PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 4171, 3 August 1874, Page 3

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Friday, July 31. STATE FOBESTS. Our report of the debate on the New Zealand Forests Bill concluded with the speech by Mr. Stafford. The following is a summary of some of the speeches made by speakers who followed : , , , _ . Mr. G. B. Parkeb and Mr. McGlashan supported the Bill. L , Mr. WAKEFIELD also supported the Bill, and called upon the Superintendents to say how they regarded the measure, Mr. J. L. GILLIES, while in favor of forest conservation, protested the proposal to set aside such a large quantity of land for carrying out the object in view. Was it possible for the General Government to occupy three per, cent of the land of the Colony in planting new forests and conserving existing ones ? The quantity was much too great. In the Middle Island the forests were mostly centred in large blocks, whilst there were also large tracts of country where there was no timber at all. Where the timber was massed there could be no settlement unless a portion of it were cleared, and it was apparent if these forests were to be conserved it was tantamount to saying that those of the country could not be occupied. To districts where there was no timber the attention of the Government should be .directed, because there forest planting was really wanted. But so long as Provincial Governments remained they weie the best able to carry on planting successfully. He objected to the clause providing for the relinquishment of Provincial liberty in respect of railways. It seemed as if the General Government had a private purse. The Pienuei must have forgotten that whether the debt remained to be paid by the Provinces or was paid by the General Government, the people had to pay it. He could not conceive why such a clause was introduced into, the Bill, unless as a tempting bait to be held out to those Provinces that might think they would gain by being released from the debt he had referred to. If the Bill was so amended as to confine it to forest conservation and new forests where wanted, and that the quantity of land taken should be only that actually required, then the measure would have his support, but as it stood he must oppose it. Mr. RICHARDSON explained that the intention of the Bill was that cutting and planting should go on conjointly, and that the revenues drawn from the forests should he expended in improving existing forests and planting new ones. He entirely disagreed with the idea that the Provincial Governments would be found- antagonistic to the scheme. To his mind, there was no reason whatever why the Provincial Governments should not assent in carrying out the scheme with as much advantage as they were now doing in regard to immigration, but that any disjointed scheme earned out from different points of view by the several Provinces would succeed was very unlikely. He took entire exception to the observations of tbe member for Ross about the success of tree planting, as far as it had gone. There was nothing like a thousand acres planted, and compared with the timber destroyed, there could be noquestion that there wasnothing approaching a tithe of it planted. In Canterbury, where the planting was most carried on, he had himself seen in one single forest a larger amount of timber destroyed than all the planting in the Colony put together. -Not only did the Government desire the Bill read a second time, but were prepared to spend a considerable time in discussing it and any amendments that might be offered, because their wish was to pass the best measure ou the subject they could. Mr. T. B. GILLIES expressed his regret, which almost amounted to annoyance, at being compelled to oppose the Bill. He would have been satisfied if the Premier had confined himself to what had been foreshadowed ■ in his speech, when he said he “ hoped that a considerable portion of the session would be devoted to the discussion of such au important matter.” He objected to the question being made one as between the Provinces and the Colony. He was not sure, it was always well to have too much bush, as it brought too much rain. (Laughter.) In Canterbury and Hawke’s Bay, it might be advantageous to create plenty of bush, but there wore some parts of the country where it was desirable to remove it. Had the measure been confined to reserving certain portions of the plain land in various parts of the Colony, he would gladly have supported it. Confine it to that, and he would support it still. But if they wanted to" alienate a percentage of the laud all over the Colony for the purpose of making revenue by cutting and planting, he thought the Provincial Governments could do it better than any other body. The General Government wanted to have too much to do when they wanted to look after all the forests of the Colony. The best way to preserve the forests was to sell them to private individuals, and if it was to their interest to preserve them they would do so. He would not add his tribute of praise to the Premier, and would venture to say that many of the facts and figures regarding onr forests were fallacious, Dr. Hector never saying anything like what was attributed to him about the condition of our forests .in 1830 ; nor were the figures said to have been given by him furnished by him. They might as well have put in 16 B.C. or 16 A.D., or any other remote period as 1830. He had no doubt the estimate made by Dr. Hector was of the original forest, looking at the formation of the country. At aU events, if he did say he gave the condition of our forests in 1830, he (Mr. Gillies) would in future give him up as being a scientific man. As to the calculation by Mr. Calcutt regarding the probable profits of planting, surely any of them could make a calculation that our oyster beds could be so managed as to enable us to pay off not only our debt, but even the national debt of Great Britain in less than thirty years. (Laughter.) He could see in the Bill indications that pliant Superintendents would meet with more favor than stiff and sturdy ones who would not bow down before the General Government. He must regard the Bill as an attempt to seize the forest lands of the Provinces, and to place in the hands of the Government powers that should alone belong to the House. - He desired to impress the House strongly that 3 per cent, of the whole area, whether acquired or not, was to be taken out of the. land acquired. Power was asked to deal with tbe land, if merely in the way of planting of timber for railway sleepers to make a profit out of them, as suggested by the Minister for Public Works. Mr. RICHARDSON observed that the member for Auckland City West was misinterpreting his remarks. Ho had been very careful to explain that the intention of the Bill was that all revenues derived from these lands were to be used for the purpose of improving these lauds and creating forests. (Hear). Mr. GILLIES could agree with an experiment, but this was no experiment, or if one, an experiment at the expense of the Provinces. It had been tauntingly said that the effect of the present system was to drive them to Oregon for sleepers, but the real reason for that was the shutting up from private enterprise of our magnificent kauri forests in Auckland by the vicious Native land legislation. He objected to these tentative Bills. Once upon the statute book they were axfficult to bo got' off, especially when they entailed salaries. Lot them have a Bill well thought over—not one that would be a disgrace to them and a source of future oppression and injustice. He did not like the bait held out to the Provinces in the Bill He regretted he had to oppose the Bill, because ho agreed with the idea Mr. FITZHERBERT was startled at being asked to hurry forward tins Bill, and to put it on the statute book. He considered the experiment might be made both interesting and valuable, hut the latter only after practical investigation and data—not upon data derived wholly from other countries and encyclopedias, and entirely inapplicable to this country, where the circumstances differed. One fundamental error pervaded the whole debate and the scheme itself. They were, as it wore, adumbrated with voluminous papers which would

