PARLIAMENT.

Oamaru Mail, Volume IV, Issue 1319, 20 July 1880, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

Y 7 i " ■//" July 19. • In the HouSe of Bidgresentatives today, J ! Mr. Hall, in reply,to Mr. Shrimski, skid vtlie Government had: not given any permission to have the member for Cheviot's speech re the Civil Service Commission printed in pamphlet form and circulated post free. Mr.> Hutchinson said the Reporters and Printing Committee allowed any member •to have his speech printed separately on paying the cost. - Sir George Grey, speaking to a question of privilege, referred to the remark by the "member~for" Rangitikei in his speech on the Maori Prisoners Bill to the effect that Mr. Tawhia had attempted to get money paid in advance of his expenses as a West Coast Commissioners, and that on being refused he declined to act on the Commission,, alleging that he was dissatisfied with his co-Commissioners. Mr. Bryce, with the permission of Mr. Tawhia, said Mr...Tawhia asked for an advance to pay the expense of a survey he had left going on. -He (Br. Bryce) replied that he was not Auditor of Accounts, but he did not think the -Audit Office would consent to such an item. At all events he was most averse to tlie advance of any money, in case it might, be said the Government attempted to influence the Commissioner. Mr. Tawhia also asked for an advance to purchase a watch; which ;was likewise declined on the same grounds. When he made these applications he was perfectly acquainted with the gentlemen who were.to act with him oh theCommisT sion. : Mr. Tawhia said that at the interview with the Native Minister he told him that certain moneys were set aside for expenses, and that he could draw on that fund if he liked for travelling expenses. The reply, he made was that he did not require the' money for travelling expenses, but- .that he required to pay for a survey. The Native Minister replied that it would not be right. He then asked for something on account of travelling expenses. Mr. Bryce gave him an order for money, and on presenting the order, the. person desired him to furnish an account of what he required. He could not do that, and declined to take any money. He then desir§d to. have the expense he had been put to in eoming to Wellington refunded (L 9), and he had never been paid it.. Sir W. Fox said he had never made the imputation attributed to him. What he wished to contradict was the assertion that Mr. Tawhia refused to have anything to do with the Commission immediately . he knew who were to be his colleagues, Mr. Montgomery resumed the debate on the second reading of the Maori Prisoners Bill. He spoke against the Bill as imprudent and unjust, and as depriving the prisoners of all rights of trial. Mr. Bowen said those prisoners had been arrested not for a simple act of trespass, but because the country was in a state of war. What the Bill meant to say .to the natives wag this ! We arrest you!, not for qrjme you have actually been guiity of', but because you were really at war with us. The whole thing was perfectly well understood by the natives, though all technicalities should be dispensed with, and the question should be faced as one of detention in consequence of war or threatened outbreak.

Mr. Ballance scouted the idea that a disturbance would he created if the men were liberated. He contended that war was more likely to result from the unjust detention than from their liberation. It was Te Whiti who waa responsible for the ploughing outrages. It was he who ought to b§ punished. The prisoners had been detained for over 12 months, and he wanted to know how long that detention was to continue. For all they could see, these men might be kept jn prison till Doomsday. He oriticised the Native Commission's report, and showed that its recommendations were not at all commensurate with the promises made by successive Governments to the natives. It was the Government of the member for Rangitikei, which was in office in 1869, that was responsible for the present state of affairs on the West Coast, Jf thpy accepted this maasurej what assurance had they of any finality m it ? He was not satisfied with the polioy of the Government; still, he was not prepared to accept the responsibility of refusing the measure, seeing that the Government had assured them that it was necessai'y for the peace of the country. Te Whiti had said that these prisoners would never be tried, and this Bill practically carried out that so-called prophecy, That" was a most improper thing to do, an 4 h,e advised the Government to insert a clause providing for the trial of the prisoners. That would deprive Te Whiti of an opportunity of saying that his prophecies had turned out correct. Mr. Gisborne said the principle of the Bill was not the postponement of trial, but the abolition of a trial a]tqgpther. Thjs was objection. , It would be obviated' if the nominal offence of which the prisoners were guilty was riot,- which was punishable by fine and imprisonment, but he thought the offence something more. He believed it amounted to treason, consequently it waa not true that the offence in itself was a trivial one, and that any trial would simply have subjected them at the very most to a few days' detention. He objected to the Bill, and in Committee hoped there would be objection to the power asked for of allowing the Government to be judges of the proposed release, thereby subjecting the prisoners liberated to be committed again to prison. That was an innovation of the law, and one whioh ought not to be tolerated. The courts of venue, and these courts alone, should "be constituted judges in the matter. He would not be prepared to take the responsibility of voting against the Bill, still he desired it to be understood that he did not concur in many of its ■ provisions, and hoped to see these modified and amended. Mr. Hall said the Government was anxious to allqw these to go the very first moment they could do aa with any degree of safety. He quoted from the Irish Peace Protection Bill of 1871, to .show that the power asked on the present occasion was not excessive or unprecedented, but that on the contrary the Bill now before the House was less arbitrary than that measure. They had been told to put these prisoners on trial, but he would ask what was the use of such a proceeding. Jt would only be the means of : detainiug them longer than they were likely to be detained. He denied that the Maoris were an oppressed people. They had been a misgoverned people, but not oppressed. A large native expenditure had gone on for their benefit. Their properties were freed from rating and taxation and yet they were called an oppressed people. If they were oppressed by anything it was by their false friends and want of industry and application. It was that th/it £;ept them in the social scale. Thp position of things at present , was altogether exceptional, so much so that no law {is it stood cpuld be brought tq apply., . That was the reason they claimed exceptional legislation. Eor years back these natives had prevented roads and telegraphs being made, and in open defiance of the law attempted to assert their rights at the dictation of their fanatical chief. These were the men'they were asked to liberate and allow to return to all the iriichievous influence to which they had been exposed. The circumstances were altogether exceptional, and he did hqpij the would not refuse them the legislation 50 urgently demanded. Heihoped the time was. not, distant When it \7ould be §;ife to allow these men to return to' tfieir homes, but. that time had not! y§.t arrived. 1 ,r Thefaction of the Opposition in the matter was unfair, but the

