with its sixteen members, paid £674,000. Surely these were reasons why the objections urged against Hawke’s Bay having another member were urged without reason. Mr. O’CONOR referred to inequalities, and said unless the Government would permit amendments in tile Bill he should try to have it thrown out.
Mr. MERVYN supported the measure as it stood.
Mr. REID supported the Bill as it stood, with the exception of the proposal to add a member to Napier, because be did not consider the addition justified by the facts, notwithstanding the statements of the hum member for Clive (Mr. Ormond).
Mr. SHEEHAN looked upon the Bill as a miserable attempt at what was called an amendment of the representation. Ho asserted there was no principle in the Bill, and said if a member were added to the Thames and one to Dunedin, and one taken from Taranaki and given to Hawke’s Bay, and the rest of the Bill let go, he would support itr lle did not consider the province of Westland so badly represented considering all things. Mr. WAKEFIELD generally supported the measure ; and The Hou. Mr. STAFFORD considered many of the amendments placed upon the supplementary order paper worthy of attention at the hands of the Government ; but as for the proposal to refer the matter to a select com-
mittee, he had never heard of such a course being pursued before it was done in 1870, and then against the will of himself and other members. A select committee could uot dictate to the House on a matter like this.
Mr. TAIAROA intended to propose that another native member be appointed. Clause 2 was postponed, and clauses 3 and 4 were agreed to. On clause 5,
Mr. O’NEILL proposed that two additional members be given to the Thames. The lion, member quoted figures to support the claim of the Thames.
Mr. MURRAY, recognising that there was not time to make up a thoroughly good Bill, thought it would bo best to give two members to the Thames and one to Dunedin, and thus let the Bill pass. If this were done, there was no reason why Parliament should not be prorogued during the middle of next week.
Mr. WHITE wanted auotlier member for Westland.
Mr. THOMSON supported the amendment.
Mr. McGILLIVRAY considered the Bill a good attempt to rectify glaring inequalities, and should support it in its entirety.
Messrs. Harrison and Wales favored the amendment.
Mr. MONTGOMERY thought all the committee would be able to do would not be much in the way of amendment, and it would be best to take the Bill as it was. He should like to see a member struck off Taranaki and none allowed to Napier. Mr. HUNTER hoped the discussion of all these amendments would not take place, for it would after all be a fight by each member for his own district. He might bring forward a claim on behalf of Wellington, and perhaps could well support it, but he did not desire to do that. He wished to see substantial justice done, and it would be only just to add one member to the Thames and one to the city of Dunedin, and allow the other proposals of the Government to go to the wall. Mr. SHEEHAN supported the amendment, and referred to some of the claims which the Thames possessed. Sir GEORGE GREY hoped a compromise would be come to by which two members would be given to the Thames and one to the city of Dunedin, with the understanding that a perfect measure would be brought down next session.
The Hon. Mr. BOWEN said that the Bill only proposed to remedy palpable inconsistencies, and next session it would lie equally impossible for any Government to bring down a perfect Bill. To give three members to the Thames would, taking population as the basis of representation, disturb the representation of the whole of the colony. Looking at the circumstances, he considered two members would be quite sufficient, and coming from Grahamstown, the representative town of the goldmining interest, two members would represent it better than three coming from different parts of a wide area of country. Mr. BRYCE compared the claims of Wanganui for a member with those of Napier, and said in the former case the claims were much stronger. He expressed general dissatisfaction with the Bill, for he thought there were already too many members in the House. They could not go on increasing, there must be a stop; then where were the Government going to stop? In Victoria there was one member for every 9000 persons ; in New South Wales a member for every 7000 ; in South Australia one for every 5000; in New Zealand one for every 4000; and now it was proposed to increase that number. He favored the proposal of confining the increase to the two members proposed.
Sir GEORGE GREY said the Minister of Justice had made a mistake in supposing Grahamstown constituted the Thames. Coromandel should have a member. The goldmining interest was not the only interest. There was the timber interest, and the agricultural interest, and various other interests. If a third member were not allowed, he should endeavor to get the proposed increase of members to other districts disallowed.
