HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1746, 23 August 1905, Page 19

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

TUESDAY. AUGUST 15. The House met at 2.30 p.m. THE FISHER CHARGES. Practically the only business of the afternoon was the discussion on the petitions presented by Mr Seddon and Mr Fisher in connection with the charge brought against Captain Seddon of having received an alleged improper payment. The discussion is reported elsewhere. NEW BILL. The Public Trust Office Consolidated Act Amendment Bill was introduced by the Right Hon Mr Seddon. ADjpURNMENT. A. motion of regret and condolence at the death of the Hon Mr Taiaroa, M.L.0., was passed, and the House adjourned, as a mark of respect, at 4.15 p.m. until 7.30 p.m. The House resumed at 7.30. SHOPS AND OFFICES.. The House went into committee on the Shops and Offices* BilL, the discus-

sion on which is reported elsewhere (page 3). The House rose at 1.20 a.m. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 16. The House met at 2.30 p.m. NEW BILLS. The following new bills were read a first time:—Public Trust Office Consolidation Act Amendment and Poukawa Native Reserves (Mr Seddon). QUESTIONS. The remainder of the afternoon sitting was devoted to a discussion of Ministers’ replies to questions; The House adjourned at 5.30. The House resumed at 7.30. THIRD READINGS. The . Marriage Validations BilL and the Statutes Compilation Act Amendment Bill (Sir W. J. Steward) passed their finaT stages. UNIMPROVED VALUE. The second reading of the Rating on Unimproved Value Amendment Bill (on which previously there was a count out) was movey by Mr Ell. The debate on the bill was carried on until 12.30, when Mr James Allen moved the adjournment. This was carried by 31 votes to 25. The House rose at 12.35 a.m. THURSDAY, AUGUST 17. The House met at 2.30 p.m. THE REFERENDUM. The Referendum Bill (Mr Seddon) was read a first time.. _ WELLINGTON STREETS. The third, reading of the Wellington City Streets Amendment Bill (Mr Aitken) was carried. The debate is reported elsewhere. - The House adjourned at 5.30. '* The House resumed at 7.30. THIRD READINGS. The Timaru Borough Drainage, Sewerage, and Loans Bill (Mr Hall-J ones) and the Wanganui Harbour Bill (Mr Willis) were read a third time. FIRST READING. The Evidence Bill was received from the Legislative Council and read a first time. AN AUCKLAND BILL. The Auckland Harbour Boa id and Devonport Borough Council Empowering Bill was considered in committee. Mr ALISON, who was in charge of the bill, explained that its object was to empower the Auckland Harbour Board to convey a certain portion of Shoal Bay, Auckland harbour, to the Devonport Borough Council for a public domain and recreation ground. The bill was reported without, amendment. DILWORTH TRUSTEES. The Dilworth Trustees Act, 1902, Amendment Bill (Mr Lawry) was taken in committee, and reported without amendment. DANNEVIRKE EDUCATION RESERVE. The Dannevirk'e Education Reserve Transfer Bill (Mr Hall) was also taken in committee, and reported with slight amendment. WANGANUI LIGHTING. When the Wanganui Suburbs Lighting Act, 1908, Amendment Bill (Mr Willis) was called for committee consideration, Mr Remington moved to report progress. This was lost after much argument by 42 votes to 12. After the supper adjournment, a motion to report progress was carried on tile voices, and the hill will be sent back to the Local Bills Committee. AUCKLAND HARBOUR BOARD. The Auckland Harbour Board Empowering Bill (Mr Kidd) was committed, and reported without amendment. EASTBOURNE ROAD DISTRICT. The Eastbourne Road District Bill (Mr Wilford) was taken in committee. After discussion Air Field moved to report progress. The motion to report progress was lost by 34 votes to 18. The bill was amended in the direction of simply creating Eastbourne into a borough, provision being made for the adjustment of accounts between the Hutt County Council and the Eastbourne, road district. The bill is to take effect from April Ist, 1906. The bill was reported with amendments, and the third reading was set down for Thursday next. COMMITTEE STAGES. The Auckland Waterworks Loans Sinking Funds and Borrowing Act Amendment (Mr Kidd), Gisborne Harbour (Mr Carroll), Havelock Commonage (Mr J. Allen), Oamaru Athenaeum and Mechanics’ Institute (Mr Duncan), Wallace Hospital District (Mr J. O. Thomson) Petone Borough Empowering '(Mr Wilford), and Eltham Public Hall (Mr Symes) Bills passed their committee stages without amendment. OTHER BILLS. The following local bills passed their second reading:—Oamaru Volunteer

