THE WEEK IN PARLIAMENT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3882, 7 August 1928, Page 24

THE WEEK IN PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. WELLINGTON, August 1., The Council met at 2.30 p.m. IMPREST SUPPLY. The Imprest Supply Bill No. 2 was received from the House and put through * all its stages and passed without discussion. CAPTIVE BIRDS SHOOTING BILL. The Captive Birds Shooting Prohibition Bill was introduced on the motion of Mr G. M. Thomson and read a first time. It is on the same lines as the Bill previously introduced by the same councillor. SONIC DEPTH FINDERS. Replying to a question bv Mr G. M. Thomson, Sir Francis Bell said that the naval authorities «er e opposed to the suggestion that sonic depth finder s should be installed on cruisers for marine survey purposes, and that the chief inspector of fisheries had intimated that the apparatus would be of no immediate advantage in the interests of the fishing industry. STATUS OF ALIENS. In moving the second reading of the British Nationality and Status. of Aliens Bill, which declares that certificates of naturalisation issued in any part of the Empire will have effect right throughout the Empire, Sir Francis Bell made a lengthy review of the historv of the naturalisation law, and showed how ideas had changed with recent happenings, ano said he proposed that the measure should be referred to the Statutes Revision Committee. He alluded to two sections, which, he said, did not appear in the Imperial Act—one enabling naturalisation in Samoa to be continued as at present, - and the other in regard to differentiation between the classes of subjects. In other respects the Bill incorporated the provisions of part 2 of the Imperial Act of 1914. and repealed the existing New Zealand law. Nothing in the Bilf would affect the provisions of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1908, or the provision relating to electoral rights and distinguishing between the classes of British subjects in relation to such rights. The Bill was framed on the lines of the Act passed bv the Great Jurists in the Imperial Parliament, defining for the first time who was an alien, and inviting the creation of Empire status of citizenship, and it was now introduced in New Zealand at the invitation of Great Britain. In order to give that right and privilege the Government had been ashed to act m that way in 1923, but did not proceed as it wished to make certain reservations with regard to immigration and electoral rights. . St James Allen said he was entirely in .favour of the Bill, and added that it was better late than never. New Zealand was the last of the dominions to introduce the legislation, and he contended that it should have been proceeded with in 1923. The debate adjourned at 4.35 p.m. on the motion of Sir Robert Stout, and the Council rose. August 2. The Council met at 2.30 p.m. ORCHARD DISEASES. The Orchard and Garden Diseases Bill was reported by the Agricultural and Pastoral Committee without amendment. CHURCH OF ENGLAND BILL. The Church oi England Empowering Bill was reported by the joint Committee on Private Bills with the recommendation that it be allowed to proceed, and this course was agreed to. STATUS OF ALIENS.

Continuing, the second reading debate on the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Bill. Sir Robert Stout said it conferred no advantage on New Zealanders, but would tend to create a stronger feeling of unity between the people of different parts of the Empire He advocated the passing of a law ere ating New Zealand citizenship. Mr A. S. Malcolm and Mr T, S Weston also supported the measure. Replying to Sir Robert Stout, Sir Francis Bell said the Government would consider his suggestion, but personally he did. not like the idea of super-adding at this stage a second status to the status of a British subject. He was not convinced of the necessity for such creation. There -were cases where, on account of the differences in the laws of various nations, some persons stood without nationality. He mentioned. the case of an English ladv who married an American citizen, anil he expressed the view, that the remedy in such a was not to alter our but for English women to marry in England, E o long a s a country offered the indignity -to an English lady of de clanng that it would exclude her from its territory if she married one of its own nationals and the English immigration quota was full. The remedy was in the hands of English women themeelves. The Bill was read a second time and referred to the Statures Revision Committee. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. WELLINGTON, July 31. The House met at 2.30 p.m. MENTAL DEFECTIVES DEPARTMENT. The Minister in charge of Mental Hospitals (Mr J. A. Young) laid on Hie table the report of the Mental Defectives De-

partment, in the discussion o-f which members took the opportunity to ventilate the requirements of local institutions. The Minister replied to inquiries and thanked members for their general approval. of the care taken of mental defectives in public institutions. BILLS INTRODUCED. By Governor-General’s Message the Inspection of Machinery Bill and the Noxious Weeds Bill were introduced and read a first time. Both are consolidating measures.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL. Mr F. J. Rollcston moved the second reading of the Municipal Corporations Amendment Bill. He said that one of the principal features of the Bill was that it requires that councils shall maintain a profit and loss account with respect to their trading undertakings. Provision is to be made for charging depreciation in respect of its' undertakings, the fund thus created to be held by three commissioners who are to invest the fund and hold it for making renewals to the plant. They may also use the money for making advances to the council for an extension of the undertaking concerned. Another section gives councils the power to make by-law’s defining residential and business zones and regulating or prohibiting the use of the area for outside these purposes. Municipal franchise is affected to the extent that if voters holding residential qualification only do not vote at the election of a council they shall not be included on the new’ roll unless they make direct application. The section in the principal Act (1920) requiring the magistrate to hold an inquiry into an election on the petition of a condidate and a number of electors is repealed. The position which has debarred many public men from entering local politics by reason of possible business associations with local bodies is eased to the extent that a member of a council may accept a contract up to £lO, or two more contracts not exceeding £25, the Audit Office, on the application of the council, having the right in special circumstances to increase, the limit to £5O. An interest in any loan raised by a council or in a newspaper in which the council inserts advertisements, or in a lease granted by the council will not constitute disqualification from holding office. Provision is made for the payment to a newly-elected mayor or a member of the council for work done prior to the election. The date for the election of mayors and councils is altered by the Bill ’from the last Wednesday in ’April to the first Wednesday in May. The Bill provides that if the same person is elected as mayor and as councillor for any borough on the same day he shall be deemed to have vacated his office as councillor, and the highest on the list of unsuccessful candidates is to be appointed in his stead. Councils are to be empowered to enter into contracts up to three years with any of their servants with respect to tenure of office. Power is given ’to local bodies to subsidise sick benefit funds established by their employees, authority under the Bill in this connection being ante-dated to April 1 of this year. Control over halls and other places of entertainment "is to be strengthened to the extent that councils may attach conditions to licenses and withhold or cancel a license on the grounds of the licensee’s bad conduct. Right of appeal to the Supreme Court is given.

