PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. THURSDAY, JUNE 10. The House met at 2.30. PETITIONS. Various petitions were presented. WELLINGTON AND MANAWATU BAILWAY VALIDATION BILL. Mr HAMLIN moved, That the recommendation of the Joint Committee of Standing Orders on Private Bills of the 9th instant, relative to the Wellington and Manawatu Railway Company’s Additional Capital and Debentures Validation Bill be agreed to. That the Stending Orders Nos._lo and 32 be dispensed with, and that the parties be allowed to proceed with their Bill on the condition stated in the report. The Standing Orders alluded to, he explained, were in connection with publishing notice of the intention to bring in the Bill. The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was read the second time. REPORTS. Reports from Select Committees were presented. QUESTIONS. The DEFENCE MINISTER, in answer to Mr Taylor, said he did not think fresh Volunteer Regulations would be issued, at any rate till after the Defence Bill had been passed. The MINISTER of JUSTICE, in answer to Mr Hobbs, said the Government intended to place a sum on the Estimates for a new wing to the Auckland Lunatic Asylum. Mr JOHNSTON asked the Government if to further encourage the manufacture of New Zealand flax into fibre for export, they will offer a bonus of L2OOO, such bonus to be payable to the person who shall first, within twelve months from the present time, export, at a cost not exceeding Ll 5 per ton on board ship, fifty tons of fibre of the value in the open market in London of not less than L3O per ton The PREMIER did not know that the Government could go to the extent suggested. The matter would be considered. Mr W. D. STEWART asked the Government whether the Government are aware that agents of the Government Life Assurance Department (Industrial Branch) have induced persons in poor circumstances to surrender their policies by representing that no more premiums could be received, as such branch did not pay, and had been closed ; and whether the Government will cause step 3 to be taken by which such policies will be revived ? The COLONIAL TREASURER, in reply, reminded Mr Stewart that the management of the institution was handed over to an independent Board, by Act of 1884. However, he had taken pains to obtain the information required, Tne Board had decided to close the industrial branch, and instructions had been given that no fresh business of this kind should be taken, Those who desired to continue their policies could do so, and to those willing to transfer, particularly favorable terms were offered. The Dunedin agents misunderstood the instructions, and did as the hon gentleman had stated. Instructions had been given now to remedy what had been done. The TREASURER, in answer to Mr Hamln . said the reason why the Pukekohe West Rod Board had not received its subsidy was that the first application was irregular, and a later one had now been made by telegraph. In answer to Dr Newman the PREMIER said the Government could not distribute to members during the recess papers to be presented to Parliament. CENSUS. In answer to Major Atkinson, the PREMIER said he hoped to be able to present the census returns this month. PUBLIC WORKS STATEMENT. Major ATKINSON asked when the Public Works Statement would be presented. The PREMIER said he thought about the end of next week. A number of accounts had only recently come in, and this had delayed the Statement. BILLS INTRODUCED. Bills were introduced and read the first time as follows Dr Newman, A Bill to amend the Railways Construction and Land Act, 1881; Captain Sutter, The North Timaru Cemetery Reserve Act, 18S2, Amendment Bill; MrG. F. Richardson, The Wyndham Show Ground Reserve Bill; Mr Ballance. The Wanganui Harbor Board Rating Bill. CITY OF DUNEDIN LEASING BILL. This Bill was agreed to in committee, and read a third time and passed. NEW PLYMOUTH RECREATION RESERVES BILL. This Bill was agreed to in committee, reported, and read the third time and passed. WELLINGTON HARBOR BOARD LEASING BILL. This Bill was read the second time, on the motion of Mr JOHNSTON. OTATO HARBOR BOARD LEASING BILL. Mr GORE moved the second reading of this Bill. Carried. ONE-TREE HILL RESERVES BILL. Mr W. F. BUCKLANI) moved the second reading of this Bill. Carried. BOROUGH OF MORNINGTON BOUNDARIES BILL, Mr ROSS moved the second reading of this Bill. Carried. NEWMARKET RESERVES ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Mr MOSS moved the second reading of this Bill. Carried. ECONOMY. Mr BROWN’S motion, for the appointment of two gentlemen to inquire into and report upon the best means of enforcing economy in the Civil Service, was lost on the voices. DOG REGISTRATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Mr McMILLAN moved the second reading of this Bill, which empowers local bodies to tax dogs up to LI. This, he said, would enable sporting dogs to be highly taxed. Major ATKINSON suppoited the Bill, and in doing so called the attention of the Government to an injustice caused in his district by want of inspection of dogs in Native districts. The Natives in that district, he contended, should be subject to the same law as the Europeans. Colonel TRIMBLE was also in favor of protection being given to Europeans whose sheep were destroyed by Natives’ dogs. Mr WI PERE pointed out that people whose sheep were destroyed had legal remedies against the Natives whose dogs did the damage. A dog belonging to one of his children destroyed five sheep, and he (Mr Wi Pere) was fined LSO. He thought the tax was too high. . , Mr TAYLOR objected to these Newfoundland sporting dogs—or greyhounds, which he stigmatised as “disagreeable curs.” Even in Wellington here, they had them. He had only been in Wellington a few weeks, and he found there were numbers of them here. Mr HOBBS opposed the Bill. Mr COWAN supported it. Mr WALKER supported the Bill, pointing out that it was not compulsory on local bodies to increase the tax. Mr W. F. BUCKLAND opposed the Bill, and considered it a most unjust one. Mr PRATT hoped that his constituency in the South Island would be exempted from the Bill.
1 Mr SUTTER said the sporting dogs were a great nuisance in his district. Interrupt*! in his speech, the hon gentleman said he knew most about the district he came from. Mr HIRST supported the Bill. The second reading of the Bill was agreed to. A POINT OB’ ORDER. Mr W. F. BUCKLAND asked permission to mention a matter which he considered a breach of privilege. A telegram was being sent around the House for signature by hon members which was to be sent to Mr Gladstone purporting to express the sympathy of the House with him in his defeat. One hon member who had refused to sign had_ been threatened that his name would be published. He suggested that if a telegram was to be sent from the House, it should be brought up and discussed properly. The SPEAKER said if any hon member had been threatened he should bring the matter before the House. Mr BUCKLAND merely wished to mention the circumstance, and would not make any charge. APPORTIONMENT BILL. Mr STEWART moved the second reading of this Bill. Carried. EIGHT HOURS BILL. Mr BRADSHAW moved that the second reading be postponed till the Ist July. Agreed to. LIMITATION OF VOTES BILL. This (Sir George Grey s) Bill was committed. Mr Barron moved an amendment to strike out the word “two,” with a view of substituting “one” (relating to the number of votes to which a man should be elected). On the question that the word “two” stand, the Committee divided. Ayes, 25; noes, 34. Word struck out. The word ‘ 1 one ” was then substituted. The usual adjournment was taken at 5.30. EVENING SITTING. The House resumed at 7.30. LIMITATION OF VOTES BILL. This Bill was further considered in committee. When the last clause was reached, Mr Whyte moved to report progress. Lost. Tbs penalty for breach of the Act was fixed at one month, instead of twelve months, as suggested. On the motion to report the Bill, Mr Hursthouse asked whether, when a person voted in two electorates, the votes would be allowed m each case. Sir George Grey said this Bill did not deal with that subject. He thought it went far enough in providing the penalties. Mr Hursthouse pointed out that no Bill did deal with the subject. The Bill was reported with amendments, and the third reading set down for the Ist July. PACIFIC ISLANDS. Sir GEORGE GREY moved, That this House concurs in the report of the Pacific Islands Committee, who had passed the follawing resolutions :—“ That it is desirable that an arrangement should be concluded betweeiv England, France, Germany, and the United States neither to occupy nor annex any island or islands in the Western Pacific Ocean. I* possible the recognition of this convention by other Powers should be obtained. Following the analogy of the mixed Commission for the suppression of the slave trade which sat for so many years at the Cape of Good Hope, such a mixed Commission for the Pacific might be created consisting of Commissioners appointed by the contracting Powers ; the said Commission having all the powers confered by the Imperial Act, 38 apd. 39 Viet. (1875), c. 51, on the High Commissioner fop the Pacific, whilst the united Governments would exercise over the Pacific the powers which are by the same Act conferred upon Her Majesty in Council.” The report, he said, was a short and simple one, but it involved many important principles. It involved a departure in the manner of dealing with the Pacific Islands. Lately a desire to acquire islands in the Pacific had sprung up among European nations, and it seemed asthough those nations thought to parcel out tbe islands as they thought fit, without any reference to the inhabitants of the Oolomes. New Zealand, hitherto, had stood aloof fromthese matters, occupied with the enormous task of governing New Zealand itself. In pursuing that course we had acted rightly. The United States, to a great extent, had followed a similar policy, and had even lent a willing hand, forgetting its own interests, to enable inhabitants of islands to elevate their State. He alluded to outrages to which inhabitants of Pacific Islands had been subjected, tbe effect of which was to greatly decrease the population. He had noticed with pride the line of conduct pursued by the United States,, and until lately, when the policy had been a vacillating one, he had admired the line of conduct pursued by England. He instanced the Act passed by the English Parliament in 1872 to prevent kidnapping of the inhabitants of these islands as a part of that policy. With this guide before them their task was easy. For under this Act it was found that the protection became ineffective* because the offenders against it claimed to be subjects of Germany, France, or some other foreign Power. It was exactly the same in theslavery trade, and then a mixed commission was appointed, under which people found it almost impossible to carry on the same trade. That was a guide for them. He believed that if England, Germany, France, and the United States held a convention and decided that no. Power should annex, the Islands that the Islands should be allowed to develop themselves ; that the seas should be cleared of corsairs who outraged the inhabitants of the Islands; and that Commissioners be appointed to see that these decisions were observed—if this was done, he saw a greats and glorious future for the islands. They would establish their own forms of Government, and form a peaceful empire of commerce whose ports would be open to all nations. He believed that Germany and France would follow Great Britain in this matter, and the result would be a great credit to this Parliament. If he was told that by this scheme New Zealand would lose great commerce, then he would say that_ if this Colony with its resources and capabilities^ — with a nation of sailors on its shores —with its position closo to tho islands could not establish a great commerce, then let some other Power have the commerce. The path to that commerce lay in a path of righteousness, justice, and mercy to other nations. He implored the House to let no prospect of obtaining 600 or 7 )0 acres lying 600 miles away, lead them away from this subject. Let this Colony give up all attempts to obtain dominion which would be of no use to them, and very costly. (Cheeis.) Mr MONTGOMERY seconded the motion. The PREMIE R regretted that he could not support the motion. The importance of the Pacific Islands question had never been recognised by British statesmen. Had it been, we in this Colony should now be in a different position. Several applications had been made by inhabitants to have their islands annexed to Great Britain, but these applications had always been refused, on the ground that to accede to them would cast additional burdens on the taxpayers of England. This was the feeling that had induced Great Britain to be indifferent. The Isle of Pines*
