THE WAIRARAPA STANDARD THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1877.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume 7, Issue 615, 11 October 1877, Page 2

THE WAIRARAPA STANDARD THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1877.

On Monday evening Mr Larnach moved that the Government does not possess the confidence of the House, which, after a short debate, was carried on a division by the votes of 45 against 42 including pairs. Sir R. Houglas, who had paired with Mr Bryce, being locked in during the division, had to record his vote with the ayes, or otherwise the division list would have stood 44 to 42, the Government being defeated, consequently, by a majority of two, instead of three as shewn by the division. The speech made by Mr Larnach was either a very brief one, or has been only briefly reported. He maintained that the Ministry were utterly incapable of conducting the business of the session. He complained of the remissness of the Government in laying out the railways. Had they been more active we would now have many miles more of railways throughout the colony, that are now in an unfinished state. Another matter was the sale of the Luna. He, of his own personal knowledge, was aware of a firm that was qui*e prepared to give £ISOO more for that steamer than had been paid for her. Mr Larnach then went on to condemn the sale of public property by private contract. The charge of disqualification that had been brought against him was the outcome of pure animus. The Government also had shown a remissness in not opening up the coalfields of the colony. The whole police force of the colony had been disorganized. This in itself was a serious case of maladministration, which, amongst the many others, tended to deprive the Government of the confidence of the House.

Mr McLean, as the weakest member of the Ministry, replied to Mr Larnach. He said;— The Government had faithfully endeavored to administer the funds of the colony in opening up the railways without partiality to any district. Otago would find on inquiry that it had received full justice in this matter. The Government had exercised great prudence in not launching out into works which they had not m jney to complete. The Land Bill brought forward was a liberal measure, but it had perhaps a good deal to do with the motions brought forward by Mr Larnach. If the Opposition really desired the settlement of the country why did they not let this Bill pass before the present motion ? Regarding the sale of the Luna, it was known last session she was for sale. A Sydney man oftered £3OOO. This amount was refused and £SOOO asked. Subsequently an offer of £4OOO was made, and that offer was communicated by telegraph to four Ministers who were absent. They all replied to the effect, “sell her.” A sum of £2OOO was since spent on her ; but he (Mr McLean) was quite prepared to sell her to Mr Larnach for less than £BOOO.

Then followed Mr Lusk who is reported to have said that he regretted that the Government had put forward one of its members who admitted his own weakness It would have been better had one of its members replied who would have made a statesmanlike speech, and not plead for mercy on the ground of weakness. The Government was entirely without the confidence of the House or the country. Mr Lusk went on to review the action of the Government with reference to the various Bills that had been brought in by it. The Education Bill owed its present shape to the exertions of the Opposition. It was shorn altogether of its original and distinctive features. The Government was without any policy, and if it had a policy it aid not possess the strength in the House of carrying it out. The Land Bill he considered would be equally unsatisfactory to all sections of the community, and in all parts of the island. In the financial administration of the aflairs of the country by the Government he had no confidence. He condemned in toto the financial proposals of the Government. Mr Lusk then proceeded at considerable length to criticise the county system. He pointed out its manifold defects, and thought that the Government should have before now brought down a Bill to remedy those defects. This was an essential measure, and the Government should have dealt with at once

With regard to the Counties Amendment Bill we are disposed to coincide with Mr Lusk, and it is a matter for regret that the Government did not bring forward that measure at an earlier period of the session so that in the event of a dissolution an expression of public opinion could have been taken as to the form of local government which it was desired to replace the Provincial system. Mr Sharp objected to the financial policy of the Government and was in favor of one common purse The recourse to Treasury Bills for large amounts should be dispensed with. Mr Woolcock agreed with Mr Sharp that the land fund should be colonial. In his opinion it was unadvisable to make any change in the Ministry at present. He said; he would support any measure for providing for manhood suffrage, with a residence qualification. He thought a change in the incidence of taxation was; also highly necessary. It had been said that the Ministry were too conservative ; but take the present. Land Bill for instance, and it would be found that it was very liberal, and would enable the people of the colony to settle upon the lands. The Government had also pledged themselves next session to make a change in the incidence of taxation. The tendency of the measures of the Ministry was to make the land fund colonial property. He felt with other hon. members who had spoken during the debate there would be no sound system of finance till the land fund was made colonial. The policy of the Government had been made in harmony with the circumstances of the colony. The Government in their Public Works policy and finance had done as well as could have been expected. He pointed out the discordant elements of the Opposition, and before he voted against the present Ministry he wanted to know what would be the policy of their successors.

At the conclusion of Mr Woolcock’s speech there were loud cries for a division, and no other member rising to apeak, Mr Larnach briefly replied. The speaker then put the question, and a

I division was taken with the following I results . Opposition. Bnlgent Grey Rolle»ton Ballanco Hamlin Seaton BarfT Hislop, Sha> , p(tel.') Bastings Hodgkinson Sheehan Brandon Joyce Shrimski Brown, J. C. Larnach(teller) Stout Brown, J. E. Lusk Swanson Bunny Macandrew Takamoaua Curtis Montgomery Thomson I)e Latonr Murray Tole Diguan Nahe Travers Douglas O’Eorke Wakefield Fisher Pyke Wallis Gisborne Rees Wood, W. Goteknmenx. Atkinson Kelly Richmond Beet ham Kennedy Rowe Bowen Kenny Russell Burns Lumsden Seymour Button Manders Stevens Carrington McLean Sutton Fitzroy Moorhouse Tawiti Fox Morris (tel) Teschemaker Gibbs Murray Ay nsley Wason (tel) Harper Ormond Whitaker Henry Beid Williams Hunter Reynolds, Wooicoek Hursthouso Richard.-on Paibs. Opposition Government R. G. Wood Cox Taiaroa Stafford Bryce Douglas It will be seen from the above that Mr Bunny voted for and Mr Beetham against the motion. The only other members of the Wellington Provincial district who voted for the Government besides Mr Beetham were Messrs Fox and Hunter. Mr W. Johnston did not vote, and the votes of Messrs Ballance, Bryce, Brandon, Travers, and Bunny were recorded against the Government. On the motion of Major Atkinson the House then adjourned until Tuesday at half-past seven. On Tuesday evening, accordingly, the House met, when the Premier announced that Ministers had tendered their resignations, but retainud office until their successors are appointed. They recommended His Excellency to send for Mr Larnach. That gentleman had waited on His Excellency accordingly, when he asked for leave to consult his political ■ friends, which was of course granted, aud on his motion the House adjourned until half past seven on Friday.