■Fhe Minister said it was the desire of i e Government that the provisions of the Bill should be widely known, and they would be pleased to receive suggestions from those in a position to make them.

Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) said he feared the new provisions would tend to hamper local bodies in trading concerns such as electricity and gas. At present the law w'as elastic, and he did not agree with the Minister that the present Bill was an improvement. He hoped these clauses W’ould be withdrawn or considerably amended because it was unfair to punish local bodies which were carrying out their trading operations in a proper manner for some some few who may not have done so. He also objected to the power given to the Post and Telegraph Department in th e matter of con-ti-ol over streets, used for telephone wires, this power was too drastic, and should be subject to an agreement between the department and the council. In some respects the Bill might be an advance, but on larger matters it was decidedly conservative and leactionary. Mr J. A. Nash (Palmerston North) said that most of the clauses in the Bill had been asked for by th e Municipal Association.. The last speaker had referred to it as reactionary, but as a matter of fact the measure contained many concessions which would be hiehlv valued. ’

Mr T. K. Sidey (Dunedin South) warmly approved of the proposal to allow a candidate to stand for the mayoralty and as a councillor. In this way the services of the most valuable men might be preserved to the municipality. Sir John Luke said that a Bill of 58 clauses seemed a fairly large order, butconsidering the increasing activities of loeal bodies he did not doubt that its provisions were in most eases necessary. Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) protested against the powers proposed to be given to councils in connection with licenses for dance halls. This legislation, he said, emanated from the antismiling faction, which wanted to control all the amusements of the people, and might even lead to irresponsible councils forbidding dancing altogether. Mr J. Mason ("Napier) said it? was quite wrong that Mr Lee should give the impression that councillors tried to destroy all the joy in life. Councils in

the past had not abused the powers given them. He (Mr Mason) strongly urged that, councils should be given power to subsidise the Workers* Educational Association, as that association was doing useful work. ’

Mr H. T. Armstrong (Cnristehureh East) thought some Bill was necessary in connection with municipal law, and he said there were some provisions in this measure of which he heartily approved, notably the power given to councils to subsidise the employees’ sick and benefit fund. He was particularly pleased to hear the claims of the IV.E.A. advocated, and he hoped that the committee to whom the Hjll was to be referred would put in a clause giving councils power to subsidise that association. After midnight the. debate was carried on by Messrs Forsvth (Wellington East), M'Keen (Wellington South), and H. E Holland (Buller). The Minister in the course of his reply said that all the points raised had been noted, and would receive consideration. The work of the Select Committee would not be rushed, and there would be ample opportunity for consideration.

The Bill was read a second time and referred to a special committee appointed by the House. The House rose at 0.30 a.m.

W ELLINGTON, August 1. The House met at 2.30 p.m. BILLS INTRODUCED.

The following Bills were introduced and read a first time: Invercargill Borough Council Special Rate Empowering Bill (Mr A. Hamilton Wallace, for Sir Joseph Ward) : Auckland Water Supply Bill (Mr J. S. Dickson, Parnell); Motueka Borough Council Library Bill (Mr R P Hudson) ; Engineers Registration Amendment Bill (Mr W. H. Field); Auckland City Empowering Bill (Mr J. S. Dickson, Parnell) ; Licensing Amendment Bill (Mr H. G. Mason, Eden); Johnsonville and Makara Gas Supply Bill (Mr W. H. Field); Education Amendment Bill (Mr H. E. Holland. Buller). EDUCATION AMENDMENT BILL. In introducing his Bill, the Leader cf the Opposition explained that it aimed to abolish the provision in.the Act of 1919 giving power to. the Minister to make regulations over-riding the previsions f the principal Education Act. He declared that the principle of making regulations was one largely taken advantage of by the Government. Matters were determined under Order-in-Council which should be done only by Act of ment. The provision which lie sought to repeal slipped through in 1919 without much protest, although he had objected at the time, pointing out the danger whieh might arise. They had recently had protest from the 7 Government benches against the Government legislating by Order-in-Council. He hoped the Government would allow Lis amendment to

go through. No regulation should be made which would over-ride Statute law. Mr G. W. Forbes (Hurunui) said time was when the' Opposition of that day complained bitterly of the use made of the Order-in-Couneil by a former Liberal Government. Even the Liberal Party itself did not like the practice, and protested to its own Government about it. Personally he very much disliked it, and it seemed to be growing worse and worse. Government by Ordcr-in-Couneil was something which tht Opposition should on every occasion protest against, as the powers taken in that way were far too wide. COOK ISLANDS REPORT. Replying to the discussion on the Cook Islands report. Sir Mani Pomare said the steamer Maui Pomare was proving highly satisfactory, but so soon as private enterprise was prepared to take up the island trade on proper lines the Government would retire from it. Mr E. J. Howard (Christchurch South) : Now you are spoiling a good thing. Sir Maui Pomare replied that there was so much criticism of petty details that he sometimes wondered whether the Government should mix itself up with the trade, but as matters stood it felt that it had a duty to do, and it was doing it. REPLIES TO QUESTIONS. The House then proceeded to discuss the. answers given by Ministers to questions. Amongst others, the Government gave the following answers:— That the matter of running a night express between New Plymouth and Wellington has received sympathetic consideration, but the additional traffic likely to result would be quite insufficient to warrant the heavy expenditure entailed in providing the additional engine-power, sleeping cars, and staff. -

That the railway classification "list for 1928 will be distributed about the second week in August.

That having regard to the necessities of the farmers in the South Island to get cheap superphosphates, the Government will institute inquiries into the disparity between the prices charged in the North and the South Islands.

That the question of renewing the subsidy of £BOOO towards herd-testing associations next year is at present consideration.