late Native Minister (Mr. Sheehan) —and i he should always gratefully remember his 1 conduct on this occasion—had risen above party, and had acted in a truly patriotic i manner. He was indeed the only patriot i on that side of the House, and deserved ; the highest credit for his action in the i matter. Mr. Brown spoke in opposition to the i Bill. Mr. Pyke said the Government, like Bassanio,said, " I beseech you wrest once the law to your authority ; to a great right do a little wrong ; " but what was the reply of Portia—"lt must not be ; 'twill be recorded as a precedent. Many an error by the same example will rush into the . State ; it cannot be." He thought native affairs would never be properly adminis- i tered until they had a South Island Native ! Minister, who knew nothing of native i mysteries. They will always be threatened with war whenever they hesitated to give the Native Minister his own way. It was done to force members, against their will and against their consciences. Major Atkinson's threat of resignation was intended to frighten those who regarded Sir G. Grey as a frightful bogie, and who would rather see Beelzebub himself on the Government He did* not believe Major Atkinson meant his threat, but threats of this kind were becoming rather common. He reviewed the bearings of the Bill at considerable length, and strongly condemned the measure, contending that it was a violation of the Treatyof Waitangi, which assured to the natives all the rights of British subject. Mr. Tainui asked why it was the. member for Egmont, who had been in the previous Government, had neglected to return the lands, as promised. It was Government that was to blame, and not the natives, who had waited for the fulfilment of promises. The natives ' had ploughed up European lands for the purpose of getting their claims looked into. If the natives were released and sent back to their districts, he thought there would be no disturbance. The Maoris imprisoned in Otago in 1872 had been released, and; on being sent home had remained peaceable ever since. The Bill was meant to intimidate the natives, for it provided that, they should remain in,prison and not be allowed to return to Taranaki. Unless Government dealt fairly with native lauds, the soldiers would have to remain a long time on the West Coast. Mr. Macandrew had great difficulty as to what should be done with the Bill. He looked on the action towards the natives from first to last as a blunder, and this Bill appeared to be no exception. If guilty, the prisoners should be tried and convicted ; if innocent, acquitted. The West Coast Commissioners' report tended to convince him that they, and not the Maoris, were greatly in the wrong. A Maori member ought to have been in the Cabinet to advise Ministers. He would like to see native affairs administered by one of their own race. Had that been the oase, he believed these Maoris might have been at liberty before this. He would oppose the Bill. Mr. Kelly said the graveness of the offence committed by the prisoners was this—They had endangered the peace of the country. It was plain the law as it stood did not provide the remedy. He would support the Bill, believing that the best means for the settlement of the difficulty was opening up the district with roads preparatory to settlement. Mr, Heeves considered this a most iniquitous measure, and he would vote against it. He was surprised to hear any member stand up and say he intended supporting it. Rather than see the measure go. through, he would use every form of the House to oppose it, and he called upon members of his mind to stonewall the measure. Capt. Russell said they had heard a good deal about constitutional law. They appeared, however, to have overlooked the fact that the great aim and object of all law was to protect the many against the few, and that was exactly what this measure aimed at. He believed that they were bound to keep these men in close custody until the country, and more especially the rebel Maoris, had had time to digest the Commissioner's report, and see for themselves that the Government aimed at doing them substantial justice. He was prepared to support the Ministry fully. He acknowledged the general capacity displayed by the late Native Minister, and said it contrasted favorably with other members of that Government. Mr. Hutchison strongly opposed the Bill. Mr, .Lundon argued that the proper polioy would be to bring the natives back when they had the troops there, and not wait until the troops were removed. He would vote against the Bill as being altogether unfair in its proposals. Mr. Ireland announced his intention of voting against the Bill. He applied the case of these promises to. themselves, stating that if the case was theirs, there would be an outcry from, one .end of the Colony to the other. He would do to others as he would be done by. Mr. Hursthouse thought a good deal of sentiment had been talked about these natives asserting their rights. If they had rights, they had a constitutional means of asserting these rights. He was told they had; not the money to do so, but he happened to know otherwise. Great interests were at stake, and even although a slight injustice might result, he was bound to acquiesce in the measure as being desired for the good of the Colony as a whole. He could testify from observation that the prisoners were quite jolly. Mr, Speight said if the proposals had beeen made to continue the detention of these men for State reasons no one would have objected to it. If they had provided for a fair trial there could have been no objection to it. The emission of these provisions was its .objectionable feature. They could make no distinction between natives or Europeans in a matter that involved the rights and liberties of the whole community. Even although these meq had bgen taken red-handed, they had no right to adopt this course. The necessities were not so great as they had been represented. It was known that there were men amongst the prisoners who had no right to be there. The, proceeding was not at all calculated to impress the native mind with a sense of our justice or I humanity. He denied, as had been asserted, that a similar case had occurred in Ireland, or that the history of afforded any precedent. Mr. Fisher argued that, aa oompared with last session, the circumstances were altogether different. Such being the case, he could now vote against this measure, although he had supported the former one. He would move as an amendment that it was undesirable to proceed with the second reading of the Bill until the native policy of the Government had been declared.