The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD favored the increase to the Thames in preference to an increase in representation for Dunedin, because in considering the representation of cities he could not accept merely a population basis. The population of a city was in a different position to the population of a country district, because they had opportunities of expressing opinion in public meetings, aud had other modes of making their voice felt in the councils of the country, which the people of a country district had not.
Mr. JACKSON considered the claims of Waikato stronger thau those of Timaru and other places. He supported the amendment, but should like to see a portion of the Waikato tacked on to the Thames, so that the former might be better represented. Messrs. Buckland and Mervyn having addressed the House, Sir GEORGE GREY said he should talk all night and next day till he got from the Government a promise that they would grant a third member to the Thames. As to the suggestion from the bon. member for Waikato about taking a piece off the Waikato, and putting it on to the Thames, he believed that it had emanated from the Government; there had been a consultation between them. (Mr. Jackson : There has been no consultation.) Well that was extraordinary ; but the similarity of views might have arisen from the lion, member and the Government sitting together through the session. He reiterated his intention of talking throughout tho night till the Government promised to assent to a second member being added.
Mr. MONTGOMERY said tho measure was not perfect, but to iucrease the number of members would make it more imperfect. Sir DONALD McLEAN hoped the committee would support the Government in passing the measure in the shape in which it now appeared. Mr. LUCKIEsaid talking against time had been tried the previous evening unsuccess-
fully, aud he felt sure if it were again attempted to force the majority to bow to the will of a tyrannical minority, the committee would again do its duty and sit it out.
Mr. REID said if the hon. member for the Thames persisted, he might find himself unable to get even one additional member. He asserted there had been no talking against time the previous night. In the discussion which ensued, Sir George Grey, the Hon. Mr. Bowen, Messrs. Von Der Heyde, Bunny, White, Dignan and May took part. A division was taken on Mr. O‘Neill's amendment, when there appeared for it 21, against 37. Mr. SHEEHAN proposed an amendment for giving Coromandel one member. Sir GEORGE GREY supported the amendment. Mr. PEARCE supported the proposition, that the increase of representation should be confined to one member for the Thames and one for Dunedin. He commended the selfdenial with which the Wellington members had refrained from asking for another member, though they were fairly entitled to it. On a division, the amendment was lost by 30 to 23.
Mr. W. Kelly proposed an amendment for creating a new electoral district in the East Coast. The Hon. Mr. Bowen and Sir Donald McLean supported the amendment, which was opposed by Messrs. Reid, Harrison, and Maeandrew. A discussion ensued, after which Mr. Sheehan moved that progress should be reported, which was agreed to, and the House resumed and adjourned at 2.25 a.m. until this day, when the orders of the day will precede tho notices of motion, and there will be no evening sitting.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wednesday, October 13. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at the usual hour. After certain preliminary business had been disposed of, the Council proceeded to that on the order paper. QUESTIONS. The Hon. Dr. MENZIES asked the Government—(l.) Whether the measures it proposed to introduce in next session on the subject of oeal government would make provision for the establishment of road boards; for the union of two or more road districts when the ratepayers desired to form ridings; and for the union of two or more ridings, in the same way, to form counties ? And, if *o, whether it was proposed to authorise every such county council to allocate the subsidies paid to it among the ridings aud road districts included in such county? (2.) Whether the Government would, during the recess, prepare measures applicable to the whole colony, upon subjects such as education, fencing, impounding, slaughtering, diseases in stock, noxious weeds, ferries, and such other matters, the laws relating to which could he most conveniently administered by local governing bodies, and introduce them in the next session of the General Assembly ? In reply to the first question, the Hon. Dr. Pollen referred the lion, gentleman to the Local Government Bill for information. As to the second, he might state, with regard to fencing and other matters following, that the Government recognised the necessity of legislation in that direction, but as to education, he could not at present make any definite statement. land purchase papers. The Hon. Mr. NG AT AT A moved that it was desirable that the papers relating to native land purchases in the Middle Island, collected and compiled by Mr. Alexander Mackay, should be translated and printed in the Maori language during the present year.—Carried. committee report. The report of the Piako Land Exchange Committee was laid on the table by the Hon. Mr. Waterhouse, read, and ordered to be printed. fraudulent debtors bill. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN briefly moved the second reading of the Fraudulent Debtors Bill. Carried without discussion, the Bill being ordered to be committed presently. WESTLAND WASTE LANDS BILL. This Bill, the second reading of which was moved by the Hon. Mr. Miller, was negatived on the voices. RIDDELL GRANT BILL. On the motion of the Hou. Dr. Pollen, the second reading of this Bill was made an order of the day for next day. DUNEDIN CORPORATION EMPOWERING BILL. The Hon. Mr. HOLMES moved that the Dunedin Corporation Borrowing Powers Extension and Debentures Bill be read a second time. Its object was to extend the borrowing powers of the Corporation by £300,000, and give power to issue debentures. By previous Bill they were enabled to borrow £200,000, and now they wished the power extended £300,000 over that amount. He then enumerated the number of useful and important works upon which it was proposed to expend the borrowed money, such as waterworks, gasworks, and other necessary public works. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE said the whole question of municipal borrowing was one which ought to receive their earnest attention. He thought local bodies had a tendency to get into debt beyond the limits of prudence ; and unless some preventive step were taken, he foresaw that the consequences of a genei’al inability to pay on the part of these bodies would be serious. He alluded to the Clyde Corporation, which the Council had authorised to borrow£7ooo, whereas the total revenue from rates was only £lls 15s. fid. This was one instance of the tendency to borrow to an extent far in excess of their ability. He alluded to Oamaru and other places, in confirmation of the general principle to which he was speaking. He objected to the Bill before him, but would not take upon himself the resp«nsibility of moving that it bo read thfit day six months. It was, however, of a character with
other Bills they had passed, and he wished to take this opportunity of affirming that ft most objectionable precedent had been established. The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY opposed the Bill.
The Hon. Mr. MILLER, while acknowledging the justice of the Hon. Mr. Watorhouse’s remarks, would point out that the towns of New Zealand. were peculiarly circumstanced, and were making very rapid progress. Even supposing the indebtedness of Dunedin to be about half a million of money, it was highly necessary that the authorities should be enabiod to carry out certain great and indispensable undertakings. The rapidity with whicli population increased necessitated those works, and he thought they would not be justified in refusing to grant the powers asked for in this Bill. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN said the people who paid the rates should have an opportunity of expressing their willingness or otherwise to take the liabilities, which were in point of fact theirs. He should not oppose the second reading, but hoped the Bill would be considerably modified in committee. The Hon. Colonel KENNY would vote against the Bill and all succeeding ones of a similar character. He regretted that certain hon. gentlemen shoidd have given notes of warning against these borrowing Bills, and in the same breath express their intention not to oppose them. Their cautions were of no avail nnles they followed up their expressed opinions by their votes. In reply, the Hon. Mr. Holmes showed that there was abundance of money from revenue to meet the liabilities. Assuming the total debt to be £430,000, the interest at 7 per cent would be £30,100, and the revenue from different items amounted to £37,500. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE pointed out that by different Acts authorising the borrowing of money the debt of Dunedin at present was £300,000, and that if the present Bill were passed it would be £OOO,OOO. The question was put, and a division taken, the result being as follows :—Ayes, 9; noes, 9. The Speaker gave his voice witli the ayes. The Bill was ordered to be committed next day. OTAGO WASTE LANDS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Order of the day No. 5 was called on, being the consideration of the reasons assigned by the House of Representatives for disagreeing with the amendments of the Legislative Council in the Otago Waste Lands Bill. The following were the reasons : “ 1. Because the object of passing the Bill is to give to persons who may be desirous of taking upland improving the waste lands greater facilities to acquire, on a system of deferred payments, a sufficient area of land for bona fide agricultural occupation ; and as the clauses which provide for the alienation of land on deferred payments are already hedged round with conditions of residence, occupation, and improvement from which other lands are exempt ; and as further conditions (which have been agreed to by the House of Representatives) are imposed by this Bill,—it is not desirable to impose conditions as to price, which will retard the settlement of the waste lands under this system, and which will be likely to prove oppressive to the occupiers, and probably place them in a position of not being able to meet their engagements to the State during any continued depression in the value of agricultural produce. Any increase of price which would lead to either of these results would be highly impolitic, and would endanger the successful working of the system. “2. That, owing to the uneven nature of the lands in the Province of Otago, it would be very difficult to classify them in a satisfactory manner ; and the classification, however carefully made, would be of an arbitrary character. At present the Waste Lands Board lias power to classify any land which is of special value, and to dispose of it by auction, at such price as may be determined. This secures all the advantages without the drawbacks of an arbitrary classification, which if once made could not be altered without legislation. “3. That the system of balloting for deferred payment sections, when there is more than one applicant, has been found in practice to work well ; and as the system has now been in operation for some time, and is well understood, it would be inexpedient to make a change which has not been asked for, in order to introduce a new method, which is opposed to the spirit of the deferred payment system, and which may not be found to work so well as that now in operation.” The Hon. Dr. POLLEN apprehended that as the question had been settled by so largo a majority of the Council, they would be inclined to adhere to the amendments made, and to which the House of Representatives disagreed for the reasons above assigned. In order, therefore, to test the feeling of the Council, he would move that this Council doth adhere to its amendments. _ The Hon. Mr. NURSE seconded the motion, which was carried on the voices. A committee consisting of Messrs. Waterhouse, Nurse, and Dr. Pollen was then appointed to draw up a statement of the reasons which induced the Council to adhere to the amendments. NAPIER HARBOR BOARD BILL.
The above Bill (which was down on the order paper to be committed) was thrown out, on the Hon. Colonel Whitmore representing that the twin Bill in the House of Representatives had been committed by mistake during the absence of Mr. Ormond. FRAUDULENT DEBTORS BILL.
The above Bill passed through committee and all its stages. PIAKO LAND EXCHANGE BILL.
This Bill was further c®nsidered in committee. The Hon. Colonel KENNY moved that progress be reported. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN recapitulated what 1 he deemed to be the important reason for the passing of the Bill, namely, that the Government might be enabled to complete land negotiations with the natives. The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY saw no reason
to doubt that the exchange would be to the advantage of Mr. Whitaker only. He should oppose the Bill because the more he saw of it the more objectionable it appeared. After further discussion, The question was put, that the Chairman do leave the chair. A division was taken, and the motion negatived by 12 to 11. The committee then proceeded to the consideration of the different clauses of the Bill. An amendment was made in clause 3, by which the choice of the laud was limited to one block instead of six. In reply to the Hon. the Speaker, The Hon. Dr. POLLEN stated that Mr. Whitaker would be required to make the survey. The Bill as amended was reported to the Council, and read a third time. LICENSING ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The Licensing Act Amendment Bill passed through committee, with the amendments proposed by the Hon. Mr. Waterhouse, and all its stages. The Council adjourned at 5 p.m. till the usual hour next day. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wednesday, October 13. The Speaker took the chair at half-past 2 o’clock. notices. Several notices of motion were given. One by Mr. Ballance, of his intention to move as an amendment to the sixth clause of the Representation Amendment Bill, —That in districts returning three members, no voter shall be allowed to vote for more than two members.—Mr. Thomson to move,—That in the opinion of this House, Parliament next year should be called together for not later than the first week in June, by which time all Bills should be ready. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION. In answer to Mr. Ballance, who asked whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill next session providing for elementary education throughout the colony, Sir DONALD McLEAN said the Government recognised the importance of the subject, and would give the matter the most serious consideration during the recess ; but at present they could not give a definite answer. bridges’ indemnity bill. _ The SPEAKER reported, for the information of the House, that the Royal assent had been given to this Bill, and that Mr. Bridges would next day be again examined by the committee. cost of obtaining patents. In answer to Mr. Murray, The. Hon. Mr. BOWEN said the cost of advertising to intending patentees under the patent laws, was lower in New Zealand than elsewhere, and the Government were not prepared to recommend any reduction. NEW BILLS. A Bill to establish a Board of Education in the province of Canterbury (introduced by Mr. Montgomery); and a Bill to amend the Immigrants Land Act, 1373 (introduced by the Hon. Major Atkinson), were advanced a stage. MIDDLE ISLAND NATIVE QUESTION. The debate on Mr. Sheehan’s motion, that the report of the Native Affairs Committee in reference to unfulfilled promises to natives of the Middle Island be referred to the Government for their favorable consideration, was resumed. Mr. MACANDREW moved an amendment to the effect that terms and conditions of the deed of cession had been duly fulfilled by the House, and the House could not recognise any unfulfilled promises said to have been made, but of which there was not proof. After discussion, during the course of which Mr. J . E. Brown said he had heard that the natives were determined to test the matter in the highest courts in Great Britain, and had already raised £2OOO for that purpose, The original resolution was agreed to. GREYTOWN AND MASTERTON PUBLIC PARK AND CEMETERY BILL. Read a second time, on the motion of Mr. Bunny, WELLINGTON RIVERS BILL. Read a second time, on the motion of Mr. Bunny. SECOND READINGS. The Onehunga Reserves Management Bill, New Zealand Presbyterian Church Bill; Religious, Charitable and Educational Trusts Act Amendment Bill, Wellington Education Reserves Bill, and the Vincent Land Purchase Bill were read a second time. BILLS PASSED. The Goldmining Districts Act, 1873, Amendment Bill; Auckland Waste Lands Act, 1874, Amendment Bill ; Napier Harbor Board Bill, Moeraki Harbor Board Bill, Otago Harbor Board Bill, Clutha River Conservators Bill, Imbecile Passengers Act Amendment Bill, Invercargill Public Offices Site Bill, Wellington Reclaimed Land Bill, and Wellington Wharf Extension Bill, and the Public Library Powers Bill, were passed through all stages. LODGER ENFRANCHISEMENT BTLL. Mr. WAKEFIELD moved the second reading of this Bill. Mr. REID said he saw many difficulties in the way of the proper working of such a measure—one thing which particularly struck him was the difficulty of purging the roll. If a man once got on, how was he to be taken off ? He should like to hear what the Government thought. The Hon. Mr. BOWEN thought the measure a good one, and said the same means would be available for purging the roll which had been used in the past, and these would lie sufficient. He considered that hitherto in excluding lodgers from the franchise a mistake had been made, and a class of men who would be more likely to select intelligent representatives than some classes who now had votes were disallowed from voting. No doubt the Bill could not be brought into operation before the next general election, but that was no
reason why the principle should not be affirmed, or why the Act should not be placed upon the Statute book.
Mr. REID, in continuation of his remarks, said no advantage was to be gained by the proposal, for, under this Act, quite as many eligible voters would be excluded. He saw nothing between the present system and manhood suffrage, and if the Bill would go that length, he could support it. Mr.. ANDREW .supported the Bill, but hoped it would be modified, so as to extend its operation. Mr. HUNTER thought the Bill a step in the right direction, and should support the second reading. Mr. George McLean and Sir George Grey supported the second reading, which was then agreed to. OLD SETTLERS PETITION. Mr. HUNTER said many of his constituents were desirous of knowing what had become of the old settlers petition, presented early in the session, and he had been requested to ask about it. The petition had been presented by the hon. member for Auckland City West, and it had been referred to the Petitions Committee, but since then nothing had been heard of it. Mr. W. KELLY, as chairman of the Public Petitions Committee, offered an explanation. He said the petition was of considerable length, and the House having ordered the petition to be printed, it had been set aside in the Government Printing Office to make way for more pressing and necessary work, such as evidence taken before select committees. At six o’clock the House rose. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Thursday, October 14. The lion, the Speaker took the chair at the usual hour. papers. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN laid on the table papers relative to immigration and public works. NOTICE OF MOTION. The Hon. Mr. WATERHOUSE gave notice that ho would move that there be laid upon the table of the Council a copy of the contract entered into between the General Government and the Wellington Steam Navigation Company, for the performance of the coastal service between Wellington and Napier. Also, that, in the opinion of this Council, no agreement or contract entered into by the Government subject to the concurrence or ratification of the General Assembly, is binding upon the colony until it has received the concurrence of this branch of the Legislature. MARTIN GRANT BILL. The Hon. Captain BAILLIE moved the second reading of the Martin Grant Bill. The Bill was read a second time without opposition, but was referred to a select committee, on the suggestion of the Hon. Mr. Waterhouse. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS LOAN BILL. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN moved that the Municipal Corporations Loan Bill be read a second time. Carried, and ordered to be committed presently. GOLDFIELDS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The Goldfields Act Amendment Bill (No. 1) was read a second time, and ordered to be committed presently. NEW ZEALAND UNIVERSITY RESERVE BILL. This Bill was postponed for a day, on the motion of the Hon. Dr. Pollen, who had been unable to make himself thoroughly acquainted with its provisions, owing to his having particqiated in the festivities of the previous evening. STAMP BILL. This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to he committed presently. PIAKO EXCHANGE BILL. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN moved that the Piako Land Exchange Bill be read a third time. The Hon. Mr. HOLMES announced his intention of opposing the third reading ; and further expressed dissatisfaction at Government land transactions generally. He was of opinion that they would very much lessen the confidence of the residents of the Middle Island of New Zealand in the changes which were about to take place in the administration of the country’s affairs. He had been previously in favor of the abolition of provinces ; but when he looked at the manner in which the colonial estate was dealt with by the Government, the conviction forced itself upon him that the people of the Middle Island looked for a remedy in insular separation ; . and such a Bill as that before the Council was a powerful argument in favor of separation.