New Caledonia, Society Islands, and others could all have been annexed to Great Britain. Iu the Eastern Pacific nearly all the islands belonged to France. It was necessary to consider in proposing a mixed commission, what islands we had left. Tonga, Samoa, and others had Governments of their own, and. really about the only group left to be dealt with was the New Hebrides. Samoa, he pointed out, had more trade with Germany and the United States than with Great Britain. France had established in some of her eastern colonies a form of government somewhat similar to that granted by Great Britain to her Crown colonies. Both Germany and France were giving sums of money to increase their trade with these colonies, and they were increasing it, while Great Britain’s trade was decrea-ing. Healing with the attitude of the colonies toward these islands, Sir Robei-t said that attitude, as he understood it, had been to get as many islands as possible under British rule, and that was what Sir. George Grey himself proposed when he was in office. The object had been to prevent European convicts from landing on the islands, and that the islands might serve as coaling stations in the event of war. It was true, as the hon member had stated, that Great Britain attempted to protect the inhabitants from being illtreated. The hoa member had quoted as an analogy the mixed commission appointed in connection with the slavery trade. Bfe (Sir Robert) contended that the mixed commission appointed in that instance was a very different Commission to that now proposed. Where did the hon gentleman propose that the Commission should sit ? It was impossible for the Commission to sit in one place and control the affairs of the islands What, too, was. the function of the Commission to be? The labor question, he pointed out, was only a small phase in the government of these islands. The whole proposal was impracticable and unworkable. And he objected to it on higher grounds. He contended that we, in these colonies had a right to have a voice in the management of these islands. Under these proposals we should lose that. How would it look to tell any one of the colonies that we were to have no voice in the matter, and that England, with all its interest in the islands and colonies, was to share the management with other Powers? Then how long was the Commission to last? .Supposing islands warned to come under British protection, were we to refuse permission ? For this Commission put an end to all that—it meant that the islands were to remain neutral territory for ever. It would be better for : the Presbyterian Mission, for instance, to put the islands under any one Power. If this mixed Commission was appointed it would mean that no Powers in it could annex ; but nations outside it —Spain, for instance, which was as anxious as other European nations to annex islands in the Pacific—could annex them. Another question was, whether the other Powers would agree to this mixed Commission? Would Germany, for instance, agree to it? She would never listen. to it. The hon gentleman had been incorrect in saying that England and New Zealand “ had followed a proper line of conduct in not annexing.” England had not failed to annex, nor had New Zealand failed to advise her—when -the hon gentleman was Premier—to annex. It was absurd, too, to say that the United States would not annex territory if she could. If we were to consent now to a mixed Commission, what, then, was the objection to other Powers coming into the Pacific ? Now he came to the question of the New Hebrides. The Government were desirous of keeping them as British possessions. They found, however, that they were close to the Loyalty Group, and they were told that sooner or later the New Hebrides must fall to France—that for such islands as these where AngloSaxons could never live, England could not go to war. Then the Government considered what they could get in return, if France must have the New Hebrides. They would have got Papa, and the Cook or Harvey Group (of which Raratonga was one), and all convictism would cease. Besides, he believed Tonga and Samoa would fall to New Zealand. This would have been more than a good bargain. And had it not been for the matter being complicated by the Presbyterian Church, Great Britain would have received a good return. Having undertaken a certain course, and having given his word that he would not advocate the cession of the New Hebrides to Fiance—he could not move in th 3 direction he suggested. In conclusion,, he said, it seemed impossible to carry on diplomatic relations between the colonies and England on this matter unless they were made public. Some of the telegrams that he had laid on the table he should not have made public had it not been that he knew that private telegrams had been sent to leaders of the Opposition on the matter. That put the Government in a most unfortunate position. This Colony must not be looked on as a Colony of Victoria, as it had been almost made during the past few weeks by appeals to get up meetings in various parts of New Zealand, and to dictate to its Ministers. He asked leaders of the Opposition how they would like this to be done to them if they were in office. He was sure that the proposition now made would be listened to by no other colony. What, then, would be the position of New Zealand if it passed it. He wished, as the hon member did, to see the islands prosperous and civilised. He believed, however, that they would not rise unless they were guided by higher civilisations. Why, then, shonldEngland neglect her duty to them ? She might raise them up. He knew we could have the Cook and Hawaii Group ; but if this resolution was passed all that would be done away with, and the islands would be annexed by other Powers.. He asked the House to look at this question in a practical manner, and not to be led away by talk about self-denial. (Cheers.) Sir GEORGE GREY made a personal explanation. The Premier of Victoria thought fit to publish certain information which the Premier of New Zealand did not wish to make public. The PREMIER said the hon member had received a telegram from an ex-Minister of Victoria to the effect that certain telegrams had been received, and it was necessary that action should be tak n.
Major ATKINSON expressed surprise that the Premier had not led the House in some way ; that, feeling strongly on the matter as he did, he had made no motion. They %vere to negative the motion, and what then ? (The Premier : Leave things as they are.) The hon gentleman made no motion, because the Presbyterian Church told him to do nothing. (The Premier : Because they had rights.) AVere the rights of a nation nothing to the rights of a Church ? According to the Premier, we were to stand alone. Never mind whether we were right or not —we were to act for fear that we should be called a Colony of Victoria. Now lie (Major Atkinson) had received a telegram saying that there was great anxiety in Victoria, and could not something be done. It was stated in this telegram that the matter should not be made a party question ; and he agreed to that. He regretted, with the Premier, the conduct of Victoria in making so many things public, but he did not agree that the Premier had been forced to make public that which should not be published; if he had been in the
Premier’s place he would not have been forced. When he received the telegram he spoke of, he at once communicate l with the Government —(The Premier : Hear, hear) —and he would have moved in the matter had he not been afraid that his action would have been looked on in a party light. He had come to the conclusion to support the resolutions of the Committee. He regretted that he had to do this, because he was agreeing to a retrograde step. But it was the action of the Government that forced him to support them. He felt certain that all these islands would fall to France if we did nothing. From the line of action taken by the Government, it seemed unlikely that New Zealand would join the Federal Council; and New South Wales was also unlikely to join. Therefore, he must come to the conclusion that unless we took some action France would get these Islands. So long as New Zealand stood aloof, doing first one thing and then another — allowing the Presbyterian Church to dictate its policy —the Home Government would do nothing. These resolutions were the best way out of the difficulty. If be thought the House would join the Federal Council he would oppose these resolutions, but that was hopeless, and therefore he supported them. He asked whether New Zealand had a voice in the management of these islands now? None. The Presbyterian Church had, and a sound policy theirs would be, no doubt ; b ;t lie should prefer to have a Government policy instead of a Church policy. If a Commission was established we should know that no evils were being worked against the inhabitants, and our policy should be to wait; these islands must fall to us one clay. (Hear, hear.) The Premier wanted to make a bargain for Rapa, and looking at it from a central —or Imperial—point of view, such a bargain might be a good one. But he was not prepared to bargain in this way. If Great Britain, wanted it, let them bargain for it from an Imperial point of view. The Imperial Government had now, possibly, become conscious of the value of Rapa ; but let them deal with liapa as a question altogether outside us. He should have no objection to foreign nations taking these islands if they took them for purposes of colonisation; but they had not been taken for that purpose. The fear was this —that the Pacific would be made a battle ground for the next European war. He repeated that he should support the resolutions ; but he would be prepared to support the Government if they made a proposition. The COLONIAL TREASURER spoke at some length in reference co the telegrams. It was not adding to the dignity of hon members, he said, that they were instructed by the statesmen of . Victoria as to their actions. He combatted Major Atkinson’s argument that the Federal Council would provide the remedy. He contended that New Zealand had a more potent position and larger influence now than she would have as a member of the Federal Council. Had the proposals which he made in 1874 been accepted, we should now be in a dominant position. The Government had come to a settlement with Germany as to Samoa, and the Agent-General had had a great deal to do with preventing the annexation of Samoa. He contended that we now had an opportunity of negotiating a treaty with France that would be of immense advantage to us. It was a treaty, too, that would have put a stop to the importation of convicts into these seas. He felt certain that the Imperial Government had acted for and in the interests of the Colonies.. The New Zealand Government took up this position—that they would not agree to giving up the rights of those whose consent to the proposals made had not been obtained. They had been checkmated, however, by the conduct of another Colony, which had made negotiations impossible. He asked whether we were to renounce all our power over the islands and hand them over to a Commission of Foreign Rowers. The resolutions, too, would not be acted upon, the other colonies would not accept them. Unless the House was prepared to pass something practical it had better leave the position as it stood —that the Government was in accord with hon members in desiring to preserve the rights of New Zealand in the Pacific. He urged the House not to pass resolutions of which the best that could be said was that they were ineffective, and the worst, that if they were effective, the House in passing them would be committing a crime against New Zealand in the present, and against its colonists in the future for all times. (Cheers.) Mr SCOBIE MACKENZIE did not agree with Major Atkinson’s position in supporting resolutions, which he admitted were a retrogade step. He agreed that the resolution would be impracticable. With regard to the Presbyterian Church’s claim, he pointed out that France was a Christian country. He did not agree that a solution of the difficulty would have been found if the Colony had joined the Federal Council. He believed that it was our duty to attend to our own affairs. Here in Australasia there was work for centuries. Our rashnesrs, he said, had forced Great Britain into a most unfortunate position, because she had either to suffer quietly an insult to the flag or go to war on a most puerile pretence. In conclusion Mr Mackenzie moved as an amendment the following resolutions in place of the one already moved (1) That it is of importance to Great Britain, and of especial importance to the Australasian Colonies, that a satisfactory understanding should be come to between the several States having interest in the Western Pacific as to their respective rights and claims. (2) That the most pressing question at present requiring settlement is that between Great Britain and France in reference to the New Hebrides. (3) That the most satisfactory settlement of this question which now appears to be practicable would be a treaty between Great Britain and France, whereby Great Britain should withdraw all opposition to the acquisition by France <>f the New Hebrides Islands, on condition—(a) That no more convicts of any class be sent by France to any of her possessions in the Western Pacific, (b) That protection, religious freedom, and peaceable possession of their rights and properties be guaranteed to all . British subjects residing in or resorting to the New Hebrides, and especially to the Presbyterian mission established there, (c) That freedom of trade and commerce be guaranteed to British subjects equally with those of France, (d) That the Island of Rapa be ceded by France to Great Britain. Mr BEETHAM expressed regret at the stand that had been taken by the Home Government on the matter. He expressed his intention to vote for Sir George Grey’s motion. Mr PEACOCK said, whatever they thought of the resolutions, all must admit that Sir George Grey had introduced them in a manner worthy of his high character and standing. He expressed his intention of opposing both resolutions and amendment. Mr MONTGOMERY moved the adjournment of the debate. This was carried, and a discussion took place as to when the debate should be resumed. The PREMIER suggested next Thursday. Major ATKINSON and other hon members objected, Major Atkinson suggesting that this