Mr. Tole seconded the amendment, arguing that flo great would he cause 4 hy tested strongly against the Bill in its present shape, but if altered to provide for temporary detention, followed by fair; trial, there could be no pbjeotioi} to it, Mr. Harris looked on the Bill in its present shape as a wanton piece of cruelty. He would oppose it to the utmost. Majpr Te Wheoro said if the lands improperly taken were restored, there would be no further trouble and no danger in releasing the prisoners. Mr. Shrimski opposed the Bill, but thought it was no good prolonging th(j disjcussiop. ' : " TVfr. < Beeves gaid, after, consulting hjs -friends, lie had determined to riot carry out liis ririginal' intention of raising the forms of the Hoti'se to intercept the Bill.; He advised the"; Government; not ; to press' the motiori to an issue until

they had the whole native policy before them.

Mr. Tawhia thought a wrong was committed in sending these men to the other island, and announced that ho would vote asrainst the Bill, urging that the prisoners ought to have been brought to trial. Mr. Macandrew said he would voto against the Bill, urging that the prisoners ought to have been brought to trial. Mr. Macandrew said he would vote against the Bill. His reason was that they were not keeping faith with tho Maoris. Mr. Hamlin opposed the Bill. At one o'clock the House divided: Ayes, 28 ; noes, 14. The amendment being negatived, another division took place on the second reading, which was carried by 30 to 14. The following is the division list Ayes, 30 : Messrs. Allwright, Atkinson, Bain (teller), Ballance, Beetham, Bowon, Bryce, Dick, Gisborne, Hall, Hirst, Hurst, Hnrsthouse, Johnston, Kelly, Kenny,, M'Caughan, M'Lean, Murray, Pitt, Holies ton, Russell (teller), Seymour, Shanks, Sheehan, Stevens, Sutton, Swanson, Trimble, and Whitaker. Noes, 14: Messrs. de Lautour, Fisher (J. T.), George, Grey, Harris (teller), Hutchison (teller), Lundon, Montgomery, Seddon, Tawhia, Te Wheoro, Tole, Tomoana, and Turnbull. The House adjourned at 1.15 a.m.