GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 7316, 28 July 1885, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. • Monday, July 27. .

Evening Sitting, The House met at 7.30. NEW MEMBEK. ■■'. Mr Grace, the member for Tauranga, took the oath, and his seat.

SAVI.VOS BANKS AND PAUCEL POST Sir JULIUS VOGEL introduced ii Bill-to Amend the "Savings Bank Act 1858" and Parcel Post Bill. DISTHESS. On the motion that the amendments in the Distress Bill be agreed to, Mr O'CALLAGHAN moved the committal of the bill for the consideration of clause 6. -uMronyfsa to -m: — ' - 1"-1 ——l— ' The bill was then reported with amendments, read a third time, and passed. JiANK NOTES. On the motion for the committal of the Bank Notes Security Bill, Sir JULIUS VOGEL said the bill would make an important alteration in banking business, and would operate injuriously on creditors who had dealings with banks in the past. He said a new clause would have to be inserted to make it of any practical use. The clause was to the effect that any special or private act dealing with any acts passed by the General Assembly, shall be deemed to be repealed. He would suggest the postponement of the committal of the bill for the present. Mr W. F. BUCKLAND said the bill would utterly fail in the object for which it was brought forward. He contended it would benefit the banks more than poor people for whose benefit it was intended. He'thought it would not affect tho object in view, which was to protect the small holders of money. He moved that the bill be committed this day six months. Mr DOWNIB STEWART looked on the bill as an imperfect one, although it intended to effect a good object. It would be another species of retrospective legislation. There was no great demand for the bill, which lie considered unnecessary. Mr SAMUEL also thought the bill was unnecessary. He opposed the committal. Mr J. C. BROWN supported the bill. The Hon. R. STOUT said that as the bill required some amendments, he would suggest that the mover should postpone the bill to some other occasion. After some further discussion, Mr DARGAVILLE said the debate had taken him somewhat by surprise, as the ordinary course would have been to object to the bill on its second reading. He replied to the various objections made to the bill. Sir JULIUS VOGEL said it was desirable that those who held notes should be protected. Liabilites incurred before the passing of the act should be a first charge They must also have regard to the fact that a large amount of money was held by banks as fixed, deposits. If these were no longer a first charge it would-materially affect those securities.

The motion for committal of the bill was then put, and resulted in a tie—ayes, 33; noes, 33. The SPEAKER gave his casting-vote with the ayes.

On the question being put that the House go into committee on the bill, The motion was carried by 35 to 33. Mr DARGAVILLE moved to report progress on the bill.—Agreed to. ANOTHER GAMBLING HIM. Mr FITZHERBEJIT moved the second reading of the Gaming and Lotteries Act Further Amendments. He said the bill would be amended in committee in the direction of allowing friendly societies to raffle lands or other gifts awarded to them. He explained that the present bill was intended to allow poor people who could not avail themselves of the totalisator to participate in small sweeps on the racecourse not exceeding £1. He hoped the House would pass this really liberal measure

**}' *E-A.GOOK said he had hoped the mover of the bill would have accepted the amendment which the Upper House made in the previous bill. He would suggest that lie should allow the question to be decided upon that amendment.

4., M, r. BR*Gk Si'"l lie should be sorry to see the bill become law, especially with the amendment which the mover said he intended proposing. He denied that the people of the Colony were m favour of gambling.. He considered it was one of the worst vices to which a community could be addicted, aud gambling should not be tolerated by the State.

Mr D. STEWART said the House was not disposed to encourage legislation of this kind He moved that the bill be read this day sixmonths.

Mr W. FRASER suggested that the bill should be withdrawn, and the question settled on the amendment inserted by the Legislative Council. He said half of the consultations were got up for swindling purposes. Mr SAMUEL said if the Legislative Council's amendments wero agreed to they would "not extend to shooting and athletics, which he thought very desirable. He contended that at every race meeting in tho Colony this law was broken with respect to tho raising of sweeps, and such breaking of the law was demoralising to the people. He trusted tho House would' read the bill a second time.

The Hon. R. STOUT hoped the bill would be withdrawn, as he looked on it as a waste of time to discuss it further.

Mr HOBBS was surprised at the mover of tbo bill going on with it after the very emphatic declaration on the subject made by the House when his (Mr Hobbs') bill was before thorn. He strongly condemned the spirit of gambling carried on at racecourses.