Brilished Sit© (Mr Duncan), Nelson Hai> bour (Mr Graham), Dunedin City and Suburban Tramways and Act Amendment (Mr Millar), Education Board of the District of Otago Empowering (Mr Millar), Dunedin District liyre and Sewerage Amendment (Mr Miller) Wellington Hospital Contributors and Society for Relief of the Aged Needy Exchange (Mr Aitken) Petone Corporation Waterworks (Mr Wilford), Masterton Trust Lands Trust Empowering (MV Hogg), and Motueka Harbour Board (Mr R. McKenzie). The House roe© at midnight. FRIDAY, AUGUST 18. , The House met at 2.30. . the estimates. The House went into Committee of Supply for further consideration of the Estimates. Mr TAYLOR, on the first item in the (Magistrates’ vote, moved to reduce the salary (£700) of the Auckland Magistrate (Mr Kettle) by £IOO, as an indication that the salaries of the railway servants shopld. he raised first. Mr SEDDQN hoped the House would not agree to the reduction; £7OO a year was not too much in this case, seeing that one Magistrate got £BOO. The salary of District Judge Kettle Was the last that should be reduced. ; Mr LAiURENSON said District Judge Kettle was one of the most capable Judges in the colony, but the principle was the thing in view not the man, and it was felt that the lowerpaid men should receive consideration first. The - MINISTER FOR JUSTICE said !he would ask the House to negative the amendment. New Zealand, he thought, had a right to he proud of its Magistrates. Sir JOSEPH WARD regarded much of the criticism, that, had been made on the Estimates as simply electioneering, but it would tend to create a feeling in the minds of people outside the service that the departments of -- State might he used for purposes inimical to the State. If members had examined ths whole of the Estimates they would have found that a great, deal of consideration had been shown to the lower-paiid men. It was perfectly well known to the railway men that proposals were to he submitted this session for increasing the wages of a certain section of employees. For them the House would be asked to make provision. It would be better to wait until these -proposals were before the House, and not to prejudice the votes of hon members upon the Estimates of the Minister of Justice’s Department. The Ministry was fully in accord with the general desire to place- the lower-paid men on a better footing. Mr Taylor’s amendment was lost by 41 votes to 14. Mr McLACEXAN moved that the item “ Magistrate and Sheriff, , Timaru, Temuka, Ashburton, Geraldine, and Ra-kaia,” be reduced by £SO on account of his alleged leniency to sly grogtsellers in Ashburton. The Government was flouting the people of Ashburton by increasing the Magistrate’s salary. Mr HARDING moved a reduction of £1 on the item “ New Plymouth Magistrate,” on the grounds of the extraordinary judgment of that official as telegraphed to the newspapers in connection with the Commonwealth Hotel case at New Plymouth. The Magistrate reheard a case in which the landlord and a barmaid were fined for supplying an intoxicated Maori with liquor. On additional evidence being brought forward, the police withdrew the information, and the convictioncwas quashed. The Magistrate further laid down that a barmaid was an irresponsible party. The Hon Mr MoGOWAN said that as long as he was Minister for Justice he would not interfere with the decisions of Magistrates. He would inquire into the matter referred to. Mr Harding’s amendment was lost on the voices. Mr HARDY said he lived in the Ashburton district. There was no fairer or harder-worked Magistrate than the Magistrate at Ashburton, and he was very glad that his services had been acknowledged by the increase in salary given him. Mr FISHER would vote for Mr McLachlan’s amendment on the ground that no increases should be made in salaries over £SOO until better provision was made for men who were unable to earn sufficient for their families. Mr DUTHIE would vote against the amendment in the interests of pure administration. The Hon Mr McGOWAN claimed than as a whole the colony had a right to he proud of its Magistracy. - Members of the Magisterial Bench desired to do justice to all parties, not because of theii salaries, hut because of their inherent feeling of right. Mr J. O. THOMSON said if the Magistrate at Ashburton was not doing bis duty, and if the amendment was carried, the Minister for Justice should terminate the engagement of the MagistT The Hon Mr McGO WAN replied that the Magistrate at Ashburton was one Of the oldest Stipendiary Magistrates m the colony, and had done excellent

work. He was a man of undeniably high character. If the Magistrates and Justice Department were judged from a standpoint of fair play he would not fear either for the department or the Magistrates. Mr FISHER said: it was the power of Ministerial patronage to which they objected. It should not he left to the Ministry to say “ You shall get £SO and you £IOO ” increase,. but there should be an equitable sliding scale of increases, according to length of service. Mi- MoLachlan’s amendment was rejected by 51 votes to 9. Mr MASSEY, coming hack to his amendment moved earlier in the day, said if, as argued by the Premier, it would he necessary to determine the appointments of the Magistrates if they decided to give them life tenure, that was the strongest argument in favour of the contention that there were Magistrates on the benches who were not fitted to occupy their positions. There was a very strong feeling that some of the Magistrates owed their appointments to political influence having been brought to bear. Sir JOSEPH WARD said the Opposition could not point to a single instance where a Magistrate’s ability did not fit him for the position, or where it had been shown that Magistrates were incapable of carrying out the duties devolving upon them. Members had been urging that the salaries of their Magistrates should be increased, and yet when this was done objection was raised, and it was argued that the _ Magistrates should he placed in the same position as Supreme Court Judges. He did not think that any of the men on the Magisterial bench had any fear of the Administration. Mr JAMES ALLEN said there could be no doubt that political influence had been brought to bear not only in regard to Magistrates, but in respect to some Judges. _ Sir WILLIAM RUSSELL said, in spite of what had been stated in the course of debate, the fact remained there was a feeling throughout the colony that there was political influence more than there ought to he, and that the Magistrates of the day were in the power of the Ministry. It was wrong that it should he felt by the people that there was a power behind the Magistrates. The people should be led to feel that the Magistrates were absolutely supreme, and surely it should be possible to bring that about by appointing them for a period, or for life. It was not desirable that their Magistrates should feel that because of a decision from the Bench, they were liable to have their salaries reduced. The positions of the Magistrates should be made unassailable.

Mr SEDDON asked, was it because a single Magistrate had dealt with a certain case in which a member of Parliament was interested, that they should change a law which had been A&orking well for so many . years ? He held the opinion that if a Magistrate remained in a place too long there might be unconscious bias, though he might be the straigjhtest man in the world; hence, ther§ should be periodical removal, . a policy that was adopted by the Atkinson Government, and, so far as the present Administration was concerned, perhaps the only complaint was that it had not followed in that respect what had been done by their predecessors. As a whole, the administration of justice in this colony compared very favourably with any part of the British Empire. There had never been any scandal, or any reason to complain of the Magistrates, and that being so, it rested with those who desired a chance to show sufficient cause. Mr Massey’s amendment was lost by 34 votes to 27.