was a matter that ought to have been taken up by the Government. It was eventually decided to adjourn it to Wednesday night. The House then (11.45) rose. FRIDAY, JUNE 11. The House met at 2.30. PETITIONS. Various petitions were presented. Amongst them was one from Judge Fenton praying for an enquiry into charges made against him in the Attorney-General’s memorandum of a recent date. Sir GEORGE GREY, who presented the petition, gave notice of a question to the Government, as to what they would do in the way of granting its prayer and facilitating an enquiry. The PREMIER said the Government proposed to refer the Bill concerned, and the petition, to an impartial committee. Sir GEORGE GREY : Then I need not ask the question, . REPORTS. Various reports from Select Committees were presented. WELLINGTON AND MANAWATU RAILWAY. The COLONIAL TREASURER laid on the table papers asked for by Mr Wilson, in reference to the sale of Wellington-Manawatu Railway debentures. He remarked that the sale took place at a time when the Government was about to purchase the line, and a profit of L4OOO was made on the transaction. It was hard, he said, for the Government to refuse to give papers asked for, but at the same time he could not help feeling that there were some parts of the papers the publication of which the Company might have the right to complain. However, the responsibility rested with the hon gentleman. Mr BRYCE thought the doctrine of the Treasurer in placing the responsibility on a private member was a curious one. Mr WILSON said he took no responsibility. The TREASURER said the papers were the property of the Government, and therefore of the House. If the Company suffered to some extent by some remarks in the correspondence, it was not a mat Or in which the Government was concerned. He thought it was a mistake to ask for papers, unless there was some good reason for doing so. He did not know what the reason was in this case. Major ATKINSON said the hon gentleman was always wanting to cast responsibility off himself on to some one else —it was the habit of the Government. If the Company suffered, the responsibility was with the Treasurer, and not with those who asked for particulars of a transaction which certainly ought never to have taken place unless it was submitted to the House. The PREMIER said the Government produced the papers because if they did not, it would be said that there was something wrong (Major Atkinson : There is). All they said was, they were not responsible for the poduetion of the papers. QUESTIONS. The TREASURER, in answer to Mr IT, Hirst, said the Government would consider the advisability of renewing the offer to give a bonus for the production of kerosene oil. The MINISTER for PUBLIC WORKS, in answer to Mr Smith, said he would have the passenger station at Tahoraite removed to Danevirlce. The station buildings at Tahoraite were erected on the recommendation of the District Engineer. The MINISTER for PUBLIC WORKS, in answer to Mr Hobbs, said he was not aware that there was any necessity at present to authorise the survey of the trunk i ail way line north of AuoklandMr BEETHAM asked the Government, Whether they will, during the next season, endeavour to obtain from the United States Fisheries Commission a supply of the ova of' the Atlantic, Pacific, and land-locked varieties of salmon, the rainbow trout, and whitefish ? The MINISTER of MARINE said the Government had not yet considered the mp.tter. Mr BEETHAM hoped they would consider it. , Mr MOSS asked the Government, If they will obtain the opinion of the AttorneyGeneral, whether it be not within the power of the New Zealand Legislature to enact laws guarding against the influx of convicts from French colonial ports, by providing that no trading vessels coming from such ports shall be allowed to land passengers or crew in New Zealand, unless such passengers and crew are provided with passports, or other sufficient proof that they are not convicts, and have not been convicts within the previous three years ? The PREMIER : If the Government consider it necessary, they will do so. Mr MOSS moved the adjournment of the House, and argued the matter. _ A discussion ensued, in which several hon members took part. Mr MOSS asked the Minister for Public Works, If any amounts were paid from loans, and included in the revenue, during the financial years 18S4-85 and ISSS-86 respectively, for haulage of material or other services rendered by the working railways to. the railway construction branch of the Public Works Department ? Also, on what principle the department decides on the amounts to be charged to repairs and renewals respectively, and whether the renewals are charged to loan or revenue ? The MINISTER suggested that the return should be moved for. Repairs and renewals were all charged to revenue. Mr J. McKENZIE asked the Government: 1. Has the Board of Commissioners for Educational Reserves in the Otago District power to cancel leases of land which were sold by auction, after fair competition, while any of the purchasers are solvent and able to pay rent ? ?. Has the said Board accented from a syndicate the surrender of the • lease of runs 301 b and 301 c, known as Te Anau Run, comprising about 80,000 acres, which was let by public,auction at a rent of L 2,190 per annum, for 14 years, and has the said Beard now advertised it for sale on the 15th instant, at L 650 per annum for 14 years? 3. If said Board has not the power to accept surrender of leases will the Government take steps to prevent the resale of the run? The MINISTES, an wering the question categorically, said : 1. There was no special power to cancel leases. 2. The facts as stated were correct. 3. The Government had no control over the land, which was vested in (he School Commissioners. The Government had tried last session to obtain power over these reserves, but had not been successful. BILLS INTRODUCED. Bills were introduced and read the first time as follows:—Mr Macandrew, The Otago Harbor Bridge Bill ; Mr Guinness,The Miners’ Rights Fee Reduction Bill. NATIVE LANDS ADMINISTRATION BILL. The adjourned debate on the second reading of this Bill was resumed. Mr BRYCE said there were several alterations in the Bill which improved it; and he approved of the removal of restrictions. He expressed an opinion that the Natives had accepted the Bid because they thought it was going to be considerably altered—that it would stop the sale of Native lands. With reference
to taxing Natives, he contended that it was not any more unjust than to tax Europeans’ property. He did not agree that the Natives contributed as much, man for man, as Europeans to taxation. Even if it were so, he held that it was not unjust to tax Native land, as Europeans’ land would be taxed, when them were roads which benefited that land. He denied that there were members in the House who desired to wrong the Natives, as the Native Minister had suggested ; and this was the first time a Minister had attempted to excite hatred in the Natives against certain hon members. He alluded to Sir Julius Vogel’s remarks on this matter at Wellington, and said it would be difficult to show that there was any “legacy of hatred ” against Major Atkinson and himself. There'were clauses in the Bill, he contended, that mollified the principle claimed for it by the Minister, that Native land should be sold under the land laws of the Colony. With respect to Committees, that was not a proposal which he had made, but which was made by Mr W. L. Rees. Under this Bill there might be a very large number of Committees, and one man might belong to a hundred of them. Members of the Committee too, would be in positions which they could, and in many cases would abuse. His real objection to the Bill, then, was against the Committee. They woul 1 be abused, and would be cumbersome, and the evils raised would take years to remove. Mr ORMOND said the Native Minister, speaking before his constituents, had said that the Bill was opposed last session by those who wished to have Native lands opened up for speculation. He denied that most emphatically. Another statement he wished to contradict, was one made by Sir Julius Vogel at Wellington to the effect that the Bill was the same as one that he (Mr Ormond) had supported, when introduced by Sir Donald McLean. He denied that the Bill was the same. He could not support this Bill, because he believed it would tend to prevent settlement in the North Island. It would give power to do wrong to people who were, elected to the Committes. The Minister said the assent of the Natives had been given to this Bill; but he ( Mr Ormond) believed they did not so assent to it, and did not know the provisions it contained. The hon gentleman had referred to the Hastings meeting; but he was in a position to say that there was great dissension over the Bill at that meeting ; and they did not know the powers to be given to Commissioners. He believed that the Natives would have preferred the pre-emp-tive right to the alternative now offered to them. With reference to the committee system, Mr Ormond condemned it, speaking at some length on the matter. He contended that it was only fair to tax Native lands. This was a question, he said, upon which a direct opinion should be expressed ; and he would take care that this session the House had an opportunity of saying whether vast quantities of land should continue to bear no snare of the cost of public works. He advocated the resumption of the pre-emptive right, a policy of justice to the Natives being at the same time pursued toward them. Mr Ormond concluded by moving that the Bill be read the second time that day six months. Mr W. BUCKLAND seconeled the amendment. He was opposed, he said, to the Committee clauses, and if they were eliminated he might support it. He contended that this was a Bill to vest in the Government the absolute right of purchase of Native lands. Mr J. B. WHYTE was very anxious that the question of Native lands should be dealt with, and would support the second reading on the understanding that the Bill should be referred to the Native Affairs Committee. Mr HOBBS took a similar view of the question. The PREMIER said Mr Bryce's objections were merely committee objections. Hedefended the proposals made in the Bill in regard to committees, and denied that it would stop settlement. The pre-emption system would necessitate the Colony going into the English market to borrow ; and if the Maoris objected to the pre-emptive right, why should it be forced on them. By Act of 1865 equal rights with ourselves had been granted to the Maoris ; and this Bill went even further than that. Mr ORMOND withdrew his amendment, remarking that when he made it he forgot that the Minister proposed to refer the Bill to the Native Affairs Committee. The usual adjournment was taken at 5.30. EVENING SITTING. The House resumed at 7.30, and the debate on the Native Lands Administration Bill. Mr BEETHAM complimented the Native Minister on the moderate speech lie had made in introducing the Bill. He was afraid however, that the Bill would interfere with the settlement of the land, and he expressed an opinion that the Natives would not consent to deal with their lands in any given manner laid down by a Bill. If Mr Ormond had pressed the matter to a division he (Mr Beetharn) should have