N.Z. PARLIAMENT.

Otago Witness, Issue 1653, 28 July 1883, Page 13

N.Z. PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wednesday, July 25. REPLIES TO QUESTIONS. Replying to Mr Watt, The Hon. Major ATKINSON said a bill dealing with the payment of rates on Crown lands in boroughs was in course of preparation, and would be passed this session. Replyiug to Captain Mackenzie, The Hon. Mr JOHNS TON said the railway from Wyndham to Toi-Tois as far as Mokoreta, for which £12,000 was asked, would be completed during the financial year. FIRST READINGS. The following bills were introduced and read a first time : — Mataura Reserve Vesting and Empowering (Captain Mackenzie), Middle Island Native Villages Control and Regulation (Mr Taiaroa). PROPERTY TAX REPEAL BILL. In reference to the bill to repeal the Property Assessment Act and the Property Tax Act, set down for introduction, Mr MONTGOMERY said he had had an interview with the Treasurer, who had pointed out that when the Government bill for the increase of the property tax came on would be the most convenient time for debating this question, and he had accordingly determined to delay the introduction of his bill until he had an opportunity of consulting his friends on the subject. The motion was negatived. The following motions were put aud carried : —For a return by what process the general manager of railways arrived at the result given in his annual statement — viz., that " the difference in revenue due to difference in rate between grain of the province of Canterbury and current class rate estimates for the year's traffic would probably amount to £90,000," whereas the total revenue for the year ended 31st March 1883 for all classes of goods, including grain carried over the Huru-nui-Bluff section, is set down at £403,420, aud the quantity of grain carried during the same period was 343,398 tons, or less than one-third of the total goods traffic, which was 1,130,410 tons ; also showing whether, since a reduction of about 25 per cent, in the grain rate is estimated to reduce the revenue by £90,000, and the grain traffic at the old rate would have produced £36,000 for the year, whether the balance of revenue from goods traffic on the Hurunui-Bluff section — viz., £43,420 — is a fair charge for the carriage of the balance of such goods traffic — viz. , 787,012 tons ; also showing in what respect the grain rate for the province of Canterbury differs from the grain rate for the rest of the Colony, and why (Mr Wright.) For a return showing the aggregate mileage travelled by all passengers, and the total mileage run by all carriages on the New Zealand Railways ; also showing the number of passengers carried for each carriage mile, Each return to be furnished for each section of railway and each branch railway in the Colony (Mr Wright).

LOCAL INDUSTRIES. Mr BRA.CKEN moved— "That it is desirable Government should encourage local industries by giving preference to articles of New Zealand manufacture required for use in the various public departments, provided that in price and quality such articles do not suffer by comparison with the price and quality of imported articles of a similar character ; and also that the Government should encourage the development of our mineral resources by giving preference to coal and other minerals that may be required in the public service, provided price and quality are equal to the rates and quality of imported minerals of like nature. He had no intention of treading on the vexed question of Protection and Freetrade. All he sought to affirm was a much-needed safeguard for the encouragement and development of their own latent resources. Mr BATHGATE argued that Nature itself had designed New Zealand for a manufacturing country. It had an abundant supply of coal and other accessories to manufacturing industry. Mr HOLMES said that the motion did not go far enough. To encourage manufactures, a variety of things were required. It demanded increased customs duties, the lowering of railway freights, and the construction of railways, tramcars, and other public works, He moved

an amendment so as to embody these proposals in the motion. Mr TURNBULL said the motion was now assuming dangerous proportions. Already a great deal had been done to develop these resources. The reason manufactures were not not more extensively resorted to was that money could find more profitable channels in other directions. An increase of the customs duties would not foster these trades. When money found less profitable investments in land, &c, manufactures would most undoubtedly be had recourse to. Colonel TRIMBLE also opposed the motion and amendment. The House resumed at 7.30. SCHOOL COMMITTEES ELECTION BILL. Mr MOSS moved—" That the School Committees Election Bill should be recommitted, with the view of adding a proviso to the effect that the bill should not come into operation until the end of March next." That would prevent the committees now in office from being fixed in office for a much longer period than was originally contemplated. Mr HOLMES wanted an assurance from the Government that the bill would not in any way clash with or materially alter the provisions of the Education Act.

Mr SHEEHAN said the bill did materially affect the Education Act. They had passed an Act making triennial Parliaments, and yet they were here to prolong the term of office of these school committees. The present system was the only means which gave a large section of the people— Roman Catholics — a voice in the election of these committees. If such a measure was wanted it ought to have been brought down by the Government, and what was most significant was that Ministers had stood by in silence. At the proper time he would move that it be read that day six months.