The Hon. Mr. BUCKLEY moved that the Bill he read that day six months. The object of the Bill, as it appeared to him, was simply to confirm Mr. Whitaker’s title to a piece of land, and as far as the Council knew, that title might be doubtful. The Hon. Mr. PEACOCK expressed his intention of voting against the Bill, because he had made himself better acquainted with it since yesterday, when he had voted in its favor. The Government could effect its object by compensating Mr. Whitaker in cash, and no doubt that gentleman would be as well satisfied. The Hon. Dr. POLLEN having replied, the question was put. The Chairman declared the noes to have it ; and Dr. Pollen called for a division, which was taken, and resulted as follows:—Ayes, 12; noes, 12. The Hon. the SPEAKER gave his voice with the noes, and the Bill was thrown out. LICENSING ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The Licensing Act Amendment Bill was read a third time and passed. BILLS COMMITTED. The following Bills wore committed and reported, with and without amendments:— Stamp Bill, Municipal Corporation Bill, and the Goldfields Act Amendment Bill. The Dunedin Corporation Borrowing Powers Extension and Debentures Bill was committed,
and at five o’clock progress was reported, and leave obtained to sit again on the day following. The following Bills wore received with messages from tho House of Representatives, and road a first time :—Clutha River Conservation Act, Otago Harbor Board Empowering Act, Wellingtou Reclaimed Land Amendment Bill, Invercargill Public Offices Site Bill, Moeraki Harbor Act, Auckland Waste Lands Amendment Bill. The Council adjourned till the usual hour next (this) day. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday, October 14. The Speaker took the chair at half-past two o’clock. petitions and tapers. Several papers were laid upon the table, and a petition from J. G. S. Grant, on behalf of the unemployed in Dunedin, was also laid upon the table. notices. Amongst several notices of motion was one by Mr. O’Rorke of his intention to move for an address to the Governor for a gratuity of £6OO to the widow of the late Mr. Williamson. MR. BRISSENDEN AND THE GOVERNMENT. Mr. SWANSON asked the Native Minister : (1.) Whether Mr. Brissonden’s land purchases in the North had anything to do with his dismissal from the Government Laud Purchase Agency ? (2.) Whether these purchases had been satisfactory to the Government ? (3.) Whether any opinion on the subject of Mr. Brissenden’s land purchases had been expressed by any of the Judges of the Land Court ; and if so, what that opinion was ? (4.) Did Mr. Brissenden at any time write requesting to be allowed to terminate his contract with the Government ? Sir DONALD McLEAN replied : (1.) No. (2.) Most clear and satisfactory. (3.) Yes. Judge Rowe of the Land Court had expressed the opinion that tho transactions were right and proper. (4.) He had so written. SHIP RODNEY AND COMMISSIONER OF IMMIGRATION AT WELLINGTON. Mr. W. KELLY asked if tho attention of the Minister of Immigration had been drawn to certain charges made by Dr. Harris, late Surgeon-Superintendent of the ship Rodney, published in one of the Wellington newspapers, against the Commissioner of Immigration at the port of Wellington; and if so, was it the intention of the Government to take any action in the matter ? dhe Hon. Major ATKINSON said he had read the letter, and aftercareful inquiry had been surprised that such a letter had been written. There had been no reason for such a letter, as the Commissioner of Immigration had acted quite correctly. ORDERS OF THE DAY. On the motion of Mr. Ballance, order of the day No. 1, namely, the committal of the Coroner’s Act, 1867, Amendment Bill, was discharged. Mr. MONTGOMERY moved the second reading of the Canterbury Education Board Bill. Mr. J. E. BROWN moved that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. After discussion a division was taken, and the second reading was carried by 40 to 3. The House went into committee. The Creytown and Masterton Public Park and Cemetery Bill and the Wellington Rivers Bill, were considered, reported, read a third time, and passed. The Onehunga Reserves Management Bill was committed, considered, reported, read a third time, and passed. The New Zealand Presbyterian Church Bill (No. 2) was considered in committee, reported, read a third time, and passed. _ The Religious and Charitable and Educational Trusts Bill, the Lodgers Enfranchisement Bill, and the Wellington Educational Reserves Bills were committed, considered, read a third time, and passod.
