House of Representatives.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4761, 29 September 1893, Page 1

House of Representatives.

Representatives. Thubsday, Sept. 28. AFTERNOON SITTING. The Honse met at 2.30 p.m. the volunteers. Mr Palmer asked the Minister for Defence—(l) Were the attack and criticisms of Colonel Fox npon the volunteer officers of the Colony, published in his report, made confidentially to the Government and not to be published % (2) was the report published by the direction of Colonel Fox himself j or ,(3) ia not the publication of _such criticisms under the circumstances aforesaid contrary to the Queen's regulations ? The Hon E. J. Seddon (.aid the officers first had to show that they had been attacked. He thought it was only fair criticism. In the second place, Colonel Fox had no power to direct the publication of the report; and thirdly, Parliament had power to overrule the Queen's regulations. Mr Palmer moved the adjournment of the Hon.e, and contended thatthe Queon'"-* regulations had power in New Zealand. Mr E. Thompson defended Colonel Fox's report, and said it was very valuable. _gr James Mills said the general feeling

-*^y , -reW."W**T^Ntn^iMK~i»^^ wb's that Colonel Fox's report was a very 1 valuable document, and that the Government had not treated that officer fairly in 1 the manner in which the report had been dealt with. Mr Rhodes did not believo in tho report 1 in soice re?pecfs. He did not think that ! country corps, some of which were in a 1 high state cf efficiency, should be disbanded, fie would back the country corps agaiust t ! io town corpa for certain work. ; Dr Newman greatly regretted that Colonel Fox's rerort had been shunted by 1 tbe Government. Mr Duncan did not agree with the dis-bandm-nt of couniry corpß. Mr Swan emphatically protested against Colonel Fox's report, and tbe manner in which it had b.en treated by the Government. Mr Allen thought Mr Palmer's question out of order. It was a deliberate attack on Colonel Fox. Certain officers who had been found want : ng were ruing their influence against that offi:er. He warmly praissd the report, and said tbat the Premier in publishing it had done good service to tbe country. Mr W. Kellt thought the number of officers throughout the Colony .hould be reduced. Captain Eussell did not agree with euch a proposal, as the standard and number of officers should be kopt up in 1 times of peace if the'.r men were- to be proper' y handled in time of war. He thought the Premier was wrong in publish- ; ing Colonel Fox's report, and said it should havebeen treated as confidential.- Itseemed to bim that a gentleman who had been select _d for this work in the Old Country, as ' Colonel Fox had baen, musthave understood j his work much better than those members who had spoken on the report that after- ' noon. He himself had been a volunteer ( officer, and he asserted that the men of • the volunteer force were, as a rule, incom- ■ parably better drilled than th.9 officers 1 were, and that be:ng so, he thought \ Celonel Fox's references to the officers, 1 however unfortunate they might be, were Bomewhat deserved. His opinion wa. that j the reason why Colonel Fox recommended ( the disbandment of country corps was _ because he found it was absolutely im- _ possible to obtain sufficient capitation to 1 keep them together. . The Hon J. G. Wabd defended the j Government in its purchase of Martini- 1 Henry rifles, and said they were strongly < recommended by Lieutenant-Colonel Som- _ merville. The Government had only done _ what anyone else would have done, and ] had got the rifles as cheaply aa it could. - Colonel Fox had alao advised the Govern- \ ment to purchase rifles at £2 each. There ] Bhould therefore not bs any attempt to \ attack the Government on this matter. He . did not intend to find fault with Colonel Fox, £ and he recognised his report as a very able ( one. He thought, however, that Colonel _ Fox bad made soma serious mistakes, and 1 tfc afc owing to his want of Colonial ( experience he was doing volunteering a j gi eat deal of harm. 1 Mr Meredith thought Colonel Fox's *j report fair and fearless, but not faultless. \ He regretted that Colonel Fox had recom- ] mended the disbandment of country corps. { Mr Buckland deprecated purchasing - cheap rifles and ammunition. MartiniHenry rifle 3 could be bought for 17s 6d up £ to JEB, but if the Government thought £2 15s sufficient for rifles, that waß its affair. ( It would make a great mistake, however, ] by purchasiug inferior weapons, and what- \ ever else it did, it should get first-clais ] arms. _ Mr Carncross was not one of " Fox's - martyrs," and therefore he was not per- i Bonally concerned in the report. So far as ( he could ascertain, however, the