That the School Journal is the general reading book used by the pupils of the Standard classes of most of onv primary schools, and must therefore contain articles on a great variety of topics. Most .of the pupils have, in addition, historical readers which contain chapters on the early history of New Zealand. It is not, therefore, necessary or expedient to include an article on the early history of New Zealand in every issue of the jour-

nal. though a due proportion of articles of the kind may be inserted from time to time.

A CONSOLIDATING BILL. A Consolidating Bill relating to the Post and Telegraph Department was introduced and read a first time. RELIGIOUS EXERCISES BILL. When the House resumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr 11. Holland moved the second reading of the Religious Exercises-in-Scliools Bill.

In a speech lasting 40 minutes He first drew attention to the differences between this Bill and that of last year, the chief of which was that there was to be no sectarian teaching whatever. In its amended form the Bill met with the entire approval of those who were asking for religious exercises in schools. There was no compulsion about attendance at these exercises, and therefore he understood the proposals met the objection of the Roman Catholics. If the Nelson system was installed in all schools before January 1, 1929, then the Bill would have no effect. Native schools had in the meantime been excluded from the Bill, but he hoped that their exclusion would not be permanent. He expressed pleasure at the splendid spirit in which the previous debate had been conducted, and he also expressed his thanks to the Prime Minister for giving him an opportunity to bring the Bill before the House on that occasion. When the Bill was defeated last session they were given six months \ in which to consider the Nelson system. They had done so,* but had come to the conclusion that that system Would not meet the requirements of the Bible-in-Schools League, as is was impossible to procure sufficient voluntary workers to provide for all the schools. In his opinion the House, as a House, was in favour of some form of religious instruction being given in the schools, and he quoted a speech delivered by Mr T. B. Strong I Director of Education) to fortify his opinion that the Bible should no longer be excluded from schools. Bible reading was a success -in the Australian schools, where no trouble arose, and no difficulty was raised with the Roman Catholic teachers. During the last year a vote of parents was taken on this subject. In Otago there were in favour of the Bill 86.3 of the votes cast; in Southland the voting was 81.5; . Wellington. 81 per cent.; Taranaki, 72.44; Auckland, 80.71; Canterbury, 80.72—giving a Dominion average in favour of 81 per cent, of the votes cast, which, he claimed, was a splendid result. He concluded with an appeal to the House to introduce into the schools some religious instruction, which would, for instance, bring under the daily notice of the children the beauties of the Lord’s Prayer, which could never do anyone any harm. If the House desired it he was agreeable to submit the question to a referendum of the people, which, though not always satisfactory, had the support and authoritv of some of New Zealand’s leading statesmen. The people were asking for this Bill, because’ they wanted it to fill x the gaps that could not be fillet! by the Nelson system. Heathen quoted Mr Stanley Baldwin’s riSKJnt eulogium of the Bible, and declared that if the Bible was

estimated »o highly by the Prime Minister of Great Britain, why should we deprive, our children of the richest treasures hidden between its covers, which were their inheritance? The Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. E. Holland) said that the concluding sentence of the mover’s speech was quite misleading. There was no reason why children should be deprived of the treasures of the Bible if ehurchpeoplo would teach themi in their own homes and live them iii their own lives. Mr H. Holland’s words were a serious charge against churchpeople who greatly preponderated in the Dominion, and who could, if they took the trouble, give religious instruction to their own children. The member for Christchurch North had quoted what was being done in other countries; but he had not shown that the moral standard of the children iu those countries was higher than it was in New Zealand. He would not admit that his was so. It might be a question whether the moral standard of our children was as high as it might be, but it was not lower than the standard of countries where the Bible was now in the schools. ' All three political parties .in New Zealand went to the polls at last-election pledged to free, secular, and compulsory education, and next election would test the loyalty of the parties to their election pledges. He denied that the Labour Party was in any way bound to the Roman Catholic Church, as declared by Canon James, who was not- altogether a responsible gentleman when speaking of members of the House. Proceeding, he declared that the Reform Party was breaking its election pledge in supporting this Bill. The Labour Party’s case was that religion should be taught in the homes, in church, and in the Sunday schools, and not in the day schools. He quoted Mr John Caughley, late Director of Education, in support of the view that if the Bill passed State aid must be given to Roman Catholic schools. So far as the Labour Party was concerned it had never supported a referendum on religious questions. The party would oppose a Roman ' Catholic majority imposing its will on other people, just as much as it would oppose a Protestant majority ' imposing its. will on a Roman Catholic minority on this or any othe religious question. Mr W. J. Girling (Wairau) supported the Bill. Parents, he said, were not teaching children the principles of religion in their homes, and many of them never heard the Lord’s Prayer. Were the children then to be denied all religious instruction? There were many beautiful passages in the Bible whicn could be brought together in a text book to which there could be no possible objection. Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) opposed the Bill. He said the Reform Party was ■not sincere in its support of the measure" If it had been sincere some Minister would have introduced it. Instead, one of the junior members of the party was put up to move it, which suggested that the party was merelj- exploiting it for political support. The Labour Party was not against religion, but what it objected to was that one section of the community should attempt to drive everyone else into its own way of thinking. Mr A. Harris (Waitemata) denied that the supporters of the Bill were opposed to and were trying to destroy the national system of education. What they wanted was a system of religion.: inst action void of sectarian influence. That the people wanted some such system was shown bv the fact that 81 per cent, of the parents who recorded their views had voted i favour of the principles of this Bill. Mr W. A. Veitch (Wanganui) said, though a firm believer in the Christian faith, he would vote against the second reading of the Bill, and, so far as it could his vote would prevent it from becoming law. He appealed to the Prime Minister to appeal to his party to stand by the policy on which it had gone to the country—free, secular, and compulsory education.

Mr W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) said that no legitimate objection had been raised to the Bill. All had been imaginarv fears. Yet they had approved of the Nelson system. He was not opposed to that system, but he thought that this Bill was safer, because the lessons would be prepared and fixed and could not be coloured at the sweet will of the teacher. The claim that the passage of this Bill would entitle the Roman Catholic schools to State aid was a pure bogey, and had no foundation in logic. Mr J. Horn (Wakatipu) said that the present system had stood the test of 51 years, and it probably was the best in the world. He was opposed to the Bill. Mr V. (Roskill) also opposed .the Bill. Mr C. E. Bellringer (Taranaki) supported the Bill. He preferred it to the NelSon system, he said, but was content that the Nelson system should continue where it was already established. If the children did not receive some form of religious teaching we would have retrogression not progression. At 1 o’clock Mr H. Holland (Christchurch North) rose to reply, briefly traversing the objections raised to the measure during the debate. A division was then taken and resulted: — For the Bill, 29. Against the Bill, 31. The following is the division list:— FOR THE BILL (29). Bellringer Lee, E. P. Dickie Linklater Dickson, J. M‘C. Luke Dickson, J. F. Lysnar Forsyth M'Lennan .! : ■ Girling M'Leod Hamilton, A. M'Millan Harris Nash Hawkeii Reid Hockly Sidey Holland, H. Sykes. Hudson Waite Hunter ;. ' Williams Jones, D. Wright ■ Young'' ?

AGAINST THE BILL (31). Armstrong Lee, J. A. Atmore M'Keen Bartram Martin Bell Mason, H. G. R. Buddo Mason, J. Campbell Parry Coates Ransom Eliott Rolleston, J. C. Field Rolleston, F. J. Forbes Savage Fraser Seddon Holland, 11. E. Smith Horn Sullivan Howard Veitch Jones, W. Walter Kyle PAIRS. For the Bill: Uru, Rhodes, Bitchener, Burnett, J. R. Hamilton, Downie Stewart; and Nosworthy. Against the Bill: Ngata, Jordan, M'Combs, Potter, Samuel, Henare, and Pomare. The House rose at 1.20 a.m. WELLINGTON, August 2. CHURCH OF ENGLAND BILL. The House met at 2.30 p.m.. The Joint Committee on the standing orders recommended that the Church ofEngland Empowering Bill be allowed to proceed. MR VEITCH’S ALLEGATIONS. Mr H. M. Campbell (Hawke’s Bay) asked the Minister in Charge of the Valuation Department whether his attention had been draw'n to some remarks of Mr W. A. Veitch. M.P., at New Plymouth to the effect that a typical case unfairness in connection with valua tions was in Hawke’s Bay, where 4000 acres were valued at £3 10s an acre, whereas alongside there was land valued at over £lO per acre. He wanted to know whether the Minister would look into the matter with a view of seeing that fairness was done to the officers of the department. The Minister (Mr A. D. M‘Leod) replied that his attention had been drawn to the matter, but he did not know what was in the mind of Mr Veitch. The allegation seemed to be that the officers of th© department were not carrying out fair valuations. If Mr Veitch and Mr Campbel] would supply him with particulars of the properties referred to he would have investigations made. KELLOGG ANTI-WAR PACT. The Prime Minister also announced that an invitation to sign the Kellogg anti-war compact at Paris on August 27 would be accepted. The pact would be signed on behalf of New Zealand by Sir James Parr, with whom would be associated Mr G. J. Anderson, a member of the Cabinet. THAMES BOROUGH LOANS. On the motion, of Mr C. E. Macmillan, acting for Mr T. W. Rhodes (Thames), the Thames Borough Loans Rate Adjustment Bill was read a second time without debate.

COMPULSORY MILITARY SERVICE Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) moved the second reading of the Compulsory Military Service Repeal Bill. He said he moved the Bill this year with greater confidence than he did last year, not because he believed there were converts to be made in the House, but because there was growing support for it in the country. He was surprised to find the encouragement he received after he had in traduced the Bill last year. This support came largely from people who were not friends of the Labour Party, indicating that compulsory military training was becoming widely unpopular. The Labour Party opposed military training when it was unpopular to do so, but now the people were beginning to realise that the Labour Party was right. He quoted recent converts to anti-military training as showing that the movement was growing rapidly. If a fraction of the money spent on military training was spent on sports grounds for the masses greater physical fitness would result. The Minister of Defence (Mr F. J. Rolleston) said there was nothing constructive in Mr Lee’s speech. It was useless to advocate a volunteer system, because that method had been tried and found wanting. Volunteer forces never had any proper discipline. It would be too expensive to embark on a scheme of training volunteer non-commissioned officers by sending them to camp for three months. New Zealand, as part of the Empire, had certain obligations in defence matters. There was less military training at parades than formerly, and youths were given lectures on citizenship and related matters. Prosecutions for failure to render military service were only 4 per cent, of the territorials and 1 per cent, of the cadets. There was very little real opposition to. the system. Mr G. W. Forbes (Hurunui) said'he was Satisfied that the present system of compulsory training was much fairer than the volunteer system under which the duty of defence would f all on those willing to bear it. For that reason he was opposed to the repeal of the present system.

Mr H. J. Armstrong (Christchurch East) said that after the Minister had rebuked Mr Leo for not bringing forward anything practical, he himself should have done so, but his speech did not contain one single constructive idea. All that he could say was that those who were opposed to compulsory military training were anti-British. New Zealand was the one country in the world that was war-mad 10 years after the war; and the people were getting fed up. Mr V. H. Potter (Roskill) opposed the Bill. To abolish compulsory military training, he said, was to aim a blow at the defence of the Empire.

Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central) said the question must be divided into two parts—the one defence and the other compulsion. It was to compulsion they objected, and he was one who believed that when a person was prepared to sacrifice his liberty, and even his life, for conscience sake, then the lesson of history was that it was best to let that person go his way. The Defence Department had not shown very much commonsense in prosecuting a number of Presbyterian divinity students, who read the Scriptures in a way that would not per mit them to participate in military training. He thought in the light of the ad vancement made in chemical and mechanical warfare our system of military train ing was out of date, and he wanted the Minister to give the House some information as to what steps were being taken in New Zealand to cope with the new phases that were developing. When the House resumed at 7.30 p.m. the debate on the Compulsory Military Service Repeal Bill was continued by Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) who made a strong plea for the conscientious objectors who, he said, were amongst some of the finest citizens we had. He felt confident that the system was doomed. Mr W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) expressed hope in the multilateral treaty for the maintenance of peace, and said he thought that military training should not be extended beyond the age of 18 years. The Bill was merely political propaganda.

Mr J. A. Nash (Palmerston North) opposed the Bill as compulsory service was necessary as a means of preparation if war should come again. Mr F. Waite (Clutha) said it was time the New Zealand Defence Department was equipped with every anti-gas appliance; otherwise if our .men had to be sent away again they would go away as badly equipped as they did on the former occasion. He thought much of the money spent on cadets was wasted and could be more profitably employed in putting the air force on a good footing. We should hold to the right to call on every able-bodied man in case of necessity. Mr H. E. Holland (Buller) said that compulsory military training was not a British institution, but was repugnant to British feeling and did not serve any useful purpose. Conscription was forced on Australia Ijy Mr Hughes, but was voted out as soon as they had an opportunity to do so. In New Zealand there were many people who were prepared to conscript life, but strongly objected to the conscription of wealth. Mr D. Jones (Ellesmere), asked what was the Labour Party’s defence policy. It had none, yet it asked the House to wipe out the existing policy, and had nothing to put in its place. After Mr Lee had briefly replied a division was taken, when the second reading was defeated by 50 votes to RIGHT-TO-WORK BILL. Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central) moved that hi s Right-to-Work Bill be postponed, which was agreed to on the voices.

REGISTRATION OF MUSIC TEACHERS.

bir John Luke moved the second reading of the Music Teachers Registratvh said . intention of the Bill was to set up high standards amongst the teachers of music. At the same tim e it was not desired to shot anyone out, and clause 12 was made wide for that purpose. A board of registration uas set up, and everyone at present practising as a music teacher was given 12 months in which to apply for registration. The Bill was on similar lines to that passed in connection with several other professions. _ Mr M. J Savage (Auckland West) said there might not be much difference in the principle underlying this Bil] and other somilar Acts, yet there was perhaps a great difference in the circumstances. It was a more serious thing to have an unregistered plumber than to have an unregistered music teacher.. If the latter was unsatisfactory the pupil could leave him and nothing would be broken, but with a plumber the public health and even human life might be at stake He however, wa s not hostile to the Bill, but doubted if clause 12 was wide enough to include all those at present engaged in music teaching. He would like to know how musical people generally re garded this measure. It should not be nassed too lightly. Mr J. A. Nash (Palmerston North) welcomed the - Bill, but urged that the period in which the present teachers could register should be extended from 12 months to two years. Mr Q W Forbes (Hurunui) thought there was danger in setting up boards as they tended to make the professions close corporations He wished to know >f bagpipe players came within the scope of the Bill. He suggested postponing the Bill to enable evervone to obtain more information about it.

Mr W D. Lysnar (Gisborne) and Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central) supported the Bill with minor modifications.

The discussion was carried on by Messrs _A. Hamilton (Wallace) J. Horn (Wakatipu), J. Mason (Napier), and D Buddo (Kaiapoi), and after Sir John Luke had replied the .Bil] was read a second time on the voices and referred to the Education Committee. The House rose at midnight.

WELLINGTON, August 3. The' House met at 2.30 p.m. Mr ,T. M. Wilford (Hutt) took his seat for the first time this session.

CONDITIONS ON RELIEF WORKS. Replying to Mr D. G. Sullivan, the Minister of Public Works -(Mr K. S. Williams) said that if a copy of-the. allegations made regarding the conditions on

the Waiau-Parnassus relief works were handed to him he would be glad to have an immediate inquiry made. MILITARY AND COMMERCIAL AVIATION.

Replying to Mr H. Atmore (Nelson), the Prime Minister (Mr J. G. Coates) said that when the finance permitted it was the intention of the Minister of Defence to appoint in Great Britain a permanent New Zealand liaison officer in connection with the Air Force, whose duty it would be to keep the- Government posted in the latest information regarding military and commercial aviation. LEAGUE OF NATIONS. The Prime Minister laid on the table the report of the New Zealand representative at the eighth Assembly of the League of Nations at Geneva in 1927. At the request of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. E. Holland) the Prime Minister agreed to defer discussion until the Kellogg Pact was being debated.

HEALTH DEPARTMENT’S REPORT. The Minister of Health (Mr J. A. Young) laid on the table the annual report of the Health Department. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) urged that adequate financial provision should be made enabling a sufficient number of dental nurses to be appointed and trained to meet present requirements. Mr J. A. Nash (Palmerston North) supported this appeal in the interests of the children attending country schools.

The debate was continued by Messrs Buddo (Kaiapoi), W. E. Parry (Auckland Central), Sir George Hunter (Waipawa), W. H. Field (Otaki), T. E. Y. Seddon (Westland), R. P. Hudson (Motueka), J. Linklater (Manawatu), J. Horn (Wakatipu), H. M. Campbell (Hawke’s Bay), J. Mason (Napier), H. Holland (Christchurch North); H. E. Holland (Buller), Sir ‘John Luke (Wellington North), and H. S. S. Kyle (Riccarton). The general tenor of the discussion was in the direction of larger expenditure in promoting various means of improving the public health. PUBLIC DOMAINS AND PARKS.

When the House resumed at 7.30 p.m. the Public Domains and Parks Bill'was introduced by Governor-General's Message, and read a first time, and referred to the Lands Committee.PROPERTY LAW AMENDMENT. The Minister of Justice (Mr F. J. Rolleston) moved the second reading of fhe Property Law Amendment Bill which, ho said, was intended to give' relief if a leaseholder were refused renewal of a lease because he had committed some unsub stantial breach of the lease. In such a case the leaseholder vyould, under the Bill, have the right to appeal to the Supreme Court, and it would be for the court to say whether the refusal to renew the lease was equitable or not. The law already provided for relief in the case of forfeiture, and in this Bill he was adopting the same principle. In regard to renewals no rights enjoyed by the landlord were being taken away because his rights were protected by provisions of compensation. The Bill was being brought in to meet a particular case, but the principle was general, and that was why a general and not a particular Bill was being brought down. He recited the facts of the case which had given rise to the demand for the Bill, and declared that the facts of the case were such that no Government would stand idly by »and see a farmer ousted from land on which he had spent large sums of money when his breaches of covenant were technical rather than sub stantial. The Bill applied to a lease which had expired, and exception might be taken to it on that ground, but the case was such that he felt they must take action to prevent an injustice. He proposed to refer the Bill to the Statutes Revision Committee, to which names and other particulars would be supplied. At this stage the Speaker intervened and ruled that members must not discuss details of the particular cases mentioned by the Minister, since it was against the rules of the House to debate cases that were before the courts, but the House could. debate the general principle underlying the measure. The Leader of the Opposition said that, so far as the general principle of the Bill was concerned, he approved of it, but there were details which might require revision, but since the Minister had agreed to send the Bill to the Statutes Revision Committee, he was satisfied to leave it at that for the present.