supported him, because he felt certain that this was not the proper principle. He held that it was right that hon members who disagreed with the vital principle of the Bill should vote against the second reading. He questioned the accuracy of the Minister's statement that the Natives throughout the Colony were in accord with the Bill, and said that in the Wairarapa the Natives were very much against it. Mr WI PERE supported the Bill, and hoped that it would pass. The Natives approved of this Bill,, as enabling future land transactions to be done in the light of day. He pointed out that in the past many troubles had risen from land dealings, and these would be ended by this Bill. Mr PRATT said there were some clauses in the Bill which he thought might with advantage be amended, but the main principle was correct. He held that the committee system would be quite workable, and asked whether it could be shown that Native Committees in this Island had ever done anything wrong. He did not expect a perfect Bill at first, but if they tried this one they could alter or repeal it if necessary. Mr LOCKE complained that the Bill did not go far enough to clear up the difficulties that surrounded many blocks of land. He thought the House should remember that it was now taking up this difficult question to settle it. He suggested that the Bill should not come into force for some time, in order that the people might have an opportunity of studying its details. He pointed out that there was a great tendency to talk about people making Maoris drunk, and so on. This was a wrong impression. Such conduct was only carried on by a few. people. He should not oppose the second reading of the Bill, but hoped that it would be amended consi ferably. Mr TE AO expressed his intention of moving amendments to the Bill. Captain RUSSELL said he held a view dissimilar to any that had been expressed. He thought that it was a great mistake to deal with Native lands through the Waste Lands Boards ; and he believed the Bill would.be inoperative. He looked upon fit as a deliberate attempt to revert to pre-emption, with the object, scarcely concealed, of the Government getting the land and selling
it at increased prices in smaller areas. According to his notions they ought to throwon the Natives as much responsibility as possible. They should insist on the appointment of more Native Land Court Judges, and on having more frequent sittings. To prevent Natives from becoming paupers they could enact that every man selling should first prove that he had a sufficient amount of land to enable him to keep himself and his family. He condemned the Bill as striving to take away the self-reliance of the Natives. Mr W. C. SMITH congratulated the Native Minister on the Bill, and the manner in wliich he had introduced it, and made its provisions known to the Natives. The effect of past laws on this question had been to make the trade in Native lands a select one, confined to a few, and the Natives had not received fair prices for the land. This Bill would remedy that, and would have the effect of cutting uo the land. The opposition to the Bill came mainly from people who Had had dealings in Native lands in tliepast, and had made money by them. He hoped the Bill would be passed, as a measure likely to do good for the Natives and to the Europeans, Mr HAKUENE did not think the Bill would bring any great prosperity to the Natives, but was in favor of giving it a trial. He considered the Bill was in accord with Native principle, because it proposed that important matters should be considered by numbers of Natives* He admired the principles of the Bill, remarking that as a man owning no land he liked the Bill. Mr MOSS said the Government were buying large quantities in the North for Is and Is 6d an acre. It was evident either that the Government was paying too little or was getting bad land. The latter, he thought, was the case. He had several objections to the Bill, one of which was to the system proposed in it of purchasing. Mr HURSTHOUSE said that in this Island there were 13,000,000 acres of land, and it was a debatable question whether it was taxed or not. At any rate, it was said it paid LIO,OOO. He was of opinion that this land should be settled. He doubted whether the Natives really were in favor of this Bill. The NATIVE MINISTER, in reply, said he would have preferred that Mr Ormond had not withdrawn his amendment, but allowed the House to decide the question. It was for the House to say whether or not- it approved the principle of the Bill, and it was'not intended that the principle should be referred to the Native Affairs Committee He pointed out that all the Native members had spiken that night in favor of the Bill. He repeated that the bulk of the opposition to the Bill came from land speculators. The Minister replied at length to the arguments of previous speakers. He remarked in reference to the suggestion that the Bill would stop settlement in the North, that at present there was a very small amount of settlement going on, except what the Government was carrying on. With regard to Mr Beetharn’s statement, that the Wairarapa Natives did not approve of the Bill, he pointed out that lie hart explained the Bill at Papawai, where if had been cordially approved. Under the present Native land laws, settlement did not exist in the North Island. He believed the constituencies of the North Island were in favor of the Bill, and would, if they were challenged, record their opinion in favor of it. In conclusion, he again legretted that the amendment had not gone to the House and the question been tested. The Bill was then read the second time, and referred to the Native Affairs Committee. GOLD EXPORT DUTY ABOLITION BILL. The adjourned debate on the second reading of this Bill was resumed. Mr SEDUON said the mining interests of the Colony were now in a very precarious eendition, and it was time this question was fully discussed in the House. He proceeded to give a history of the many attempts that had been made in the Legislature to reduce and abolish the duty. Approaching the present time, he pointed out that in ISS4 the Government, in the Speech, remarked upon the absolute necessity for aiding the mining industry. He asked what had been done by the Government in fulfilment of that promise? As to the Bill, he thought it did go far enough; it should have provided for a reduction of at least Is per ounce per annum—(hear hear) — and he felc confident that that would have been agreed to. The mining industry, since 1876, had paid L 300,000 in duties, &c., to the revenue of the Colony. He contrasted the action of the New Zealand Government in this matter with that of Victoria, where the export duty and miners rights’ fees were abolished many years ago. And hero they had insult added to injury ; for the miner was called a pauper and a loafer. And what relief had been given to miners during the last ten years ? The propertied classes had had a rebate of taxation of about L 500,000 ; and this year even L 25.000 was given by way of rebate. He alluded to the consequent decrease in the number of miners in the Colony, and said that since the last census the miners on the West Coast had decreased by ISB4 souls. The miners, he argued, had been the pioneers of civilisation ; before the Colony had the miners its revenue and resources were very small. Take away the gold export, and would New Zealand have been able to borrow as it had? Would its population have been what it was now ? He reminded the Premier that the time had new come for something more than promises. Would the Premier promise to tack this matter on to the Appropriation Act if the Legislative Council threw the Bill out ? Air J. C. BROWN, after censuring the previous speaker for taking up aa hour and a half at such a late hour, expressed a wish to move the adjournment of the debate. This he was unable to do.
Air RQLLESTON quoted a goldfields report of 1884 to show that the Government had assisted the mining industry to the extent of abour, 2s 9.V1 per ounce in that year. The L 52.000 ockl collected for gold export duty and miners rights’ fees in that year was handed over to the local bodies without reduction, the cost of collection, £sc., being provided by the Colony. Mr CADAIAN said the goldfields in his district had never evinced any particular desire to have the gold duty abolished, but he was ready to admit that as a question of principle it was wrong to tax an export. The Northern goldfields members would support the Bill on the understanding that in the Goldfields Committee a permissive clause was inserted. Air BARRON expressed his intention of opposing the Bill. The TREASURER having replied, the motion was put and a division called for. Ayes 36, noes 13. The House rose at 1 a.m, TUESDAY, JUNE 15. The House met at 2.30. PETITIONS. Various petitions were presented. NEW ZEALAND BIBLE, TRACT, AND BOOK [SOCIETY BILL. Air PEACOCK moved the second reading of this private Bill. Agreed to.
ItEPOHTS. Various reports from Select Committees were . ore-sen tecl.' BKEACII OF PRIVILEGE, Sir JULIUS VOGEL said he wished to brin" r before the House a scandalous paragraph which had appeared in the Christchurch Press of June 7th. The reason why he did not bring th'* matter before the House before was that M” T* C Backhand, the lion member concerned v/Vh him, was away, and had only returned that dav. He thought it right to delay making reference to the matter until that gentleman was here. The paragraph to which he referred appeared under the heading “ Political Intelligence.” and was as follows :—“ Various little anecdotes are in circulation as to the means used to secure a majority for the Government. It is said that Sir Julius Vogel sent for Mr J. C. Buckland, who was regarded as one of the 6 CtouctfuLs, 5 and. after some fencing, toicl him plump and plain that if he wonkl only vote for -Government in the coming division he might ask for what he liked afterwards for his constituency ; but Mr Buckland, instead of rising to th a bait, indignantly turned on liis heel and bounced out of "the room, slamming the door after him, and pledged liimseif to vote against a Government that could thus endeavor to -influence votes. I give the story for what it is worth. It seems to be on good authority. paragraph, to his mind, threw a chaige Q c ari j n f a mous offence upon an lion member occtmvingVhe position which he occupied, and it seVined to him that the public character of rubhc men in the House was the pro-, pertv of the House. If the House thought fit to any action upon the matter, he should do ail" that ho could to aid in bringing to justice the persons who had published this statement, and the miscreant who was the author of it. If, however, the House did not choree to take action he should, as soon as the GW- : ,n was over, take proceedings against the persons, either civilly or criminally as ne was advlGd, unless a very ample apology was made’ and the name of the writer given up. He had left the hon member for Waikouaiti (Mr Buckland) to make what statement lie Pked ; he had not spoken to the hon member about it. The hon member, he believed, in--Gt'-c in the or.per a contradiction which was crabLished without any expression of regret or Mr~j." C. BUCKLAND said he sent a teleto the paper, only part of which they published. Ha* should give the Treasurer every assistance in bringing the offenders to SU Hr’SEDDON suggested that the leader of the House should take action in the matter, and should not allow delicacy to stand in the way. The PSIvMIEE said he had thought it the leader of the Government made a motion it would be looked on as persecution of a political °‘lk BED DO N moved, That in the opinion of tb’S House a gross breach of privilege has 'been committed, and that the publisher of the paper be called upon to give up the name ot zre person supplying the information. 'The extract was then read by the Clerk. Mr,tor ATKINSON- felt as strongly as anyone did the general degradation of. the. public me” of the Colony by paragraphs of this sort ; bathe could not forget that all public men were subject to this sort of thing. He himself had had worse' tilings that this said about him, and he thought thej r would best suit their own dignity by tailing no notice of such statements. If he" thought they could put a stop to the attacks he wonkl support action being taken ; but the Government had not taken any steps, a-d he suggested that the hon gentleman be allowed to deal with the matter himself. He was sorry to have to say this, because he was a political opponent of the Treasurer. He suggested that the debate be adjourned for a couple of days. Mr BAKRON remarked tnat there would be no end to this sort of thing if the House took it up. . . . The TREASURER said it was a case of this kind : That -the House had before it a charge as seilous as could be made against a Minister and a member. If the House took no. steps, it practically renounced the right of taking steps tv> {Da! with such statements. 