report wa_ fair and impartial. He thought il . was unnecessary to import Colonel Fox at j all, as there were many capable officers , already in the Colony, but as he was here j his recommendations should receive full consideration. Ho condemned the two- , thirds regulation as being most unfair, , and unless they were allowed one-half, the , volunteer companies could not possibly 1 obtain capitation, and therefore could not exist. He thought aiso that ib was moat unfair to put rifle corps on the same footing as volunteers. Sir John Hall would not have risen at all, were it not for the unfair atiack on Colonel Fox by the Premier and the Post-master-General. The main ground of Mr Ward's attack was because, being on parade and being asked to take charge of his company, he refused to do so, aa it might be unpleasant to another officer. women's votes. Mr Scobie Mackenzie called attention to the fact that no facilities wer<_ being given for women voting at the next election, and said he had received a telegram from one district to the effect that no electoral form 3 could be obtained there at all. The Hon E. J. Seddon said instructions lal been given to every Begi-trar to use every means to put women on the roll. He hnd been assured that no less than 450,000 forma had been sent out already. The debate was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment. EVENING SITTING. The House resumed at 7.30. STOCK BILL. The Stock Bill was committed. In Clause 2 it was resolved that the Bill should come into operation on Jan. 1 next. Mr G. Hutchison proposed an addition which would provide that Section 54, authorising stock to be driven only in the day-time, should come into operation in any district only after a petition from a majority of the stick owners of that I district. ; Agreed to. Clause 42, annual dipping compulsory, elicited a lengthy discussion. It was eventually decided that dipping should tike place between Jan. 1 and April 30. The clause was further amended so aB to enable the time for dipping to be extended for any owner on his application, provided that the extended time did not exceed sixty days. The clause was also altered so as to provide that the penalty for every sheep not dipped should be two shillings instead of five. Clause 72. The Governor may declare earmarks to ba made only by puncturing. Mr Buchanan took strong exception to this clause, and eaid it would only be passed in the Stock Committee at a thinly attended meating. He moved that the clause ba struck out. The Hon J. M'Kek zie pointed out that the clause would come into operation only by an order in Council, and to give an opportunity to stock owners to object, it would not be given effect to for twelve months. If he found a majority of stock owners throughout the Coloay opposed to it, th. order in Council would nob be issued. After considerable debate Mr Buchanan's amendment was lost by 32 to 22. Mr Buchanan moved to strike out subsection C, providing for lire brands on the faco as a_.e marks. He said it would causo an imoavenienca that would be almost intolerable. The Hon J. MMlenzie could not accopt the amendm'int. He said fi.a branding was common in the Old Country. Carried by 27 to 25. ] The Hon J. M'Kenzie said the amend- 1 meut just carried would render tii** whole CUuse useless. Ho ih.rcf are ruovei fcfrat ! it be struck out. Agreed to, and Clause 72 struck out. , Schedule C was nlso si ruck out. The Bill waa theu reported with amendment?, read a third timo and passed. midland eailway. Mr Guinness moved— "Tha. in the opinion of the Hou.e it i 3 expedient that

*.*Wl*_*__j)_Kg3_«3«re^aa'4*ra3^_3g^ tho report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Midland Railway be adopted." The report wa_ as follows -.—The Public Accounts Committee has carefully considered the proposals made by the New Zealand Midland Eailway Company for a modification of ita contract, and has agreed to the following report: — (1) The Committee cannot recommend the acceptance of the propoEa's of the Company as embodied in the draft contract submitted by it; (2) The Committee recommends that the contract be amended so as to provide that in lieu of land grants being made to the Company on account of work hereafter to be executed by it, debentures o. a corresponding value, plus fifteen per cent of B 1 value of the land, be issued to the Company, bearing interest at the rate of three and a half per cent per annum, such issue of debentures in lieu of land grant* to be conditional on the Company surrendering its right to select land within the reserved area of about 5,600,000 acres, after deducting the quantity to which it is entitled, and to which it may be entitled for works in progress. (3) That an extension of time for the completion of the