Mr T. M. Wilford (Hutt) said the Bill was much too wide. There was no limit to the time when questions' of expired leases could be revived, and he suggested that subsection 1 of clause 3 should be considerably restricted, otherwise lessors might be subjected to the most irritating litigation. Mr J. Mason (Napier) thought that the Bill was one that should be passed if justice was to be done to many lessees in New Zealand.

Mr E. J. How’ard (Christchurch South) thought that the Bill was only part of the Government’s policy to make the leasehold tenure unpopular. Mr T. K. Sidey (Dunedin South) considered that the House should be very careful in passing restrospective legislation.

Messrs W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne), Mr J. Savage (Auckland West), and H. G. Dickie (Batea) supported the principle of the Bill. ■

Sir Apirana Ngata asked that the Bill be referred to the Native Affairs Committee, for Native leases were deeply involved in the Bill, and-he wanted to be able to assure his people that no injury was intended to them, a

The Munster, in reply, said the Bill did.not contain any attack on Native leases, and he would quite willingly have it referred to the Native Affaire Committee. He was prepared to consider the point raised by Mr Willord that clause 3 was too wide, and he would ask the Statutes Revision Committee to consider it. The Bill was read a second time and referred to the Statutes Revision Committee. DIVORCE BILL. Mr F. J. Rolleston moved the second reading of the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Bill. He said the Bill was really a consolidating measure. Usually in consolidating measures it was the dutv , com P der s to adhere closely to the language of existing Statutes, otherwise some change might unintentionally he made m the law, but when they had b i aC K t 0 1807 ’ aa they did in New Zealand, the case was slightly different In a general way the changes made in the law by this Bill were slight, the following being the more important:— (a) Failure to comply with a decree for restitution of conjugal rights is made a ground for judicial separation. It is a ground in England, and is a ground for dissolution in New Zealand. (b) Distinction between cases of adultery happening before and cases happening after June 1, 1899, had been abolished until the Divorce Act of 1898 was brought into operation on June 1, 1899. A wife could not obtain a divorce on the ground of adultery only unless it was incestuous adultery or accompanied by bigamy. She hal to prove in addition either cruelty or desertion for two years. The Act of IS9B altered the law on the subject, and gave the wife a right to obtain a divorce on the ground of adultery if committed after the Act of 1898 came Into force. When the Acts were consolidated in 1908 it was considered necessary to maintain the distinction between the cases happening before June 1, 1599, and those happening after that date, but it seemed to be unnecessary after the lapse of 29 years to maintain the distinction. The only possible eect of the change would be to give a wife a right to divorce in a case where her husband had committed adultery before June 1, 1899, and had not committed any matrimonial offeree since, which would give his wife the right to a divorce. The cnanee of there being such a case was, remote indeed. If the distinction were aboli hed as proposed, then sections 22 and 23 of the Act of 1908 became unnecessary, and they had been dropped. (c) The rule as to the retention of her domicile by a deserted wife notwithstanding that her husband had changed his domicile was extended by clause 12 so as to apply to the case of a wife who had been separated from her husband by agreement or otherwise, (d) The subject of collusion had been cleared up, and except in the case of adultery collusion was the only discretionary bar to relief. (e) It had been made clear that connivance was a bar in the case of adultery only. This was necessary, for it was absurd to talk about connivance where relief was sought on other grounds, as, for example, the existence of an agreement for separation. (f) Clause 33 dealing witn alimony and maintenance was taken from section 190 of the English Act of 1925. It got rid of the confusion created by the apparently conflicting provisions of sections 41 and 42 of the Act of 1908, and gave the Supreme Court the additional powers possessed by the High Court in England, (g) Section 29 of the Act of 1908 had been dropped. It appeared for the first time in the Act of 1898. It was difficult to know what it meant and it would be better out of the way. (h) The provisions contained in sections 68, 69, 70, and 71 were unnecessary, and had been dropped. They were taken tor the most part from the English Act ot 1857. The English Act o«f 1925 did not contain any such provisions. (i) Section 74 of the Act was unnecessary, and had been dropped. Earlier provisions mace clear the rights of a husband, (j) Section 5 of the Amending Act of 1912 (relating to the validity of certain marriages) had been omitted.

The Leader of the Opposition said that while the Bill cleared up the position ot the domicile of a New Zealand wife there was another class of. wife for whom no provision was made. For instance. when the American fleet was in New Zealand waters some of the American sailors' were married to New Zealand girls and promptly deserted them. They had no redress in this country because their husbands’ domicile was in America. He thought that class of case should be'met and he suggested that some clause should be inserted in the Bill before it was finally passed. Mr T. M. Wilford (Hutt) said the law should be altered so that a girl who was accused by a wife of adultery with her husband must be served with notice of that charge so that she might come to court ana defend herself. No such notice was now necessary, and he had previously tried to get the law amended, but the Government had not allowed him to do so. Generally, he congratulated the Minister of his revision of the law, but he would go further and give any woman the right to a divorce whose husband was an habitual drunkard. Divorces were not increasing in New Zealand except in some of the cities where men married “ frying pan ” wives, and in those cases he thought the ground of divorce should be indigestion. The Minister, in reply, said he did not think a consolidating Bill should be made the vehicle for increasing the grounds of divorce. 'mere were, however, minor alterations in the law which might-be considered. The Bill was read a second time and referred to the Statute* Revision Comuiittea. - -