'Mr DARGAVILLE hoped the debate would not be adjourned. He was in favor of prising the resolution, and leaving toe matter there. It was incumbent on the House now. he thought, to express an opinion. Mr FERGUS did not see what was to be -raided by carrying this motion, before the £>?*%v, perhaps; liacl liaci time to mioStei t-iie facts of the case. (Laughter.) In two days, a mrEb more satisfactory conclusion would be coa<l What had been the effect of former ca--e.* of this kind? Simply to advertise the and called before the bar of the House, was in the next year elected to the House. He hoped the House would accept the amendment of Major Atkinson ; but at the same time lie expressed his intention of supporting the Ireasurer in vindicating himself. Mr HISLOP quoted from remarks made by Sir Robert Stout, in 1877, in which he advised the House, in a similar case, that they had gone far enough when the libellous statement was denied. Mr HOLMES said it was consoling, no doubt, to see the position taken up by Major Atkinson, Mr Hislop, and Mr Fergus.. They were all, apparently, sympathising with the Treasurer, but when a member of Major Atkinson’s Government was attacked, the hon rrar-tDman took up a different position. “'Major ATKINSON interjected that he had had nine vears’ experience since then. Mr HOLMES, continuing, argued that it was unwise to take notice of a scurrilous newspaper paragraph. He suggested that the resolution should be carried, and the matter a *Mr MONTGOMERY said it was difficult to draw the line. This was a breach, and it should be followed up. He thought, however, that the law should be employed, for if the T£ouw took notice of such a matter it was a question whether or not it would impair the freedom of the Press. Mr M OSS said he saw it stated m a paper the other day that thi3 would be known as “ the drunken Parliament.” They knew that was not worth notice, and they snould, he thought, similarly treat the writer in this case.' Did any one believe that non members v/6re sr.riuanced in their votes by the object of getting votes ? (Laughter.) , Mr "HOLLESTON said ne thought the whole matter was a storm in the teapot. There were many ludicrous statements appearing in newspapers from the galleries of the House, hut he did not think that they ever stuck to anyone. . The PREMIER said he had not changed his views since 1877, and he should ask tne o agree to the adjournment. jfr TURNBULL considered if was the proprietors of the papers that were to blame. Dir BUCKLAND remarked that many -ck:u' iV e = had also been made against him. Mr SAMUEL feared that to take action would he So bring some mendacious penny-a-liner ii: to notoriety. • , . , Mr BRYCE said the blunder had been as strop'dv condemned from his side of the House as from the other; but he asked what the effect would be if the House passed the resolution and stopped there ? To encourage auett. libels. As to going further, he thought
all the House could do in the matter they had done in the expression of opinion given. Mr SEDDON considered ifc his duty to consent to the adjournment of the debate. He suggested that steps should be taken to prevent reporters who would invent such stones from going into the gallery. _ Mr FISHER, who remarked that the Press had always treated him with honorable con--sideration, asked what power the House had in such a matter as this. He thought it would be unwise to press the matter further. The motion for adjournment was then put and carried. QUESTIONS. The TREASURER, in answer to Mr Guinness, said he did not think it would pay to provide for the use of silver pine in telegraph poles-the cost of carriage would be too la The MINISTER for PUBLIC WORKS, in answer to Mr Macarthur, said the Government would, no doubt, be able to give additional accommodation for the post and telegraph and railway station purposes at Palmerston North. . Mr MACARTHUR asked the Munster for Public V orks, Whether, if the amount of revenue from the Foxton—New Plymouth railway will not justify the remission of the exceptional charge of Is per ton on all goods passing to and from the Foxton Wharf by railway, he will cause such charge to be levied mi other Government wharves connected with the same line as will enable him to reduce the Foxton Wharf charges proportionally, and spread this impost equally over the whole district served by the Foxton —iSew Plymcut i ra The y MINISTER replied that the matter would be looked into, but he could not see any reason why the charges should be reduced. Mr MACARTHUR asked the Minister for Public Works, (1) Whether the sum of LIOO,OOO allocated in the Financial Statement to the Napier—Palmerston line, will be sufficient to complete that railway to its junction with the Foxton—New Plymouth railway at Palmerston; and, if not, how much moie will be required ? (2) Whether the_ Government propose to complete the junction of tne East and West Coast railway system of the North Island through the Gorge within the next two years ? . The MINISTER, replying categorically, said, to the first question, no ; and to the second, he was not in a position to say. llie Gorge line would take quite two years to conSt The POSTMASTER-GENERAL, in answer to Mr Fergus said he was considering the advisability of having postal notes issued at small post offices. . T , Mr MOSS asked the Government If they will take into consideration the necessity of levying higher duties on articles which our ironfounders and engineers are able to produce well and cheaply in New Zealand, but for which thejr cannot find a sale so long as it is the interest of those who control the Home market, to compel the use of articles imported from other countries ? The PREMIER in reply, congratulated the hon member on Ills change of front, for the lion gentleman voted against the Governments protection proposals last year. The Government proposed last year to deal with the tariff on articles made by iron founders. _ He advised the hon member to make a motion.
THE BOTOBUA SUFFERERS. In answer to Mr Grace, the PREMIER said the Government had made offers to assist, sufferers by the recent volcanic disturbances. He had now suggested that a Committee should be formed at Tauranga who could communicate with the Government; and the Government would give assistance in dealing with cattle and sheep. , , , Mr ORMOND suggested that the Sheep Inspector should go to the district and report. The PREMIER said he would accept that suggestion. OWHAOKO AND KAIMANAtYA NATIVE LANDS BILL. The NATIVE MINISTER moved that this order be discharged, so that the _ Bill might be referred to a Select Committee. Agreed to. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL. The House went into committee on this Bill. On clause 63, number of votes of burgesses, the Premier moved to strike out a clause giving one vote to persons possessing property valued at less than LSO. After a long discussion, the 5.30 adjournment was taken. EVENING SITTING. The House met at 7.30. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL. This Bill was further considered in committee. , , Sir George Grey moved an amendment to the 63rd section, to provide that every person over the age of 21 years should have a right to vote at borough elections. The said the hon gentleman should have moved the amendment earlier. It would not at this stage effect what the hon member aimed at. A rather acrimonious debate ensued, in the course of which the Premier accused Sir George Grey of opposing everything he (Sir Robert Stout) brought forward. Sir George retorted that the Premier had made a motion which took the House by surprise. Eventually Sir George Grey’s amendment was lost by 72 to 11. The Premier’s amendment was lost by 53 to 28. _ A. long discussion took place in connection with clause 123, providing that the burgesses shall elect auditors. Eventually the clause was struck out by 41 to 32. In clause 141, general rates, the clause was amended so that fifteen pence was made the "eneral rate to be levied instead of one shilling, Sir Julius Vogel opposing. Ayes, 35 ; noes, 34. Sir Julius Vogel said that as the vote just taken was so close, perhaps his colleague would postpone further consideration ot the Bill. (Laughter.) Major Atkinson said that if an adjournment was desired so that the Treasurer could consult with his colleague on the vote, he would support it. (Laughter.) Sir Robert Stout said he could not agree to the postponement. Several new clauses were added to the Bill. Mr Hatch moved that the Controller and Auditor-General be the auditor for boroughs under the Act. Mr Garrick moved an amendment, to the effect that there should be two auditors elected by burgesses, one of whom should retire each year. The second reading cf this clause was rejected by 41 to 33. Mr Hatch’s amendment was carried. Mr Garrick moved a new clause empowering the City Council of Christchurch to borrow L6OOO for new offices, &c. The clause gave rise to some discussion, several hon members being of opinion that it was not a maifcer that ought to be introduced into such a Bill as this. The clause was lost on the voices. Mr Downie Stewart moved sl new clause making it legal for a borough to convey land in exchange for land taken for road lines. This was withdrawn, The Bill was agreed to with some further amendments and reported. COUNTIES ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This Bill was committed. Several clauses were agreed to, and at 1 o’clock progress was reported. The House then rose.
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16. The House met at 2.30. PETITIONS. Various petitions were presented. REPORTS. Various reports were presented. QUESTIONS. The PREMIER, in answer to Mr Beetham, said the Government could not see the advisability of issuing circula-s to have the .question of what constitutes a residential qualification differently defined. It would be better, he thought, to amend the Act. The PREMIER, in answer to Mr Moat, said the Government was awaiting a reply from the Governments of other colonies before deciding what should be done in regard to the petition of John Tuck. The MINISTER for PUBLIC WORKS, in answer to Mr Beetham, said it was not necessary at present to make a detailed survey of the Castle Point harbor ; if the funds for a large wharf were forthcoming, the surveys would be made. - - The MINISTER for PUBLIC WORKS), m answer to Captain Russell, sajd the question of having t'ne Napier-Wood ville line fence J was a very large one, involving an expenditure of about L 200,000. It would hardly bo fair after the hon member’s motion last year to put such a sum on the Estimates. The MINISTER of MARINE, in answer to Mr Pratt, said the Government would introduce a Bill this session to provide for the leasing of seal-fishery rights. The COLONIAL TREASURER, in answer to Mr Pearson, said some weeks must elapse before a return showing the property tax valuation of lands affected by the Crown and Native Lands Rating Act could be circulated. The MINES MINISTER, in answer to Mr M. J. S. Mackenzie, said the Government would communicate with Dr Hector when lie returned as to the advisability of obtaining a a seismologist to report on the volcanic disNEWMAN suggested that what was wanted was a sum on the Estimates for the purchase of instruments. . The COLONIAL TREASURER, m answer to Mr Seddon, said the whole question of stamps was under consideration by the Department. As to the present similarity between penny postage and one shilling stamps, steps would foo taken to li&ve & Gisfcinguisliing mciiK on one of them. The COLONIAL TREASURER, in answer to Mr Seddon, said he had not the power to order the Public Trustee to refrain from levying certain rents of settlers on Native reserves on the West Coast of the Middle answer to Mr Dargaville, the PREMIER said the Government would, on Tuesday next, make a statement as to what they intended to do in regal'd to the re-adjustment of representation. ‘ In answer to Mr Johnston, Sir Robert added that the question of amalgamating city electorates would be referred to on tnat occa--81 The MINISTER of MARINE, in answer to Mr Guinness, said the Solicitor-General was not of opinion that the expenditure of Harbor Boards on tugs was illegal. ' The MINISTER for PUBLIC . WORKS, in answer to Mr Buchanan, said, if it were not for expense, it would be better no doubt to have better lamps on the Wellington-Master-ton Railway line. Those at present in use, however, were the same as were used in England, and as there was a large stock of them he could not make any alteration except by supervision The new carriages would nob be used on that line yet. His instructions were _to work the line as economically a 3 possible. He pointed out that persons who wished to read could carry a small lamp with them.