Mr O'CALLAGHAN supported the bill, and hoped it would not be recommitted. Mr SHRIMSKI supported the amendment for the recommittal of the bill. He was fully convinced that the bill aimed at the Education Act, and if allowed to pass into law it would materially affect that Act. The question was put that the amendments made in Committee be agreed to. The House divided.— Ayes, 39 ; noes, 11. On the motion for the third reading, Mr SHEEHAN moved that it be read that day six months. The bill affected our finance and our legislation of every kind, and yet Ministers stood idly by. It was to be regretted that in the case of an important measure like this the Crown did not put down its foot and say, "If a thing like this is to be done it will be done by us." Not a single representation had come from without showing any demand for this change. This was a most important matter, and yet Government stood idly by and allowed a matter of so much importance tobe thrust upon them by a member of the Opposition. Mr MOSS said if they once admitted the change there was no saying where the change would stop. The present system of education had many enemies, and this bill placed it in a most critical state.

The Hon. Mr ROLLESTON denied that J the bill was aimed at the v/hole system of edu- ! cation. The bill itself was weak, and while it \ would do no harm, he would vote with Mr j Sheehan because he looked upon the bill as s interfering with the details of a large system, • but not with the idea that it was at all mischievous.

Mr PETRIE regretted that Mr Rolleston had not expressed his opinion at an earlier stage. It was a most illiberal measure, mas' - much as it disfranchised lodgers, and yet the; / were called upon to pay for the educatioia system. Mr STEWARD said the bill was affirme d by Parliament last session. There was no ne' tv feature in the bill of this year. He contends d that the bill aimed at doing more substantii il justice to the Roman Catholic Church. Tine cumulative vote, so far from being an advai ltage to that Church, had been used against ii ts interests. He had satisfactory evidence tbi it in the course he had taken he was supports d by the views entertained by the body of th c people. The question whether they should pu t in » lodger was fairly raised in Committee, and decided by a large majority in the negative. Before moving in this matter he was told by the Government that they would not bring in a measure of this kind. In view of that fact it was ridiculous to blame him for having taken the matter in had. Mr BRACKEN opposed the bill. Minorities should be represented, but under this bill they could be excluded from that privilege. The question was put that the bill be read a third time. —Ayes, 39 ; noes, 10. The following is the division-list : — j

Ayes (39). — Allwright, Barron, Bathgate, Beetham, Brown J. E., Buchanan W. C., Daniel, Dargaville, Dick, Dodson, Duncan, Feldwick, Hursthouse, Ivess, Lee, Levestam, Macandrew, M'Donald J., M'llraith, M'Kenzie J., M'Millan, Montgomery, O'Callaghan, Peacock, Pearson, Pilliet, Postlethwaite, Shephard, Stevens, Steward, Sutter, Sutton, Thomson J. W., Trimble, Turnbull, Watt, Whitaker, Whyte J. 8., Wright. Noes (10). — Atkinson, Buchanan J., Hursthouse, M'Donald A., Moss, Rolleston, Shrimski, Swanson, Tole, White W. Pairs.— Ayes : Green M. W., Fish, Hamlin, Hobbs, Green J., Morris. Noes : Sheehan, Munro, Petrie, Smith, Hurst, Johnston W. The bill was read a third time and passed. ABOLITION OF EDUCATION BOARDS BILL.

MrSEDDON moved the second reading of the Abolition of Education Districts and Boards Bill. He detailed the provisions of the bill, and contended that it would effect a very considerable saving and a great improvement in our educational system.

The Hon. Mr DICK opposed the bill, contending that it would be no saving of expense to administer the Act from Wellington as was proposed. It would be an injury instead of a benefit. It would be Centralism almost run mad to ask the Government to control all the schools from Wellington. The Boards proposed to be abolished could act promptly, and with a local knowledge of all the facts of the case. The Government could not possibly undertake to appoint suitable teachers to all the schools in the Colony.

Mr LEVESTAM had always been of opinion that either the central boards or local committees should be abolished. He took it that the Government would act in a more liberal spirit than the boards did. It would be a great advantage to the teachers who, unless he has a number of friends on the board, cannot possibly get advancement On the Continent of Europe the education system was administered by the central Government, and there the system worked well. Mr FISH combated the idea that the Education Act could be administered as well from Wellington as locally. He complained bitterly of the injustice done by boards to committees, more especially in Otago. He opposed the bill. Mr J. W. THOMSON opposed the biil. The House was counted out at 11 p.m., uo quorum attending after the supper adjoui;nr ment,