HANMER CROWN LEASES. The Minister of Lands (Mr A. D. M’Leod) moved the second reading of the Hanmer Crown Leases Bill. He explained that the primary object of the Bill was to afford Crown lessees in the township of Hanmer and the immediate vicinity an opportunity for securing a more permanent form of lease in respect of lands held by them. The majority of these leases were for the term of four years without the right of renewal. They were granted under the powers embodied in the Land Act of 1924. There were 49 leases of township sections covering an area of 34 acres six perches, and 19 leases of suburban areas aggregating 402 acres, making a total of 67 leases covering an area of 436 acres. The Bill provided a new form of lease up to 21 years, with perpetual right of renewal under the Public Bodies Leases Act. All applications for new leases were to be considered by a special committee which would investigate each case on its merits and submit specific recommendations. There was a clause in the Bill providing that the Crown may resume possession of land containing mineral springs or natural gas. Mr M. J. Savage (Auckland West) claimed that Clause 14 contained a principle that the Reform Party had always denounced. The clause provided that no one owning interests in these Hanmer lands could part with those interests without first obtaining the consent of the Canterbury Land Board. Whenever the Labour Party advocated anything of that sort the Reform Party had always denounced it as a vicious, principle. Truly it was never too late to mend. Labour members complimented the Minister of Lands on the inclusion of Clause 14. He was marching on. The Minister of Education (Mr R. A. Wright) said that the clause was put in the Act as a cheek on “ dummyism.” That had nothing to do with tenure. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr 0. J. Hawken) said that Clause 14 applied to leasehold, not to freehold, which made all the difference between the case for the Reform Party and that for the Labour Party. The Minister of Lands, in reply, said the question of leasehold versus freehold was not raised in this Bill, but he hoped to remain long enough in the House to pass the enactment giving the freehold to all holders of rural land. Clause 14 in the Bill was necessary to - protect the Crown against aggregation and dummyism, and it had no other pur-

pose. It had been in the land law for many years, and it was curious that the Labour Party only now discovered its existence.

The second reading was agreed to on the voices, and the House rose at 11.40 p.m. till 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday.

NOTES FROM PRESS GALLERY.

WELLINGTON, July 31.

ONE-ARMED CAR DRIVERS.

An assurance that as little disability a s possible would be placed in th e wav of one-armed drivers was given by the Prime Minister in the House of Representatives to-day. when the subject of licenses for such disabled motorists was raised by M r J’ e Auckland East), who stated that artificial arms were a general hindrance rather than an assistance. Mr Lee asked the Prime Minister whether he realised the danger that might result to the community if one-armed drivers were compelled to wear artificial arms before they w’ere permitted to obtain licenses. “ I have two I am prepared to return to the department at any time,” said Mr Lee.

The Prime Minister said his endeavour would be to give one-armed drivers everv facility possible. The department had been asked to suggest some small contrivance for affixing to motor cars which would indicate to the public the direction * n . w bich the car was going. One-armed drivers could relv on the Government seeing that as little disability as possible wa s placed in their way as motorists. DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING. The terms of the appointment of the new director of town planning (Mr John Mawson) were made public in the House of Representatives to-day by the Acting Minister of Internal Affairs (Sir Maui Pomare) in reply to a question bv Mr G. W. Forbes (Hurunui). The Minister stated that the director was a full-time officer and that his salary was £l2OO a year. He was not permitted to engage in private practice. MENTAL HOSPITALS. In the House of Representatives to-day, when a discussion arose on the subject of mental hospitals, the question of payment for . patients was mentioned. The Minister in Charge of the Department (Mr J. A. Young) said the fee was £2 a week for each patient whose guardians or whose estate could pay it, but the admission was purely on medical certificates. There was a receiver in Wellington who conducted this section of the work. He was a very humane officer, and the* was no fear that any

family would be oppressed. Some paid 2s 6d a week, some nothing at all. The superintendent of the hospitals had no knowledge of the fees being paid for patients or v hether any fees were being paid at" all. He based his treatment purely on the needs of the patients.

READJUSTMENT OF PORTFOLIOS. A temporary .readjustment of portfolios has been made in view of the departure of Mr W. Nosworthy (Postmaster-gene-ral) with the New Zealand delegation to the Empire Parliamentary Conference in Canada. Mr K. S. Williams takes over the Post Office, Mr J. A. Young the Tourist Department, Mr F. J. Rolleston the Government Insurance Department, and Mr J. G. Coates External Affairs.

WELLINGTON, August 1. PUBLIC TRUST AND A BREWERY.

Replying to Mr J. S. Eliott (Oroua), who asked a question about the Public Trustees’s advertisement regarding a Wellington brewery, the Prime Minister to-day stated: The Public Trustee is administering the Macarthy trust, one of the assets of which is a brewery business. As the law of New Zealand stands at present brewing is a legal business entitled to the same degree of protection from a trustee as any other business in a trust estate. That being so, it is the duty of the Public Trustee to do all he possibly can to make the business a profitable one for the estate. Advertising is a recognised part of the present-day conduct of business, and therefore the Public Trustee deems it fitting to advertise the products of the brewery whenever it appears to him- that such a course will be advantageous to the estate. As for the association of the Public Trustee’s name with the brewery products, it is necessary under the Licensing Act for the name of the brewer and bottler to appear on any labels used. The pamphlet, “ A Guid ing Light,” was prepared by a leading advertising agent on behalf of the management of the brewery and approved by the Public Trustee. This pamphlet advertises the products of the brewery and draws attention of likely consumers to the charitable nature of the trust to which it belongs. SUPERPHOSPHATE PRICES. Replying to Mr J. R. Hamilton (Awarua), the Minister of Agriculture (Mr O. J. Hawken) to-day made the following statement:—The 'question of the disparity of superphosphate prices between the South Island and the North has on more than one occasion been investigated by the Government as it

has been realised that it is highly desirable that South Island farmers should be enabled to purchase fertilisers to the best advantage. The information obtained is to the effect that in the south longer haulages, the cost of which has to be met largely by the manufacturers, and higher works costs, consequent on smaller scale production, necessitate a higher selling price. The raw phosphate from Nauru and Ocean Islands is landed at the same price in the South Island as in the North. It may be pointed out that the present price of 44-46 superphosphate at Auckland, New Plymouth, and Wanganui is £4 17s 6d per ton, net., f.0.b., while at Hornby, Burnside, and Invercargill it is £5 15s per ton, less 5 per cent, discount for cash, f.0.b., the difference between the North and the South Island thus being Ils 9d per ton when the discount is given. Having regard to the necessities of the farmers and to the honourable member’s request the Government will institute further inquiries as to the present-day position. AN APPARENT ANOMALY. Some amusement was caused in the House of Representatives to-day when Mr H. G. R. Mason (Eden) introduced a Licensing Amendment Bill, which he described as being of a non-contentious nature.