work be granted to thelCompany, such extension not to exceed five years from the date of signing the new contract. (4) That, if desired by the Company, the debentures to which it may become entitled be deposited with the Public Trustee, to be issued to the Company in, as near as may be, twenty equal half-yearly instalment, the interest of each debenture while in the hands of the Pnblic Trustee to be applied as the Company may direct. That this provision shall not be considered a variation of the other terms of contract. Sir E. Stout moved as an amendment — "That as tbere ia no guarantee that if the contract with the Midland Eailway Company is altered in the way proposed in the report of the Public Accounts Committee, that tho railway from Nelson to Beefbon, and from Springfield to . Hokitika will be completed, this House is of opinion .hat no variation should be made in the existing contract/ The petition >f the Company now was that it had no more money, aad it came to Parliament md asked for a million and a quarter of bonds. This was on condition that the Company made the railway, and after it had made it the Colony could buy it back. It would be far .heaper for tbe Colony to borrow three millions and make the line itself, than t. yrant this money and after that buy the line. He held that such a proposal was itterly absurd. It was perfectly evident ;hat the Company never intended to touch Nelson, and it naturally wanted to tako .he line that would pay it best. If, more)V6r, they gave the Company this concesjion, it would probably come back to the Colony next year for further concessions. _v.g to the bogey of a lawsuit that had been raised, it was simply a bogey, and the Uolony had done nothing to cause it. The proposals gave them no guarantee of pernanence, and he held that it would pay ;he Colony much better to construct the me for itself. He felt sure that the Houso would never listen to such an .xtravagaut or ridiculous proposal as that nade by this Company. Mr Scobib Mackenzie seconded the .mendment. Dr Nkwman referred to the extraordinary attitude assumed by the Government over this matter, and complained .hat the Government had given them no lead at all. Hs strongly opposed the notion, and referred to a most important point, namely, that the Company wanted £700,000 for constructing only half of its sontract. ' Mr Fish understood that the Government would move another amendment against the report of the Committee, and he would therefore vote against Sir E. Stout's amendment. Mr C. H. Mills said the Company antered into this contract with its eyes open, and what it agreed to do should be carried out faithfully. He was not prepared to vote for the report of the Committee. The Hon W. P. Eeeves, speaking as a member for Christchurch and not as a Minister, .aid the Colony was not asked to part with a single penny till the Company had gone on with it; contract. As the Company did the work, and not before that, the Colony would pay for it in a certain way. Iha Colony assented to the land grant system when the Company first started. He said if comparisons were made between the amount of public money spent in Canterbury and in Otago or Wellington, Canterbury's share would seem very microscopic indeed. He would ask of what general benefit the Otago Central would ba to the Colony as a whole ? It would certainly benefit Otago. He denied that there wou.d be any fearful liabilities such a3 had been spoken of by some hon. member?. The Midland Eailway Company did notaikfor £700,000 it waß only aa the Company made the railway that it got land. Nothing was to be given to tha Company till it had earned it. Was it advisable, therefore, that they should see the Colony involved in a lawsuit, or that they should get their land back and give debentures instead P Mr Buckland said the Company took up this contract knowing what it wa3 doing, and it was well aware of the position. Sir John Hall had listened with surprise and regret to Sir E. Stout's speech, and he had seldom heard more unfair arguments.- He said the Company had grievances in the matter of taxation, and as to the argument that the Colony was bonnd to purchase the line, there was no foundation for that. He referred to the various objections made against the Midland Eailway, and as to Mr Scobie Mackenz : e's complaint about tho Otago Central, he said money had been voted year after yosr for tho o_a.ro Central, till there had been nearly __.800.000 spant on it altogether, whilst the Colony had not speni a penny on the Midland line. The Company had good grounds for a lawsuit against the Colony, and there was no doubt that the Company was entitled to an extension of time. Mr Taylor opposed Sic E. Stout's amendment. The debate was still proceeding at 2 a.m.