PUBLIC WORKS STATEMENT. Major ATKINSON asked when the Public Works Statement would be delivered ? The PREMIER : Next week. Major ATKINSON : Early next week ? The PREMIER : I could not say. JUDGE FENTOX’S CHARGES. Mr BALLANCE moved, That a Select Committee, consisting of ten members, be appointed to consider the question of the Bill to provide for a reinveatigation into the Native title to lands known as Owhaoko and K.ai-manawa-Oruamatua, and the petition of E. D. Fenton referring to the said Bill; -such Committee to have power to call for persons and papers, and to report from time to time ; three to be a quorum. The Committee to consist of the Hon Major Atkinson, Hon Mr Bryce, Mr Conolly, Sir G. Grey, Mr Holmes, Mr Menteath, Mr Montgomery, Mr Seddon, Mr w. D. Stewart, and the Hon Sir Robert Stout. Mr ORMOND expressed an opinion that the memorandum issued with the Bill by the Attorney-General on this matter was unfair to Judge Fenton. He suggested that the Premier would have acted lightly and courteously in giving an opportunity to that gentleman to reply. The PREMIER said his sole object in writing the memorandum was to draw attention to certain things, and not to charge any one. The information was given for the Native Major ATKINSON also regretted that the memorandum had been peculiar thing, he remarked, to bring before the House a memorandum for the information of the Native Minister. As to the Committee, he pointed out that several hon gentlemen were always picked out for Committees ; and he suggested that there might be a rule by which Chairmen of Committees could arrange when meetings should be held. The matter might be referred to the Standing Orders Committee. . e Mr BRYCE said it was not unusual for these memorandums to be made, but the unusual thing was to lay them before the House. He pointed out that Dr Buffers character was seriously impugned in this matter. , , , , , The PREMIER announced that he had received a telegram from Mr Michael Studholme who said that he had had nothing whatever to do with the land for the last five years, _ _ Sir GEORGE GREY expressed an opinion that the Committee would be placed in an unfortunate position by the manner in wmch the matter was referred to them. The TREASURER was of opinion that all party considerations should be set aside in a matter like this. He remarked that there was reason to suspect a vast amount of irregularity in Native land dealings. He cautioned the House against the possibility of encouraging litigation. It was alleged that Native part owners had received large sums of money, and had not paid those who were entitled to participate. Were these people to benefit. by the lands being reopened again? A contingency was before the Colony of long years of litigat! Dr NEWMAN suggested that Dr Buffer’s connection with the matter should also be considered. „ , The NATIVE MINISTER said tne memorandum had been made solely for the guidance of the House, and to show that the Natives were entitled to a re-hearing. The motion was eventually carried. ADVANCES ON LAND BILL. Mr HACANDKSW moved that the second reading of this Bill should be set down for Thursday week, and made first order of ths day.
A discussion ensued, in the course of which Mr SEDDON moved to omit that portion of the motion making the Bill the first order of the day. j
This was lost. Mr BRYCE thought the motion was unfair, and said it had not been anticipated when Mr Macandrew asked the indulgence to make the motion, that he was going to move in this manner. • - Mr DARGAVILLE moved that the Bill he made an order of the day for the Bth July. Only one Bill was set down for That Mr MACANDREW accepted this amendment. Sir GEORGE GREY said he was the most interested party in this matter, and he suggeste t that as Mr Macandrew had done all he could by accepting the amendment, that amendment should be withdrawn. Mr MOSS pointed out that a number of important Biffs were on the Order Paper, amongst them the Law Practitioners Bill, and it was wonderful the unanimity that existed between the lawvers in this matter, Mr riURSTHOUSE remarked m reference to the Law Practitioners Bill that vears he supported and opposed it. This year he was to support ifc. lie would not have withheld his negative voice when Mr Macandrew asked for permission to make a motion had he known what motion was to be made. Sir GEORGE GREY withdrew his objections, remarking that hs had not been aware that 'both he and Mr Macandrew were being plaved upon. The amendment proposed by Mr Dargaville was then put and carried. FAR C ELS POST BILL. The TREASURER moved the second reading of this Biff. Carried. EAST AND WEST COAST RAILWAY ACT AMEND MENT BILL. The second reading of this Biff was postponed. LOCAL BODIES LOANS BILL. Sir JULIUS VOGEL moved the second reading of this Biff. He carefully explained the provisions of the measure. The Biff, he said, was the outcome of observations of difficulties encountered by local bodies. Major ATKINSii N thought the Bill generally was a useful one, although there were several parts of it which might be amended in committee. Generally, he must congratulate the hon gentleman in having at Hsfcgrasped the requirements of local bo.ties. Mr SEDDON objected that the Bill would not be applicable to smaller local bodies, such as those to the north of Auckland, and on the West Coast of the Middle Island. Mr ORMOND protested against the Bill, as stereotyping the existing state of things. At the same time, he pointed out that the. piovision. as to school buildings being bunt of rates was a new departure. It would very largely increase the burdens of the ratepayers. He observed that the Government were not carrying out the local government policy they had promised to introduce. Mr MOSS said the Bill was a measure oo prevent the General Government to reduce expenditure in any way, but to throw extra burdens on local bodies. As a Bill to allow local bodies to run into debt, it was perfect, and no doubt would be taken advantage of. The chairman of a council or of a road district who wished to immortalise himself could sweetly gild the pill, and point out that no interest would have to be paid for the first year. The moral responsibility of these loans would rest with the Colony. Captain BUSSELL objected to the clause as to school buildings, as unfair to the outlying districts. , , Sir JULIUS VOGEL, in reply, said that the Biff would assist local bodies to. borrow more economically. Ifc was a Bill to improve the position of local bodies already authorised to borrow,' The Bill was read the second time, and the 5.30 adjournment was then taken. EVENING SITTING. The House resumed at 7.30. THE PACIFIC ISLANDS QUESTION. The PREMIER said the adjourned debate on this question was to have cume on that night, but he suggested that ifc should be taken oif Friday next. He had reasons, he said, for making this proposal. Sir GEORGE GREY asked when the Lana for Settlement Biff would come on. The PREMIER was willing to take it that night or on Friday, and adjourn the Pacific Islands question till Tuesday. Sir GEORGE GREY objected to the postponement. Hon Major ATKINSON suggested, that after the statement of the Premier Sir George Grey should withdraw ids objection. Ifc was decided to take the Pacific Islands debate on Friday evening. Mr STEWART hoped the matter would not be put off any more than could be helped, for ifc was a subject in which the Colony was deeply interested. EDUCATION STATEMENT. During the previous discussions the MINISTER of EDUCATION (Sir Robert Stout) announced that he intended to make an education statement on Friday evening. LOANS TO LOCAL BODIES BILL. The TREASURER moved the second reading of this Biff, which was, he said, an addition to°the Bill read the second time that afternoon. The one provided that local bodies might borrow, and the other provided for the Government lending the money on favorable te.ms. The Government was to lend money at 5 per cent., payable for 26years, the Colony to be responsible for the payment of the capital sum, and an amount of 2A _ per cent, per year to be nut aside to meet the liability. Ihe purpose of the Bill was to leave to the ratepayers what money should be borrowed, and for the construction of what works. As regarded the means by which the Treasurer should supply the money, it was intended that for a time the monev should be raised within the Colony. It was left, however, to the discretion of the Treasurer. The limit of the amount to be lent annually was left blank, and could be filled up in committee. The Biff, he contended, must be a great advantage to the local bodies throughout the country. ■ Major ATKINSON said the Government had advanced a considerable stage in their knowledge of local bodies, and he congratulated them sincerelv upon it. But uhe ought to have" told the House something as to how the main (roads were to be constructed. He would point out that this great question was left entirely untouched, and vvere the Government going to make the roads out ot borrowed money ?. He was not going to mention that LBOO.OOO that clid not exist: but he wanted to know how the Government were going to deal with this question, especially in outlying districts. The settlers on bush land could not, it was clear, borrow money under this Act for roa d=. Generally the Bill was more liberal than the Roads and Bridges Construction Act. But the question of roads had yet to be settled. He expressed an opinion that the sinking fund would be seized some time when there was a deficiency, if it was not properly tied up. He approved of the proposal to inscribe deoentures, and he thought the Government was to be congratulated on the improvement.; But ue hoped “the Government would take into con-
sideration the position of local bodies, who borrowed under the Roads and Bridges Construction Act. They would have to pay 9 per cent, for their money, while bodies borrowing under this Act would only have to pay 5 per cent.” With reference to the question of school buildings, that opened up a large question : indeed. Generally, he congratulated the Government on the Bill, and the satisfactory spirit in which they had acted ; indeed, be;---' | said, the Government had always been willing, ! but fchev had suffered from want of knowledge. The Biff, with a few amendments, which would be made, not in a party sense, would, he thought, be a useful one. Mr MOSS considered this was a Biff which would destroy the self-reliance of local bodies, 1 and the effect of it would be to once more float LI, 000,000 or L 2,000,000 of unnegotiable debentures. Mr FERGUS contended that the goldfields and outlying districts would fare badly under this Bill. He should like to see the Bill amended so as to give more favorable terms to those districts. Mr BUCHANAN said Mr Moss might well be called the Cassandra of the House. _ He (Mr Buchanan) was of opinion that the Bill would fail to provide for roads in such districts as the Seventy-Mile Bush. He had several Committee objections to the Bill. Mr HURST HOUSE contended that the Bill was an attempt to get rid of the Colony’s legitimate liability in regard -to main roads. He held that the Colony must undertake this liability, and complained that too much money had in the past been spent on railway* as compared with roads. He agreed that the Bilf would not favorably treat outlying districts and goldfields districts. He pointed out that there was no provision in the Bill to enable local bodies to pay off their liabilities while the debentures were current. He was not sure tlicit tliQ (jrov6mi]Q<3nfc licicl not & aGsp design in shifting the liabilities on school buildings on to local bodies. With reference to Mr Moss, that gentleman was apparently still in the same frame of mind ; he had_ always opposed everything but proposed