“Is it three years or six years?” asked the Prime Minister laughingly. Mr Mason: It has nothing to do with three years or six years. Mr Coates: We shall try to help you.

Mr Mason: Thanks very much. An explanation of the contents of the Bill by Mr Mason showed that he was not- attempting to deal with the issues which have loomed so largely in licensing legislation. He said that under the existing law wine growers were allowed to sell their vintages, but they were not allowed to co-operate for marketing their goods. The object of the Bill was to remove this apparent disability.

GENERAL MANAGER OF RAILWAYS.

Full information concerning the terms of the appointment of the new general manager of railways (Mr H. H. Sterling) was promised the House by the Prime Minister to-day when replying to a question by the Leader of the'Op position (Mr H. E. Holland). Mr Holland, while paying a tribute to the worth of Mr Sterling, expressed the opinion that the country was entitled to know the terms of the appointment as far as superannuation was concerned.

The Prime Minister replied that he would be guilty of discourtesy to other members of the House if he replied to the question there and then for there was already’ a number of questions on the Order Paper. He did not want to deal with the subject piecemeal fashion, and full information would be given at a later date. CONDEMNED STOCK. A total of 5807 cattle and four swine was condemned and slaughtered under the Stock Act last year. The amount paid in compensation was £15,447. The amount received in respect of the disposal of the carcasses was £1616.

WELLINGTON, August 2 LOCAL RATING.

The appointment of a Royal Commission to investigate the problem of local rating throughout the Dominion was advocated by Mr W. H. Field (Otaki) in a question to the Minister of Internal Affairs, of which he gave notice in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr Field said there was an acute and growing controversy throughout New Zealand on the subject. Frequent changes in. the system of rating in various districts were made and undoubted loss and hardship resulted to very many individuals. He suggested that the commission the Government should set up should consist of independent men versed and skilled in the subject, and that the legislative adoption of the report that was brought down might bring about a just system of rating for universal use throughout the country.

MULTILATERAL TREATY. A brief statement concerning New Zealand’s adhesion to the proposed multilateral treaty for the renunciation of war was made by the Prime Minister (Mr J. G. Coates) in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr Coates stated that the New Zealand Government had been invited to sign the treaty at Paris on August 27 and arrangements had been made accordingly. It was expected that the treaty woifld be signed on that date on behalf of New Zealand by the High Commissioner for New Zealand in London (Sir James Parr), with whom would be associated the Minister of Labour (Mr G. J. Anderson), who was at present in England. LAND DEFENCE. Comparative figures were quoted by the Minister of Defence (Mr F. J. Rolleston) in the House of Representatives to-day to prove that New Zealand’s expenditure on land defence was not excessive.

Excluding naval defence, said the Minister, the United Kingdom in 1927-1928 spent £41,565,000, or 17s 4d per head of poulation. South Africa spent £923,924, or 10s lOd per head of population, and Canada £2,818.000, or 6s 5d per head of population. The latest figures for Australia (1926-1927) showed an expenditure of £2,702,220, dr 8s lid per head of population. New Zealand last year spent £481,759, or 6s 7d per head of population. Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central): Is Singapore included? The Minister: That is naval defence. It is not in these figures. Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East): Then the figures are not accurate? The Prime Minister (sharply): Yes. They are quite accurate. Proceeding, the Minister of Defence observed that the figures showed that New Zealand was not spending as much

as the United Kingdom, South Africa, or Australia, and only slightly more than Canada.

WELLINGTON, August 3. AIR FORCE LIAISON OFFICER. Th e appointment at some future date of a New Zealand Air Force officer for haison duties in England was foreshadowed by tlie Prime Minister (Mr J. G. Coates) in the House of Representatives to-day. Coates said that for two years a senior air force officer had been stationed m England with the object of collecting information, respecting military and commercial aviation, and upon his return he was entrusted with th e formulation of a scheme, now well known, which provided for air bases at Wellington and Auckland, and with the selection of the types, of machine to be obtained for service in New Zealand. For some time consideration had been given to the question of stationing a liaison officer in Britain, but the immediate concern was that of cost. He believed, howeverthat the Minister of Defence had in mind, when suitable opportunity offered, the making of such an opportunity. RELIEF WORKS. An inquiry into the conditions obtaining at the Waiau-Parnassus relief works was promised by the. Minister of Public Works (Mr K S. Williams) in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) said he had received complaints from a worker that the camp was pitched on swampy muddy ground, that the men had been refused straw for their beds, and had been given wet bunks on which to sleep. It was also alleged that the men had been kept working all hours, including the King’s Birthday and Anzac Day. that they had been kept waiting for an unduly long time for their correspondence and pay, and that they had to keep explosives in the camp as proper places were not provided. It was further stated that the sanitary conveniences were inadequate. If you will let me have a copv of the allegations I shall be glad to have an immediate inquiry made,” said the Minister. WELLINGTON, August 5. WORK FOR THE WEEK.

The presentation of the Financial Statement on Tuesday will be the most important business in the House of Representatives this week. The debate will be commenced on either Thursday or Friday. It is the intention of the Government to make further progress during the week with some of the measures now on the Order Paper. Chief among these is the Kinematograph Films Bill, which is to be referred to a special Select Committee after the second reading. For the private members’ day (Wednesday) there is nothing contentious on the Order Paper except Mr H. G. R. Mason’s Licensing Amendment Bill, the object of which is to allow New Zealand vinegrowers to cooperate in the manufacture and sale of their wines.