cause them to legislate for New Zealand, with its 900 miles of coast, as if it were embraced in one degree of latitude. The Bill asked them to apply to the North Island, two-thirds of which was forest land, the same provisions that were to be applied to the treeless plains of the Middle Island. Why wore they called upon so suddenly to grapple with a subject of such admitted magnitude. If it was necessary for the salvation of the country to take onethird of the land of the Colony, he must remark that it meant talcing over two millions of the choicest lands of the Colony, which was really equal to double that number of acres, taking the good land with the bad. If he were asked in a culinary point of view to distinguish between “preserving” and “ conserving," he could not tell the difference. The purpose of the Bill, though very well disguised, was not to enforest New Zealand, but to disforest the Provinces. _ The only, mistake was that its introduction was not entrusted to one of the Native ministerial colleagues, because the Bill would then have been symbolical of an aboriginal custom when on the -war path, to cover their advance of deadly intent by -holding in their hands forest boughs, and it was therefore an artistic or inartistic blunder of the Premier not to entrust the matter to one of his colleagues of the Native race, because then it would have been excused on the ground of force of habit or nature. (Laughter.) Judging from the speech of one hon. member, it would appear as if Superintendents had been self-elected, and it were a high crime or misdemeanor to be a Superintendent. One would think Superintendents had usurped powers, instead of representing the mass of the people. Taking the scope and intention of the Bill as far as Wellington was concerned, it meant taking away half a million’s worth of its estate. If the wealthy Province of Canterbury were prepared to abandon a like proportion of that Province, let the members. say so. Having shown the magnitude of the proposal contained in the Bill, he must remind them of a saying by the Premier last year that not one mile of railway was to be constructed without land being taken for it, and to tell them that this proposal veiled the intent of taking that which dared not be taken openly. This Bill was only a large advance of the rejected policy of last session. What was the equivalent to be given for these four millions of acres .to, be taken ? Why a remission of 1 per cent, upon the railway loan, and at the expiration of thirty years any liabilities upon the construction of the railways were to become solely Colonial. We would pay in thirty years some four millions for these public works, and then the Colony would take them all to itself. Looking at the result of floating of our million and a half loan recently, there was good reason to think that our credit in the Home market was at its zenith. To show how unequally the measure pressed upon the various Provinces, he felt' certain that as some Provinces had no forest laud to be taken, and as Wellington had considerable, that would be immediately pounced upon. Let them test the practicability of the scheme which was to pay £IO,OOO a-year to manage two million acres of land of the Colony. Could anyone choose to imagine any more inadequate means to manage such a quantity of land ? Most of them knew enough of the subject to see the absurdity and impracticability of the scheme. How could newly planted trees be preserved without fencing them in, and £IO,OOO a year was allowed to manage and fence in all that land ! That alone was sufficient evidence to. show that it was never intended to be done. If the desire had been an earnest one, and the House was asked to introduce from Germany twenty or thirty of those men who had been brought up in the art of forestry, to send them to all parts of the Colony, and after a period of experience to come down again with an intelligent Bill based upon experience, the House would vote £25,000 or even £50,000 if necessary. How ridiculous was the request that they should make haste to place this Bill with all its faults upon the statute book, and amend it from year to year. This was like building a ship from a model, the model being as large as the ship. Yet this was the advice of the hon. member for Timaru. He had no objection to try the experiment, if the model were only of reasonable proportions, but this was only an attempt to capture their landed estate, and create a large staff of officials, which would not lead to any good results. Mr. K. WOOD said four points had come out with considerable clearness. Pirst, New Zealand was rapidly destroying her valuable timber property. Second, that something' should be done. Third, that nobody knew what was to be done. Fourth, that the majority of the House were decidedly of opinion that the Bill should not be gone on with beyond the second reading this session. To show the rate at which our forests were disappearing, he mentioned that when he first came to Auckland, he passed through a forest which he then thought was eternal, but where now no vestige of forest was ■to be seen. When the Premier brought down the Bill, the House was certainly under the impression that the Government did not intend to proceed with the Bill this session, and members had, consequently, not given to it the attention they otherwise would. He was in that category; but from what he had seen of the Bill, he concurred in every word that had fallen fronf the hon. member for the Hutt. He (Mr., Wood) asserted it was the duty of Superin-., tendenta to oppose the Bill, which in realityplaced the cart before the horse. The House was in a very difficult position. The Government could, no doubt, carry the Bill through if they liked; but they could not do so and have a short session. The provisions of the Bill, which embraced a policy for the whole Colony, could not be discussed under a month. He would recommend postponement of the measure, and the Government to accept the advice of their staunchest supporters, and to adopt the suggestions of the Superintendent of Taranaki. The Bill caused the grave apprehensions of the people of Auckland, where so many were dependent upon the timber-trade of the Province. \ On the motion of Mr. Murray, the, debate was adjourned till Tuesday.