The order of the day for the second reading of the Native Lands Purchase Bill was postponed until Wednesday. The House went into committee on the Representation Bill. The debate was resumed on the amendment for creating a new electoral district on tho East Coast.
After discussion, tho Government accepted tho amendment.
Mr. PYKE said he would move that all the proposed new electorates be eliminated from the Bill, with the exception of a member for the Thames and a member for Dunedin. In the course of discussion, Mr. O’CONOR said already eight members came from Dunedin, and he was opposed to giving the. city any more representation. On a division the amendment was carried by 43 to 22. Mr. BRYCE then moved that another member be given to Wanganui, and after dilating upon the strength of his claim, said if the Minister for Justice would give one single good reason why the addition should not be made, ho would withdraw his request. Mr. PYKE moved that tho Chairman leave the chair. Motion negatived by 45 to 16. In reference to the motion of the hon. member for Wanganui, tho Hon. Mr. Bowen said, taking the districts of Wanganui, Rangitikei, and Manawatu, and other districts on the West Coast, they had already more representatives than the East Coast districts, although the population of the latter was 2000 in excess of the West Coast districts. Mr. BRYCE thought that reasoning unfair. On the question being put, a division was taken, which resulted as follows :—Ayes, 29; frees, 25. Mr. ANDREW moved that an additional member be given to Waikato. He pointed out that Wanganui only had 739 electors, whereas Waikato had 893 electors, which he took to be a good argument in favor of giving the additional member he asked for,
Mr. I). REID Raid, according to the return upon which he had baßed hiR calculations, Wanganui had 1030, and lie wished to know where Mr. Andrew got his figures from. The lion. Mr. BOWEN said a supplementary return had been prepared. A long discussion ensued, after which a division was taken, and the amendment was lost by 29 to 28. Sir F. D. BELL proposed that the words “ Mataura one member,” be inserted. On a division, the amendment was lost by 32 to 20. Mr. O’CONOR moved that the words “Buller, one member” be inserted. This was negatived by 27 to 29. Mr. WILLIAMS proposed an amendment giving the Bay of Islands and Mongonui an additional member, which was negatived on the voices. An amendment by Mr. Swanson that an additional member should be given to Newton was lost by 31 against 19. Mr. WALES proposed three extra members for Dunedin. Mr. PYKE proposed two extra members. Sir GEORGE GREY moved that the provision for an extra member for Timaru be struck out. A motion to report progress was lost on the voices. After further discussion, a motion by Mr. Macandrew to report progress was also lost on the voices. Sir George Grey’s amendment was lost by 46 to 6. Mr. PYKE moved the insertion of the words “Wakatip one member.” This was lost on a division by 34 to 21. The amendments re the city of Dunedin representation were lost on a division by 40 to 13. An amendment by Mr. l)iu nan, providing that there should be still two electoral districts in the City of Auckland, was accepted by the Government. Mr. Ballance’s amendment, providing for the representation of minorities, was withdrawn after discussion. The remaining clauses were considered and passed without amendment. Progress was then reported, and the House adjourned at 3.40.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZMAIL18751016.2.31
Bibliographic details
New Zealand Mail, Issue 214, 16 October 1875, Page 17
Word Count
19,512Parliament. New Zealand Mail, Issue 214, 16 October 1875, Page 17
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