New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 2.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4509, 2 September 1875, Page 2

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 2.

Me. Hom.eston carried a resolution yesterday for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the truth of certain alleged breaches of the Disqualification Act during the present Parliament. No division was taken on the subject ; and it would have been better if the motion had been allowed to pass without any remarks other than those of the mover. The statement made by the member for Avon was, in the circumstances, as temperate as it could well have been; and if Sir Donald McLean had contented himself with signifying his assent to the motion for a select committee, no remark of ours would have been necessary. But Sir Donald went on to defend the land purchase branch of the Native Department; and in his warmth he made use of a rather unguarded expression, to the effect that he did not care whether a certain transaction in land on the west coast of this province was legal or not, he was convinced it was for the general good that it should be completed. Jn other words, that although it might not be a legal transaction it was one which sound policy dictated. But this was not the point of the question at all. Nor was it, except incidentally, raised by Mr. Rolleston's motion. The question was one solely affecting the purity and independence of Parliament; —the public policy of the transaction was not under consideration, until Sir D. McLean brought it into review, and drew out a rejoinder from Mr. Rolleston. There is this, however, to be said in vindication of the Native Minister, that he has been subjected to a harrassing cross-fire of inuendo and accusation since the opening of the session, and he may be excused if, for a moment, he forgot that he was not called upon to stand on the defensive.

Coming to the motion proposed by Mr. Rolieston, we have this to say, that the circumstances alluded to by him, and generally admitted as correct, compel the House to take the matter up. The Legislature cannot too jealously guard its independence and privileges, and if it has reason to suppose that these have been tampered with in any way, it is its duty to investigate the matter with scrupulous impartiality. We offer no opinion whatever as to the legal consequences of the transactions in question, so far as they affect the position of certain members of the Legislature. That is altogether a matter of proof ; but it is perfectly clear that what a gentleman may properly do in his private capacity he cannot do as a member of the Legislature, without forfeiting his seat. And it was this distinction which the Native Minister did not draw. Whether the Government did right or wrong in the land transactions alluded to is one question ; whether members of both Houses, by participating in them, have forfeited their seats under the Disqualification Act, is another, and a different one altogether. The first is a political question, and will be decided doubtless by the majority as a party matter ; the second concerns the honor and independence of Parliament, and should be decided on its merits. The Government have nothing to do with it. If members placed themselves voluntarily in a doubtful position that is their affair ; and we trust the House will approach it in a candid spirit. As two members of the Legislative Council, Messrs. Jakes Williamson and C. J. Taylor were named in connection with the Piako swamp transaction, we presume the Upper House will inquire how far those gentlemen have infringed (if at all) the letter and spirit of the Disqualification Act. Manifestly, the affair cannot rest where it is. The Government consulted the Solicitor-General regarding Mr. Buckland's case, but as all the papers are not before him, a final opinion has not been given. In so doing, Ministers manifest a becoming spirit. They desire to assist the House in every possible way ; but the question of privilege having been raised it" is the bounden duty of both Houses to set themselves right with the law and the country.

Mr. Montgomery moved for a return the other day, " showing the amount to be " charged to each province during the " current year, to make up the sum of " £127,520, for which credit lias been " taken in the estimate of ways and "■ means, under the head of ' contribu- " ' tions from Land fund for interest on "'cost of railways completed.'" The following is the return laid before the House of Eepresentativea : Auckland £19,067 Taranaki 2,330 ■Wellington 1,702 Hawke'sßay 0,230 Nelson .. .. 4,028 Marlborough .. • 5,703 Canterbury 64,807 Westland 2,422 Otago 30,405

Estimated Total .. .. £127,520 A foot-note to this return intimates that these figures show the estimated amount chargeable for interest on monies expended on the construction of railways opened, and to be opened, during the financial year, after deducting therefrom the profits on the working of the lines, estimated at £49,724. It is clear, therefore, that for the present at all events, the land fund must bear a considerable portion of the interest on capital invested in railways. As the country fills up, however, and'production increases, this state of things will be changed, but it is too much to expect' any more favorable result at present.'' A noticeable feature in this returauis the large deficit which Canterbury will be compelled to make good out of land fund, as compared with Otago ; but it must be borne in mind that* Canterbury has recently opened a considerable length of branch railways, the working expense of which, added to the interest on capital, will be a serious charge for some time to come. Ultimately

no doubt the branch lines, acting as feeders to the main lines of railway, will, recoup any temporary loss ; but mean--1 while the land fund must make good the deficit. As, however, these district railways'are of special advantage to owners of- property, it is a point worth considering whether a rate should not be levied in aid of revenue. Should the railway fund, through some unforeseen circumstance, be less than the estimate, it would become a serious matter for the entire community to have the colonial estate sold to pay interest. We do not think»this is likely to occur, but it is not altogether beyond the range of probability in some cases, wherefore we throw out the suggestion touching local rates in aid of revenue. This principle is generally recognised and acted upon in the United States, where the people are taught to depend as little as possible upon the Government. In this country, however, it is the custom for the people in their individual and collective capacity, to look to the Government for everything. It is a recognition of this vicious principle by the State that has led to the arrangement under which any deficit on the working of constructed railways should be charged against the land fund of the respective provinces. If the true principle of local responsibility for local works, (which branch railways unquestionably are,) had been recognised, the late Colonial Treasurer would not have had to confess that a very large sum had been diverted from colonial undertakings to purely local objects. This is one of the outcomes of the provincial system, and its injurious eiiects will survive long after provincial institutions have been abolished. It is to be hoped, however, that the public works and immigration policy may ao contribute to the settlement of the country, that the traffic receipts on constructed railways will soon be sufficient to cover all charges that can be taken to account against them.