nothing. Mr SE DDON’S objections to the Bill were simply Committee objections. He denied that the goldfields members intended to make 3demand on the public purse to makeup for the reduction of the gold duty. . . Mr KERR would like to see some provision >, for opening up roads in the isolated portions of the country. With that exception, he thought the Bill was complete. . Mr ROLLESTON thought the Bill was, on the whole, what the House would have to accept and consider carefully in Committee. With regard to the clause referring to school buildings, the option in that case was a mandate —ifc meant that the local bodies would have to pay moneys which ha.d hitherto come out of the consolidated fund. ■ In the past the Colony had been spending money to waste in railways, without making roads at the same time. This Biff would enable the districts to help themselves to n, certain extent. They were told that the Public Works Statement would propose money being taken out of loan for the purpose of making roads to open up lands for sale, but that wou.d not last long very likely. Mr GUINNESS spoke m favor of the Bill. Mr MONTGOMERY thought ifc was a most remarkable thing to propose a sinking fund when only in ISS4 a Bill was passed for the seizure of sinking funds. (Major ATKINSON: We are wiser now than we were in 1884.) Very likely; but what had been might be again, and it was possible that a future Treasurer would also seize this. With regard to school buildings, he could understand the Treasurer saying that in well-settled districts the people should maintain schools, but he could not understand taxing people in a young district for a new school. He thought this was a good Bill because, as had been said, ifc would bring the people face to face with taxation. Mr MACANDREW did not share in the discontent expressed with the Bilk He thought it was an advance —and a advance —in the direction of solving the problem of local government. He did not attach much importance to the clause providing that local bodies might borrow tor school buildings, because he did not think the local bodies would be- got to levy rates for this purpose. He hoped that next session a Bill would be brought down to deal further with the question of local government; but at present the Biff was, as he had said, a distinct step in Mr W. C. SMITH supported the Bill, and thought the Treasurer was to be congratulated on having introduced a Bill, the main principle of which was such a pood one as this of lending money to local bodies. _ The TREASURER, in reply, said it was a mistake to say that the Bill was drawn up on the lines of the Roads and Bridges Construction Act. He had intended to take some clauses of that Act, but one after another_h6 had had to discard them. He would be willing to make the vote a permanent one, He alluded to Mr Montgomery as “ a genius, not only in the present, but also in the future.” As iar as that hon member's objections went, he (Sir Julius Vogel) could not profess to legislate for 26 years hence. He held that a sinking fund was a proper precaution. The hon member for Egmont had put in a word for the bodies borrowing under the Roads and Bridges Construction Act, and he was willing to have the terms varied. As regarded borrowing for education purposes, hon members, with tha u ; proneness to suspicion, which he was sorry to see arising, objected to it. He pointed ouu j that many local bodies wanted schools, and. were unable to raise the money, and the time would come when especially the larger centres would- be glad to take advantage ot such a elause as this. The Bill, however, left it optional at present. Regarding the question of the LBOO,OOO, the h.on gentleman was trying to “ bamboozle the ITnn'sa over it. (Sir J*uliu3 entered, at soias length into an argument in respect to the LSOOjOOQ). With respect to the complaints that outlying districts were not well treated, he admitted that those who were starting tne race deserved consideration ; but did they not get ifc out of the Crown and Native Lands Rating Act ? The Government did not re,use to itop expenditure on roading, or vo repudiate the liability of maintaining some main roads. In conclusion, he thanked the House for the manner in which ifc had received the Bill. The second reading of the BilL was agreed to. On the motion for committal on .t rid ay, Major ATKINSON made- a reply to the Treasurer’s statement about the LBOO,OOO. Ifc was an open secret in the ..obbies, he said, that the Government were in difficuLies over tha Financial Statement ;. they were hard at ■ work trying to find liabilities against which to charge ifc. Therefore the Treasurer wanted to draw him (Major Atkinson) out. He quoted the Financial Statement to show that the liabilities for the year were L 816.000. He asxsa, then, where was the LSOO.OOO that the hon gentleman told them was perfecfclv free. There was not a halfpenny free. Ministers had the responsibility of taking away any of the votes, ox to admit tnat they had misled, the House. , , - Mr MOSS wished to make a few remarks m answer to v/hat, he was informed, had been said about him during tha debate. He unaerstooci that the Treasurer had said that hei did - . no% exnect Mr Moss, to support any flifi
brought in.” Well, he could tell the hon gentleman that he absolutely pined for a chance to support one of his Bills. He accepted the Treasurer’s chaff, but he must be pardoned if he said he could not accept it as argument, or if he suggested that argument might have been looked for on an occasion like this. Mr Moss concluded by moving, as an amendment, That before proceeding with this Bill it is desirable that the Government should bring down proposals dealing with the main or post roads of the Colony. The amendment was put and lost. . The TREASURER replied to Major Atkinson, remarking that he was not at all averse to receiving a lesson from one whom he had ooked upon as a neophyte in these matters. The hon gentleman, however, was standing on dangerous ground when he said that he (the Treasurer) had told the House that the money was perfectly free from engagements. He complained of the manner in which the hon gentleman and his colleagues persistently ran down the credit of the Colony. What, good did he do the other day in trying to prove that there was no surplus ? Let the hon gentleman do anything he liked—turn the Government out of office—so long as he did not try to make the Colony suffer. He (the Treasurer) had clearlv given the House to understand that the LSOO.OOO would be available for other purposes than railways. ~ , , , Major ATKINSON said he had never run down tho credit of the Colony in any way ; but he had taken exception to the hon gentleman s manner of dealing with the finances. The motion for committal of the Bill was then carried.
JUSTICES OF THE PEACE ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This Bill was further considered in committee. Sir George Grey moved the first of his Elective Justices Mr Kerr pointed out the evils which had arisen, in the shape of "Vigilance Committees, under the elective system in America. Sir George Grey replied that the speech just made convinced him that it was _ better to have Justices elected than nominated by Parliament. Mr Bruce said the proposal _ was theoretically correct, no doubt, but practically it would be a failure. He added that the nominated system had been so abused that Parliament appeared rather to prefer, the elective system. The recoil from the nominated system was the cause of an absence _of hostility to the present proposal. He denied that the system had been a success in America. He cou d retail experiences, he said, which would astonish the House. Mr Peacock said there was hostility to the proposal, and he thought it was a pity that such a matter as this should be discussed in committee. Colonel Trimble and Mr Samuel spoke against the clause. Eventually the clause was lost by 38 to 18. The remainder of the clauses were then dropped.
COUNTIES BILL. The Counties Bill was discussed in committee. Progress was reported at 1.15, and the House rose. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. THURSDAY, JUNE 10. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30. PAPERS. Mr BUCKLEY presented several papers. TAWHIAO'S MISSION. Mr TAIAROA moved, That there be laid upon the table of this Council copies of the correspondence between the Earl of Derby, Tawhiao, and the Government of New Zealand, from 1884 to the present date. Agreed to.
CARDINAL MORAN. Colonel BRETT moved, That the evidence taken by the Public Petitions Committee on ■petitions Nos. 2 and 4, from certain inhabitants of the Colony, regarding the reception of Cardinal Moran in New Zealand, be printed. Dr POLLEN asked Colonel Brett to withdraw the motion, or in the event of his refusal Tie should ask the Council to reject it. He took this course, as it had been proved that a misapprehension had arisen by the petitioners. It was well known that the Government in its corporate capacity took no part in the reception, and the Colonial Secretary was only present out of a desire to pay respect to an old friend. The Government had merely granted a free railway pass to a _ distinguished visitor, as was the custom in similar cases. He hoped the subject would go no further. Colonel BRETT withdrew his motion. Mr SCOTLAND moved, That the report of the Public Petitions on petitions Nos 2 and 4, from certain inhabitants of New Zealand, on the subject of the reception of Cardinal Moran, be referred back to that Comconsidered that no possible good could follow by the motion being carried. Certain very grave accusations had been made against him (Mr Buckley). Mr SCOTLAND : It is false. . Mr BUCKLEY was exceedingly surprised at the conduct of the Hon Mr Scotland, who was not only a member of the Council, but also a member of a learned profession. Mr SCOTLAND apologised to the Speaker, and substituted the word ‘incorrect for * false.’ , , Mr BUCKLEY accepted the apology, He personally should have desired that the evidence had been printed, but, after the speech of Dr Pollen, he was content to let the matter rest. , , , Mr SCOTLAND explained that he had tabled the motions on the advice of the Speaker, and his only desire had been that his dissent to the finding of the report should be put in the proper light. . . The motion was lost, on a division. Ayes, 12 : noes, 18. NEW BILLS. The following Bills were read a first time The Settled Land Act Bill, 1886 (Mr Buckley), and a Bill to provide for Bible reading in schools (Mr Menzies). The second reading of the former mentioned Bill was fixed for the following day, and that of the latter for next Wednesday. INFLUX FRENCH CRIMINALS BILL. Sir PREDERICK WHITAKER, in asking leave to introduce the French Criminals liffiux Bill, stated that it would be recollected that in 1883 a conference of delegates of the Governments of the Australian colonies had been held at Sydney, and at this conference a very strong feeling was expressed against the influx of French criminals. The Convention bad addressed the Queen on .the subject, and at the request of the Convention he prepared a Bill, which after deliberation it was decided to hold -over in the hope that the Imperial Goverrmacnt would taike the matter up. The ex•citement was again renewed, and he therefore now brought down this Bill winch he might say held out no threat, and could only be brought into operation by the will of the Governor. It had been stated that the Imperial Government would not give sanction to the Bill, but he thought differently. _ The Bill was not ultra vires, and as it contained a suspension clause there could be no objection to his motion. He asked hon members to suspend judgment until the Bill came m for the second reading. The motion was agreed to.
THE EARTHQUAKE DISASTERS. Before the Orders ofjthe Day were called on,
Mr BUCKLEY stated that the Government had received official information that \Vairoa was covered with ten feet of ashes, and it was ascertained that a number of Natives in addition to those referred to by the newspaper extras had perished. The Government had decided to send up Dr Hector in the Hinemoa, with a view to succour the families who were in jeopardy. (Cheers.) NATIVE EQUITABLE OWSERS BILL. Mr BUCKLEY moved the second reading of the Native Equitable Owners Bill, and in doing so remarked that the Bill sought to give certain Natives relief in cases where they were kept out of their land by Maori trustees who had been appointed to act for their fellowaborigines. He intended, if the motion were agreed to, to refer the Bill to the Native Committee. . Sir F. WHITAKER., while not opposing the motion, desired to express the opinion that it the Bill passed it would complicate matters %vith the Natives. Dr POLLEN expressed his surprise at the recent flood of legislation for the Natives with which they were inundated.. If any Natives were entitled to relief, he considered that such were individual cases, and as such, did not require special legislation. He expressed pleasure at hearing the Bill would be referred to a committee. The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was referred to the Native Committee.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS EXTENSION BILL. The Charitable Trusts Extension Bill was further considered in committee, and reported with amendments. The Council at 3.50 adjourned to next day. FRIDAY, JUNE 11. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30. PAPERS. Mr BUCKLEY laid on the table several papers. NEW BILLS. The following Bills were read a first time : Stock-driving Bill, Codlin Moth Act Amendment Bill, Anima's Protection Act Amendment Bill (all by Mr Buckley.) Mr TAIAROA moved, That the Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the Native Reserves at Arahura, Greymouth, Nelson, and Motuekabe translated and printed in the Maori language. Agreed to. Mr G. R. JOHNSON moved That it be an instruction to the Rabbit Nuisance Committee to consider also the administration of the Sheep Act. Agreed to. Mr BUCKLEY moved that as the Chantab’e Trusts Extension Bill (as amended) had not been received from the Printer, the order for its third reading be discharged, and made an order of the day for Tuesday next. The motion was agreed to. FIRST READINGS. The City of Leasing Bill and the New Plymouth Recreation Reserves Bill were received from the House of Representatives, and were read a first time, the latter-named Bill being referred to the Local Bills Committee, KERMADEC ISLANDS. Mr REYNOLDS stated that he had just received a letter from Port Chalmers from Mr T. H. Hodge, which stated that the Kermadec Islands would carry ten sheep to the acre, would grow potatoes all the year round, and grow bananas and an indigenous sugar. The islands were well watered, are stocked with goats, and the anchorage is good. The group was of volcanic origin, but the writer did not apprehend any eruption was likely to take Pl The Council, at 2.50, adjourned to Tuesday. TUESDAY, JUNE 15. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30. PETITIONS. Sir F. WHITAKER presented a petition from resideuts of Auckland against the annexation of the New Hebrides by France. Mr MENZIES presented a, petition from Southland in favor of the reading of the Bible in State schools. . , , ~ Petitions were also presented by Air Acland in favor of a Bill for the protection of young women and girls, ,and Mr Williams, from Coramandel, Pi >ko, and lhames, urging the amendment ©£ the Charitable Aid Act. QUESTIONS. Mr SHRIMSKI asked the Colonial Secretary, Whether the Government intend to bring in a Bill this session to amend the JSospitals and Charitable Institutions Act, 18S5 ; and, if so, whether it will contain any provision in reference to the funds which were in hand or invested by the Committees previous to the Act coming into force ; also, whether it will contain ally provision ta preserve the rights of donors who became life governors under former Mr BUCKLEY, in reply, said that the Government intended to bring in an amending Bill this session, and no doubt the suggestions thrown out by the hon member would be attended to. _, _ . , Mr BUCKLEY, in reply to Mr Bonar, said the Government would give Ls<3 toward the funds of the Royal Humane Society of Australasia, and no doubt the same amounts would be annually devoted next year. THE NEW HEBRIDES QUESTION. SirF. WHITAKER moved the following resolutions “ (1.) That it is of importance to Great Britain, and of especial importance to the Australasian colonies, that a satisfactory understanding should be come to between the several States having interests in the \V estern Pacific as to their respective rights and claims. (2.) That the most pressing question at present requiring settlement is that between Gieat Britain and France in reference to the New Hebrides. (3.) That the most satisfactory settlement of this question which now appears to be practicable would be a treaty between Great Britain and France, whereby Great Britain should withdraw all opposition to the acquisition by France of the New Hebrides Islands, on conditions —(a.) That no more convicts of any class be sent by France to any of her possessions in the Western Pacific, (b.) That protection, religious freedom, and peaceable possession of their lights and properties be guaranteed to all British subjects residing in or resorting to the New Hebrides, and especially to the Presbyterian mission established there, (c.) That freedom of trade and commerce be guaranteed to subjects equally with those of France. (d.) That the Island of Rapa be ceded by France to Great Britain.” He was aware that the question had been mooted in the House of He* presentatives, but he believed that it would be impossible to_ get the whole of the Australasian colonies to come to any definite arrangement with regard to the islands mentioned in his motion. This difficulty was increased owing to the fact that, with the exception of Raratonga and the New Hebrides, the best of the islands had already been annexed by some one or the other of the great European Powers. It appeared to him that no commission appointed by the several Australasian colonies could deal with the subject. So far as he could make out, all the islands in the South Pacific worth anything at all were already annexed. |Sir Frederick reviewed the despatches and communications which had passed between Earl Granville and M. Waddington with respect to the proposed annexation of the New Hebrides. The question, he remarked, which had been propounded by
Lord Granville was, Were the colonists in favor of getting r'd of the French convict question in the South Pacific ? This was the question the colonies had to answer. From France they learned that the French were ready to send additional convicts to New Caledonia, and therefore, so far as he could gather, the question for the Australian colonists to consider was, Would they accept the neighborhood of free French colonists in the New Hebrides, or would they prefer the whole of the islands of the South Pacific being inundated by hordes of French criminals. With regard to the Presbyterian Mission in the New Hebrides he desired to say that the Rev Mr Baton 30 years ago established a mission, but the treaty between England and France with regard to the Islands was only entered upon 8 years ago. He considered that the Presbyterian Mission would be far better off by being under the protection of a civilised Government rather than being under no protection whatever, and therefore he considered that for this reason alone his motion should be agreed to. He certainly thought that in the interests of the Natives of the New Hebrides, it would be far better that free French colonists should be introduced into tlieir midst rather than that the criminals from New Caledonia should be permitted to overrun all the Islands of the South Pacific. So far as he could judge the Government had put off the question until the Presbyterian Mission had decided what they should do, but up to the present the Presbyterian Mission had returned no answer to the inquiry of the Government, What the colonies were asked to give up was really of no consequence to them, and what was more they were invited to give up really what they did not possess. From what he had read of Lord Granville’s despatches he did not believe that the Imperial Government would ever make any effort to acquire these Islands, and therefore he considered that the best arrangement the colonies could agree to would be to make an amicable arrangement, for whatever the colonies might say to the contrary France would obtain possession of the New Hebrides. Moreover, he found that the chiefs of the group had asked protection from France, and as he felt convinced that England would certainly never go to war with France on the subject of the annexation of the group, the best thing would be for the colonies to make the best terms they could with France, more especially as there was nothing in the law of nations to prevent Germany, France, or, indeed, any other Power, in either the old or the new world, taking possession of the New Hebrides The colonies were giving up nothing,. for, if the group was acquired by England, it would' assuredly prove to be a source of weakness to her. The sooner these islands were placed under some civilised government the better it would be for the Natives, who would thereby be protected from the dreadful labor traffic ; and for this and other arguments he had advanced he hoped the Council would agree to the motion standing in his name. Mr AIcLEAN moved the adjournment of the debate till Friday next, which was agreed to. STOCK-DRIVING BILL. Mr BUCKLEY moved the second reading of the Stock-driving Bill. He believed that several amendments would be proposed in committee, and he did not apprehend that the Government would offer any objection in the direction indicated. The Bill was introduced with a view to lessen sheep stealing. The motion was agreed to. CODLIN MOTH ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Mr BUCKLEY, in moving the second reading of the Codlin Moth Act Amendment Rill,’ remarked that the proposed measure gave power to the Governor on the petition of residents in a district to declare such district unclean. The motion was agreed to. ANIMALS PROTECTION ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Mr BUCKLEY moved the second reading of the Animals Protection Act Amendment Bill, which was agreed to. ANNEXATION OF THE KERMADEC ISLANDS. The debate on the question that a respectful address be presented to Her Majesty praying that the Kermadec Islands may be annexed to New Zealand, was resumed by Sir F. WHITAKER, who remarked that although the group did not appear to be of any great value, still, as they took a quantity of produce and commodities from the Colony, it would be as well to agree to the proposition of Government. He thought it would not be gracious of the Parliament to repudiate the action of the colonial Government. The motion for the presentation of the address was agreed to. , , , The Council, at 4.30, adjourned to next day. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16. The Speaker took the chair at 2.30. PETITIONS. Mr REEVES presented a petition from 150 ratepayers of Christchurch relative to the drainage district of Christchurch. Mr SCOTLAND presented petitions from residents in the borough of New Plymouth, with regard to the New Plymouth Reserves and Recreation Bill. QUESTIONS. Mr PEACOCK asked the Government, If they will reconsider the prison regulations, with a view to modify the treatment of persons confined for safe custody and unconvicted of crime, whereby their confinement may be made as little oppressive as possible, in accordance with subsection (4) of clause 14 of the 4-Ct 9 Mr BUCKLEY said, in reply, that he had consulted with the Minister of Justice, and he had ascertained that the prison regulations were the same as prevailed in other colonies, and therefore the Government would not alter the regulations. COASTAL SHIPWRECKS. Mr CHAMBERLIN moved, That, in the opinion of this Council, the Government should hold out inducements calculated to lead to the devising of means whereby the chances of shipwreck on the coasts of the Australasian Colonies might be lessened. The question, he remarked, was one which interested, not only the Colony, but also the whole of the civilised world. He thought that the Government should make an effort to get the Imperial Government to ascertain the reason of the variation of compasses, and he believed that the colonial Government should offer a bonus for a discovery by which compasses may be adjusted, so as to avoid costal shipwrecks in thick and hazy weather. Mr SCOTLAND seconded the motion. Dr POLLEN considered that the security of the travelling public would be best guaranteed by the law being permitted to take its course, as was the case in the Ly-ee_-Moon disaster. He moved the previous question. Mr REYNOLDS remarked that the Government was prepared to do all in its'power, with a view to put officers of a wrecked vessel on trial for manslaughter in cases of loss of life. Mr McLEAN statedjthat so far as the Union Company was concerned no officer in employ of Company obtained rank in Company’s service until he was passed by Government officer. The Company took every precaution, and officers of vessels were responsible for any accident which might occur. _ _ j The question was put with the following I result:—Ayes, 6 ; Noes, 29. *
Motion was lost. BIBLE READING IN SCHOOLS BILL. Mr MENZIES moved the second reading of the Bible Reading in Schools Bill, and in doing so remarked that the Council had last week affirmed the principles contained in the Bill. Mr SHRIMSKI moved that the Bill be read “ this day six months.” Mr HART was understood to say that some religious instruction should be inculcated in the schools, but he was one of those who foresaw that opinions would clash if the Scriptures were read in the schools. He would like to see the Bill referred to a Select Committee. Dr POLLEN thought that if the Bill were passed, it would lead to dissensions. It was a slander upon the people of the Colony to say that they neglected to teach their children the truths contained in the Bible. He knew from personal observation that the Sunday Schools in the Colony disseminated Bible truths, and if the Bill were passed it would lead to denominational education, and to the subversion of the Education Act. Mr Lahman, Sir F. Whitaker, Mr Scotland, Dr Grace, Mr Swanson, and Colonel Brett strongly opposed the motion. Messrs Barnicoat and Holmes spoke in favor of the Bill. Mr BUCKLEY moved the adjournment of the debate.
The motion was lost on a division. Ayes, 12; noes, 23. The motion for second reading was carried on a division. Ayes, 20; noes, 17.
CITY OF DUNEDIN LEASING BILL. Mr BUCKLEY moved the second reading of the City of Dunedin Leasing Bill, which was agreed to, the committal being made an order for Friday next. The Council at 5 o’clock adjourned to next day.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZMAIL18860618.2.86
Bibliographic details
New Zealand Mail, Issue 746, 18 June 1886, Page 27
Word Count
18,004PARLIAMENT. New Zealand Mail, Issue 746, 18 June 1886, Page 27
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.