PARLIAMENTARY.

Thames Advertiser, Volume XIII, Issue 3635, 24 June 1880, Page 3

PARLIAMENTARY.

(Pbb Pot Association.)

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Wellington, Wednesday. Tho House met at 2130 to-day. THE BOTriiE,,LICENSE. Ovoradozen petitions were presented from Otago praying for the retention of the bottle license.

the civil sebvice commission,

Mr Macahdbew asked if tbe wholo of tho Civil Sorvice Commission evidence will be laid on tho table; also returns showing the nature and extent of contracts ontered into with contractors which the Middle Island Commissioner of .Railways iB alleged to be partner with. Mr Oliyjjb replied that the evidence had not been reoeived from the Commission.

Mr Bsown movod an adjournment of the House, and, in doing so, insisted that it was only right the ovidence in question should be before tho Houso.

Mr Gisbobne concurred. The report was a most alarming one, and the country had a right to insist upon knowing whether it was based on reliable data.

Mr Macahdbew said the reply was not satisfactory. If the report was correct the South Island Eailway Commissioner should be at once dismissed.

Mr Oiiveb said it was to bo presumed some portion of the evidence would be produced,, but it might not be proper to produce the whole. The Eailway Commissioner had been instructed to report, and his statement would be laid on the table. .

Mr Speight said this was one of the first resnlts by Government by Commission. Parliament was entitled to have overy particle of the evidence produoed. Ho knew unreliable evidence had been read, and they had a right to know the value ofthe evidence taken as a wholor

Mr Reeves concurred,

Mr Murray could well understand that it would be unfair in many instances to divulge the nature of evidence given. A committee should bo appointed to inquire and report as to whether or not ( tne report was based on reliable evidence. 1 Mr Turnbull thought the demand made for the evidence was Somewhat premature. Mr Ham said the whole subject would have to be gone into when the report was brought on for consideration, and the discussion at present was premature. He apprehended all the evidence would be forthcoming. The.'Commission was entitled to credit instead of being reflected upon, as some members had attempted to do. The report contained (many valuable suggestions, although he would not be prepared to say Government would be prepared to adopt the whole of these suggestions. Mr-DsLiUTOUR complained that the report had been supplied to certain newspapers throughout the colony before it was before Parliament. Ho concurred in the opinion that the evidence should be produced. Mr Seddon condemned the action sought to be taken as an unjustifiable attempt to interfere with Government in its first efforts towards much needed retrenchment. If the evidence were demanded the names of witnesses should be suppressed. Mr Stewart quoted _ Parliamentary precedents to.show that it was not the practice to produoe such evidence. It was a point left to the discretion of Government themselvos.

Mr Hutchison did not see that , any gjjod end would be Berved' by 'producing tho ovidence, and condemned the action as an attempt to interfere with Government in making much needed retrenchment.

Mr McLean concurred.

Mr Bolleston said he had no doubt but the evidence would be forthcoming, and the fullost opportunity given the officers implicated to rebut tho oharges made.

Sir Gbor&e Grey said the fullest possible information should be given, as the report reflectod not only on the professional, but also on the personal, character of servants.

Major Atkinson argued that the debate had proceeded on a false issue. No one knew whether or not the Commission had or had not furnished a copy of the evidence to officers implicated by report, They were bound to assume that the Commission had taken every precaution to get the report Ifysed on reliable e'vidoncc. . Evidently it was persons, and not the service itself, that members were solioitous about. The motion for adjournment was negatived on the voices. Dr Walhb gave notice that he would ask Government to state at what time copies of the report were furnished for transmission to the Auckland Herald, Chrislohurch Press, _ and Otago Daily Times onFriday evening. THE NO-CONFIDENCE MOTION. The debate on the no-confidence motion was resumed by Mr Thompson, and interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment.