Parliamentary.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2084, 8 September 1875, Page 2

Parliamentary.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

WELLINGTON.

Tuesday. Mr Harrison asked if the Minister of Justice would appoint a Deputy Commissioner of Stamp Duties at Greymouth. -

Mr Reynolds said the Government did not intend to make any suck appointment at present. . In reply to Mr J. C. Brown, Mr Eeynolds said the Government intended to erect Telegraph and Post-office at Havelock, Otago, and expected it would soon be ready. . In reply"to Mr Bradshawj Mr JRichardson said the Government intended to introduce a bill to amend the Adulteration of Food Act as soon as other business permitted. Mr Murray asked if the Government intended to take measures to prevent the overloading of vessels ? Mr Reynolds explained that there were three Acts containing provisions to prevent overcrowding and overloading of steamers and sailing vessels already, and the Government were then taking proceedings in one case. In reply to Mr Stout, Mr Atkinson said, as far as the Government knew, no advertisement had been issued calling for tenders for the conveyance of immigrants, but all the New Zealand Shipping Companies had been comunicated with on the matter.

Mr Buckland created a lively discussion by moving that a committee be appointed fco inquire lyhether the appointees of Superintendents did not ppme under the fifth clause of the Disqualification Act. He did so because he heard Dr Feather-, ston declare in Auckland that Superintendents were executive officers of the Crown, and it was specially provided for in the Act that no appointees of theirs drawing public money as salary could sit in the House. '.'■"''".

Mr Atkinson, speaking for the Government, thought the .clause did not apply, but the moyer was at liberty to test the opinion of the House, Mr Macandrew moved an amendment to make the motion embrace all members

of the House on account of the honorarium, and when Buckland agreed to withdraw his motion at the wish of the House! Mr Macandrew pressed his amendment to a division, and lost it by 40 to 23.

The motion was then withdrawn, but Mr Buckland said he would test the matter another way. .Before going into Committee on the Abolition Bill, Mr Atkinson replied, as he had promised at Friday's sitting. ■ The burden of his remarks went to show [ that the Government had not and never had any design upon the land-funds of Otago and Canterbury, and quoted a large number of figures to show that Abolition was an immediate necessity, quite irrespective of anything in connection with the land fund. It was solely dictated by a desire for a system of colonial finance. He considered that, with the exception of Mr Montgomery, all the Opposition speakers had "been amply answered by those supporting the bill, and the figures he cited were mainly in reply to Mr Montgomery, and went to show that the colony could easily fulfil all the promises the Government made in connection with Abolition. The House rose at 5.30. This day. On the House resuming last night— r Mr O'Borke took occasion, before going into committee, to condemn the Abolition Bill as a system of bribes. If passed, he foresaw it would lead to political torpor, stagnation and degradation in the whole Colony, excepting Wellington, where it would develope political corruption. Mr Macandrew made a last appeal for delay. He challenged the Government to go to the country. He would oppose the Bill at every stage. Mr Stout then moved an amendment, the object of which was to postpone the question until the Government had matured a scheme and submitted it to the country. Sir George Grey, Messrs Wood, Reid and Fitzherbert supported. " Mr Luther Shepherd and Mr Mervyn were against. The amendment was put and lost by 41 t022. : ■. ' . „ . After another eager discussion as^to whether the debate should be resumed at 2.30 or 7.30 on Thursday, the latter was agreed to, and the House adjourned at 2.50. \ . „