GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14280, 31 July 1908, Page 6

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THURSDAY, JULY 30. The House met at 2.30 p.m. The following -bills were intrcduiwd and read a first time:-rMarriage Act Amendment Bill (Sir William Steward), Hvtt Valley Tramway District. Bill (Mr Wilford). Gonville and Castlccliff - Tramway District Bill (Mr Hogon). A LAND TRANSACTION. Tho MINISTER of LANDS laid on the table the papers relating to a certain land transaction in the City.of Wellington between the Government, the City Council, and the firm of Kennedy, Macdonald, and Co. (Ltd.). Mr FISHER, at whoso instance the papers wero presented, said this transaction revealed an" extraordinary- position. The - Government had been hoodwinked unwittingly, and it. had committed a breach of the Lund Act in selling Crown lands to private individuals without competition. Moreover, in regard to the exchange of land, the Government had been misled as to the nature of the exchange, and had been led to sell the. land at £100 per perch to Mr Macdonald, who refused £420 per perch for tho same land. Mr. MASSEY said that if the facts were as stated by tho member for Wellington Central evidence of criminal ncgpgence was disclosed, and a shady transaction had taken place. There should be a full inquiry by tho House, and if anything irregular had occurred it must be put right, even if an act were required to do so. The PRIME MINISTER said he felt that tho matter should bo. referred to a committee. Tho Government courted the fullest inquiry. It had only done what, according to its lights, was right and honourable. If anything wrong had ocourrcd it possessed the power to put it right. Neither the Mayor nor Mr Macdonald had spoken to 'him on the matter. He suggested that the matter ho referred to the Lands Committee, which should commence the inquiry to-morrow, and report as quickly as possibles t-o the House. Tho Hon. Mr M'NiAB read the whole of the correspondence, and remarked that the problem was complicated. He moved in the direction, .suggested by tho Prime Minister. Tho motion was agreed to. WESTPORT HARBOUR- BOARD LOAN, Mr COLVIN moved the second reading of the West-port Harbour Board Loan Bill for raising £200,000 for harbour extension purposes. Mr LAURENSON protested against local bodies going in for such large loans. Mr BARBER said one good harbour was wanted on the Ccast.- At present the difficulties of ingress and egress militated against the advance of the district. The second reading was agreed to on . the voices. CHRISTCHURCH SANITATION BILL. The Christchureh . City Sanitation Empowering Bill (Mr Gray) was read a second timo without debate. TOWN DISTRICTS ACT AMENDMENT. Mr ELL moved the second reading of the Town Districts Act Amendment Bill. The object of the bill is to make -the qualifications of an elector those prescribed by "The Municipal Corporations Act, 1900," and also to make tho conduct of elections come under the provisions of "Tho Local Eloct-ions Act, 1904." The second reading was agreed to. OTHER BILLS. The . Local Elections Act Amendment Bill (Sir William Steward) and tho Lamps on Vehicles Bill (Mr Major) wore read a second time without- debate. PUBLIO WORKS ACT AMENDMENT; Mr IZARD moved tho second reading of tho Public Works Act Amendment Bill, to enable local authorities under certain conditions to tako land compulsorily for the purposes of making streets and roads, and making provision in regard to compensation. The second reading was agreed to, COMPANIES ACT AMENDMENT. Mr, ELL moved tho second reading of the Companies Act' Amendment Bill, requiring banking companies to publish lists of shareholders, which shall 'bo open to irspcction bv anybody. The PRIME MINISTER said tho proposals wero important. Reasons existed for placing banks on tho footing which they had hitherto enjoyed. He thought tho bill should bo referred to the Public Accounts Committee. The bill was read a second time, and referred to the committee acootdingly. QUACKERY PREVENTION. Mr HORNSBY moved the second reading of the Quackery Prevention Bill; making it unlawful to advertise or supply any preparation, medicine, or appliance alleged to be for the prevention, alleviation, or euro of any human ailment or physical defect declared by a judge of the Supreme Court, on the application of tho Chief Health Officer, to be of a fraudulent nature, or of such character that it cannot have the cffect claimed for it, or cannot effect tho purpoGo for which it was supplied. Mr Hornsby referred at considerable length to | the harmful effect- upon the community of many of tho worthless nostrums and noxious articles offered for sale and freely advertised; also of the claims of quacks and scoundrels claiming, without any right to do ,so, that 'they > wero ablo to deal successfully with terrible diseases, such as consumption and cancer. The object of the bill was. merely to checkmate such people and prevent the sale of noxious applianoos or worthless and harmful drugs.. It enabled a judge of the Supreme Court to prohibit the salo or advertising of such articles. He also referred to the danger to infant life of so-called soothing syrups —WDotehed drugs which cost scores of infant lives, He also urged the necessity for restricting tho salo of ehlorodyne. There was, ho said, a strong publio opinion that something must bo done to copo with the great evil. Mr RUTHERFORD supported the bill, and protested strongly against patent medicines. He- had never allowed them in his house. Children should be allowed to howl all'night rather than be soothed with patent liicdicir.es. Mr FLATMAN said ho was afraid the bill would place a monopoly in tho hands of tho modical men.. Ho held that some ' patent medicines wore good, and if the sale of these were suppressed the publio might sutfor. Tho bill placed too much power in the hands of the Health Dc.-i>artment. There was such a thing ' as bribery. lle did not rcflcct upon anyone in the department now, but they aid not know who might be there in the future, no intended, however,.-to support the second'reading, Dr OHAPPLE congratulated the mover upon its intentions, and also tho Government upon tho steps already taken to stop tho evil. TJiey had already stopped most pernicious literature passing through tho post office, and many young men owed a debt of gratitude to .the Government for that. He congratulated the press, whioh spontaneously had determined to suppress advertisements, and homes and youngpeople owed a debt of gratitude to the papers. Quacks brought grist to the medical mill, and medical men liad nothing to gain by opposing quackery. They did so merely out of a sense of duty. Tho attempts made by the profession to suppress quackery had not been as generously rcooived as was deserved: on the contrary, popular prejudice was often against them. These quacks tried to intimidate and to create a belief that physiological phenomena were, symptoms of disease, and often induced disease when it did not exist. He referred to the cruel and iniquitous letters written by quacks to their victims, and discussed at considerable length the value of some patent m-sdieinca advertised. Continuing, Dr Chappie said that the claims for some of the drugs advertised wore wicked lies. Some drugs were described as pleasant to take. Why? Because they were alcoholic, and a- huge sals was assured for tliem. These drugs created a craving for themselves. He also referred to the delay arising in treatment by quacks through experimenting, and the danger duo thereto, and also to wrong treatment. He said it was astonishing that we had tolerated quacks, who had tampered wTSi serious diseases for their own solo.gain, so long. Their charges were extraordinary and notorious, and there was no redress for victims. Mr HANAN said the bill, if passed, would bo a piece of humanitarian legislation against the acts of vampires and charlatans. Mr WILFORD said the bill, as drawn up, was utterly worthless to prevent what it was intended to prevent. Clause 2 was ungraramat-ieal, Instead of saying that medicines and appliances must- be declared harmful or of a fraudulent nature liefore being proscribed, it said that human ailments and physical dcfccts must- be so declared. Of course they were harmful, but bow could they be described as fraudulent, lie had been glad to listen to Dr Chappie, as the representative of a close eorpora-

lion. lie supposed Dr Chappie would admit that science taught, whilst incdioinc

guessed. Some medical men were good guessers, nnd these Dr Chappie would call i experts in diagnosis. There wero bad gm'ssers, and these Dr Chappie would call quacks. Mr Wilford continued at eome length on the subject of poisons and pate,-it medicines, exciting considerable mirth. He supported the measure, subject to an amendment of clause 2. The motion was agreed to on the voices. THE BARK MAJORITY. Mr LAUHENSON moved the second reading of the Licensing Polls Absolute Majority Bill. • Ho said it was a. thoroughly democratic measure. The absolute majority obtained in all other elections, and it should do so in the licensing poll. Though opinion was strong in favour of no-license, it had ' only been carried in six out of 68 elce- ' torates. ' Mr LAURENSON said that no Democrat i could justify the present position. With I hardly an exception jio-lieenso was deter-/ ( mined by a bare majority, in the. United . S.ates and Canada, and the anomaily exist- < iug in our legislation in this respect ought , to iio removed. The peoplo were' sick and ' tired of a system which gave to two public- ! house loafers the same voting power as was possessed by tho Chief Justice. the 1 Minister of Lands aaid tho Minister of 1 Education. I ■M.rLANG congratulated iho mover upon ( the bill reaching its second reading, but lie f said he was pledged to support tho three- i fiftlis majority, liy going to extVemos the j No-license party would alienate the sym- , pathy of the moderate men. H Mr RUTHERFORD opposed tin bill on , the ground ( that licensing coituiiktocs exacted a high standard of accommodation I from licensee), and tho public .required 1 high class accommodation. Many of the leading prohibitionists staved at* the liest, hotels when they travelled. Tho member for Lyttelton would have been on 6afer ground if he had put in his bill a, provision for giving compensation to licensees who lost their-licenses through the vote of the people. ■ The Hon. Mr M'NAB said the' debat mu6t not centre, round (lift question of accommodation or compensation,- but must bo confuted to tho question of whether the bare majority or t.he three-fifths majority should prevail. His opinion was that tho present, system had worked well. The bare ' majority would produce eternal turmoil 1 and unrest in the electorates. He feared I that this question was going to be very J troublesome, dividing the temperance vote | all over tho Dominion. It was his opinion i that it would bo in the best interests of i the tempcrance cause to keop tho baro majority in the liquor poll oft' the Statute Book, and experience in the United States 1 supported that view. Some laws must have ' a fair preponderance of backing to be put. i into rally satisfactory effect. Tho time 1 was coming when the Vholo licensing quos- i tion would develop largely, but at tliat ; time the party asking for the bare majority would not bo tho Temcoranco party, but i tho Trade party—ho did not use tho word : offensively,—which would then see in tho bare majority the only hope of restoring ' licenses.. ' Mr JAMES ALLEN said lie was glad ! to seo tho propess of' education working i in the Minister cf Lands—a prominent no- * license leader. He' also opposed tho pro- : posa' on tho ground, of the turmoil occasioned by the 'bare majority, under : which the law would not. be effective. ] Dr OHAPPLE vigorously opposed tho . bill, and dissented from tho doctrine that the baro majority was democratic. He said' everyone knew what was meant by tyranny of majorities. Besides, were grave national issues always decided by a bare majority? Would tho member for Lyttelton ugree to deoido religious beliefs or the Bible-in-scliools question by the bare i majority? Did he not know that tho Constitution of tho United States could only bo changed by a three-fourths majority of the Legislature? Would Mr Laurcnson decide wlicther tea should bo drunk by tho bare majority, or should tho bare majority decido what drees tho oeoplo should wear or what tlie sumptuary laws, were to bo? Besides, the three-fifths majority had been selcctod on the ground of expediency. ; lt was cvideuce of good generalship, and paid the No-liccnso party. If unrest, were introduced by adopting the bar© majority I tho cause of tempcrance would bo put back for years. They must make the law effootive, and it was moro likoly to bo so | under the stability afforded, by a good backing of publio opinion. It was not the total abstainers who had carried no-license, nor oven tho Temperance party, but the great body of moderate publio opinion, at whioh the No-liceneo party could not afford to snap its fingers. Mr MALCOLM supported tho bill in a speech strongly favourable to ■ no-liceneo on orthodox lines, which had becomo familiar from continual iteration. Mr HALL followed, supporting Dr Chappie's spe&h. Ho said they must guard against confiscation of property as the result of a catch vote. Mr HANAN said he was pledged to the three-fifths majority, and said it had worked well in Invorcargill. Mr HOIiNSBY said the Prohibition party waa making a taotioal mistake in;. trying to force the bar© majority on the country. He protested against tho threatening oiroular sent to members by tho party advocating the bare majority, and 6aid that nothing but a mistake sueii as this could cheek tho earner of t.he prohibition' movement. This campaign for the baro majority was more than a crime— it was a blunder. He knew for a positive fact that many peoplo who had hitherto voted for prohibition would not do so in futuro if tills measure were put on tho Statute Book. The great moderate vote would bo alienated from the temperance cause. Mr FISHER said he thought one might have exported a measure which was calculated to split the rio-licenso vote to come from the 'trade, and not from tho No-license! party. Ho had spoken in favour of nolicense in proportion to his length of public service as often as anyone in the House, but ho was opposed to the hare .majority proposal as tho greatest tactical mistake over mado by the No-liceneo party. It would orcato - ceaseless unrest in every licencing district, and would play right into the hands of tho trade, who would ceaselessly try to convert no-license into licenso. What wero the iigurc3 under the present system? Tho continuance vote had increased by 43,000 votes—from 139,000 to 182,000—in nine years, and tho no-license vote had increased in the same period by 100,000—from 93,000 to 198,000. Was not that a splendid result? The present proposal was simplv revolutionary. Every member of the House knew what his experience had been, and knew that ho was in earnest, heart and soul, for no-lirareo and tho abolitipn of an iniquitous traffic, but the bill was not going to further the cause. The HUME MINISTER said that, in looking on that night, he had been ablo to see where the House would be if a General Licensing Bill wero brought down. . The present bill had revealed a remarkable diversity of opinion. Before t.he last election members woro generally asked to> express their views on this subject, and a largo majority had pledged themselves to maintain the law as it now was. Ho had always refused to give a pledge on any question to anyone, but he had told his constituents that he favoured tho three-fifths majority, and ho would stand by that. A very largo number of amendments were asked for in the Licensing Bill. He had publicly stated that tho Government would not bring down any licensing legislation this session, and that for tho simple reason that there would bo no time to deal with such legislation in the last session of Parliament. What would happen if this bill got to the committee stage? atle guaranteed to say that bofore it had been one day in committee it would have a tail of over 100 amendments. He could not understand what was the motive of introducing a private bill on this subject, unless it was to seo how memhere would vote on a subject- on which they liad given pledges before the last election. It would lie a retrograde step to introduce legislation into tho Statute Book on a burning public question through (lie medium of a private bill. Messrs Buddo, Baimie. Flatman, Barber, T. Mackenzie, and Wilford opposed tho measure, ami after Mr Laurcnson had replied the motion for t.he second reading was lost by 54 votes to 8. The following is t.he division list:— Tor the Second Reading (B).—Messrs Arnold, Ell, Fowkle, Laurcnson, Malcolm, Poole, Stalhvorthy, Tanner. Tollers: Messrs Laurcnson and Malcolm. Against the Second Reading (54).—Messrs Alison, J, Allen, Barber, Baume, Bollard, , Buddo, Carroll, Chappie, Colvin, Davey, Dillon, Duncan, Field, Fisher, Flatman, W. Frasor, Graham, Gray, Greenslade, Hall, Hanan, Hardy, Heke. Hemes, Hogan, Hornsby, Izard, Jennings, Kidd, Lang, Lawry. Lethbridge, Lewis. M'Gowan, R. M'Kenzie, T. Mackenzie, M'Nab, Macphcrson, Mander, Massey, Okey, Parata, Poland, Ueid, Ross, Rutherford, Seddon, Sidey, Symes, Thomson, Ward, Wilford, Witty. Wood. . Tellers: Messrs Chappie and Fisher. ! The House rose at 0.30 a.m.