Mr BROWN supported the bill. Sir FITZHERBERT contended that the amendments made by the Legislative Council only referred to .small sweeps got up on the course, and made no reference to acquaties or shooting, which his bill provided for. The motion for second reading was lost by 21 to 32. A DUI.TK NATION. Mr BEBTHAM moved the second reading of the Adulteration Prevention Act Amendment Bill. Ho explained that the bill was intended to provide for what properly should be called

faucy bread, and was brought in to remove an injustice which was at present felt by bakers. . Agreed to,

J?ltlEKDlA' SOCIE'I'IES. . Mr O'OONOR moved the Committal of the Friendly Societies BilL He said the bill was introduced.at the; request.of several friendly sdciuties. It prdVidcd tliat everything over 5 per cent, of the surplus funds of a lodge should be at the disposal.of the lodges and go into the general management fund. 3Ur HURSTHOUSE opposed the bill. He said that only a few of the lodges in the district represented by Mr O'Oonor were in favour of the proposed change jii the law. He wished the House would give consideration to the conditions of friendly societies. If the CJovcrninentallowed the Government auditor to audit the accounts of those lodges they would be conferring a great boon on them. He moved, that the bill be read a second time.that day six months . MrT. THOMPSON (Auckland) said he sent ! copies of the bill to. his constituents; but had not received,a reply. .He would move that the debate be adjourned for a week. Mr PEACOCK also hoped the debate would be adjourned. Mr HOLMES asked that the bill be adjourned for a fortnight, to euable the Government to get an. expression of opinion from the different societies as to its merits. The debate was adjourned to Thursday week POLICE OFFENCES. On the motion for the committal of the Police Offences Act Amendment Bill, Mr MOAT moved that the bill be com.mitted that day six months.

The Hon. R. STOUT supported the bili. He said it was necessary to provide a remedy against bad houses, and the police would exercise some discretion in dealing with them.

Colonel TRIMBLE thought it was a dangerous thing to put such power in the hands of the police. It was an attempt to levy blackmail.

Dr NEWMAN hoped the House would pass the bill. He did not think any blackmail would bo levied under the bill;

Mr FISHER said there was no question that had been more persistently brought under his notice as Mayor of Wellington than the establishment of disorderly lftmses and their effect on the depreciation of property. He thought it was a matter for the^ Legislature to consider whether the morals of their children should not be preserved from the sights which were witnessed at those houses. He also considered that the rights of property should be respected by the House.

The motion for committal was carried by 28 to 27. '

The House Went into committee on the bill.

Clause 4, providing for a penalty on persons frequenting disorderly houses, was struck out on a division by 31 against 23. Mr KERR moved to report progress. Ayes, 28; noes, 28. The CHAIRMAN gave a casting vote with the noes.

Mr G. F. RICHARDSON moved that the Chairman leave the choir.

The motion was carried by 31 against 27, and the bill was thrown out. UNCLAIMED I.AXD.

Mr WAKEFIELD moved the second reading of the Unclaimed Laud Bill, He said the

object of the bill was to transfer lands to bona file owners which at present were held by those who were not bona fide owners. There were many portions of land in different parts of the country in that position aiow, and this led to great frauds being pdfpetrated. He thought no injustice would be inflicted on anybody by the bill, as if an absentee owner should return' within 20 years he would be allowed to recover it, with 5 per cent, added. He contended that the bill was greatly to the benefit of the State, and was also of benefit to the absentee owners. Sir JULIUS VOGEL said the bill dealt with a very important subject, and should be treated very carefully. He thought it was not prepared in a very careful manner. He considered every attempt should be made to discover who the owner of the unclaimed land was. They should take care to protect the rights of owners. He suggested that the bill should be withdrawn for the present to have it more carefully prepared.

Mr GARRICK hoped the House would not agree to the bill. He pointed out that already there was a power under the Rating Act to sell unclaimed land for rates. There was only one clause in the bill that was clear and workable that was where there were any proceeds the Government should not get hold of them. He thought, the bill was one of those

mischievous pieces of legislation which laymen who knew nothing of such matters sometimes introduced. He moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months.

Mr .WAKEFIELD admitted that the bill might not be so carefully prepared as was desirable, but he considered all the objections made to it by the Treasurer were committee objections. He thought the opposition of the member for St. Albaus to the bill was because it was drawn in plain language, instead of being couched in legal phraseology. He might inform the hon. gentleman that in the speech just made he had been criticising the opinions of the highest legal talent in the Colony—namely, the Attorney-general. He should be glad to receive suggestions on the bill in. committee.

Mr MOSS thought some such bill as the present was urgently needed.

Mr SEDDON moved the adjournment of the debate.

The Hon. R. STOUT agreed with the

ments were necessary. The attention of the Government had been called to this matter, and it was intended to introduce a public trust bill to deal with it.

The motion for the adjournment'of debate was carried.

The House rose at 12.50.