HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXIX, Issue 10951, 1 September 1885, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

(per united press association.) Wellington, August 31. The House met at 7.30 p.m. Major Atkinson said that before proceeding to tbe orders of the day he would like to ask the Government whether the Premier intended moving the postponement of the Government business in order to proceed with the remaining resolutions. Tho Hon. Mr Stout said tbe House, by affirming the amendment of the member for Port Chalmers, affirmed the principle that the resolutions as a whole were negatived. Major Atkinson asked whether the Premier intended keeping the promise he had made that he (Major Atkinson) should have an opportunity of moving his resolutions. The Hon. Mr Stout said there was no breach of faith involved in his action. Major Atkinson asked the Speaker's ruling on the question. The Speaker said his impression was that Mr Macandrew's amendment only affected the particular resolution that had been before the House. The Hon. Mr Stout said he was not prepared to postpone the orders of the day. Major Atkinson said the Premier distinctly pledged himself to give him (Major Atkinson) an opportunity of moving his resolutions. He submitted that the Premier had not fulfilled his engagement. He also submitted that the Premier had lost the confidence of the House and of his fellow colonists, for, although he had had a majority, he hid been told by several members that they did not like supporting him on that occasion. His majority was also caused by the four Maori votes. Mr O'Oallaghan rose to a point of order. He did not think the member for Egmont was justified in referring to the native members in that manner. The Speaker said he was not justified in doing so. The members of the Houre were all on an equal footing. Major Atkinson said the Premier met the first resolution by an extraordinary evasion, and now he was using the forms of the House to prevent the remaining resolutions coming on. Mr Macandrew said Major Atkinson should be the last man to refer to that matter. Did he not recollect that in 1879 be (Mr Maoandrew) had moved a resolution, when Major Atkinson had pursued exactly the same course. Ha had kept the resolution at the bottom of the order paper till ho had scoured fontvotes to defeat it. Oolonel Trimble said the position in 1879 was very different from the present. The Government at that time had not had an opportunity of deolaring their polioy, and a majority of the House was determined they should get that opportunity. The Hon. Mr Stout said tbe honourable member for Egmont had forgotten the division list the other evening. If he remembered rightly there were 12 votes against his motion. He contended that the Government had done what no other Government would have done, namely, to meet three want of confidence motions in one night. He would ask any person not biassed to say whether Mr Macandrew's amendment had not tra» versed tho whole of Major Atkinson's resolutions. Besides, tbe whole of these resolutions would have to be disoussed by the House during the session. Mr Wakefieia said the reason it was necessary*; tefc &ove-:tto -.three want of | £onfideneq'y^radn»%<^rHtaoause the Ministry shirked the and burked discussion! by moving Mr Mao« andrew'a amendnient. The manner in which they escaped defeat was well known, and be would not refer to it. He said the precedent of 1879 did not apply in the least to the present case. The hon. member for Port Ob aimers knew porfeotly well that he moved his no confidence motion in 1879 before the Hall Ministry were actually in possession of the benches. They all knew what a successful leader of the Opposition Mr Macandrew was. Neither did he display any capacity for governing the country when he was a Minister. It had been said by a member of that House that the hon. member for Port Ohalmers had muddled away two millions of money when a Minister without knowing where it went to. How then could that honourable gentleman Buy there wore no other honourable members in the House who could govern the country in a capable manner. He defended the action of the four Auckland members in supporting the Hall Ministry in 1879, and said no one could acouee those gentlemen of corrupt motives in doing so. He was surprised at the action of the Premier in evading the present resolutions, as it was an honourable understanding by the House that the resolutions should be disoussed separately. Sir Julius Yogel said the attabk made by Mr Wakefield on the member for Port Chalmers was utterly unprovoked. He thought it would be a good day for the member for Selywn when he earned the respect felt jn the House and the country for the member for Port Chalmers. He contended that tbe member for Port Chalmers in 1879 was i perfectly justified in moving a want of confidence in the then Government. Speaking of the first resolution, he said if tbat had been carried ii would have meant throwing 4000 railway men out of employment. He wondered how the member for Egmont could pose „„ t l ■ la ader of tbe Opposition, when his Solution was £"? w * W* by 12 votes The member for Oamaru was . ltle W B *' successful leader of the- Opposition they had yet had. He contended that if the Government wished to bring the remaining resolutions on they oould no doubt have done so, aB there was so much other business before themj he also said it was the wish of a large majority of the House that thoy should not waste any more time, but get on with the business of tho session. Mr Bryce said he was gratified to find that the Treasurer bad such a high opinion of tbe member for Port Chalmers, because if he oould refer to Hansard he would be able to show tbat ha did not entertain suoh favoin'sble opinions in times passed. He did not think much importance was attached to the present question, except in so far as it affected the faith of the Government. He concluded that the position in 187,8 and tho present were not a.t ail analogous. Mr Pratt said some members wero annoyed at the part taken by the Maori members in the division. He thought it was the rule of the House that when questions were discussed they should not be carried outside the House, but he found that the European members allowed their feelings to go outside. He voted for the Government because he had been returned to do so. Mr Fergus said the member who had just spoken understood English as well as any member in the House. He thought tjie days of special Maori representatio» in the South Island at aay rate were nearly at an end, as it was an absolute faroe. ' He said the Premier had broken faith altogether wJtli the member foe Egmont, as he (Mr Voi-gun) and several othermembers were o> ■;r- j cl from expressing their opinions •. ili-y understood the resolutions WcauU ue utoved seriatim*

Dr Newman disclaimed haviug spoken I slightingly of the Maori members as represented by Mr Pratt. He oontended that the Maori members had a perfect right to vote as they pleased. Mr Levestam defended the action of the Government. Mr W. F. Buckland defended himself from tho retnarka made by Mr Te Ao with reference to his having en> deavoured to secure his vote for the Opposition. Mr Hislop said the position of the | House was that a number of honourable members, simply because of a pledgo to their constituents, had determined to , keep the Government on the benohes, although they had forfeited all right to the confidence of the House by the manner in which they had abandoned all their professions. He thought that Was not a proper position for those gentlemen to assume. He said the position in 1879 was altogether different to the present. The Premier had promised to give the member for Egmont every facility for moving his resolutions, but no sooner did the motions come before the House than the Premier got the member for Port Ohalmgrs to rise for the purpose of burking the whole discussion. Mr O'Oonor thought the Opposition should take their beating, and be satisfied. He deprecated the allusions to the Maori members by several speakers. He denied that any breach of faith had been committed by the Premier with regard to the resolutions. Mr Hurst said whatever the opinion of the House might be, the opinion of the colony would be that the Premier had not acted properly in the course ha had taken on the resolutions. He thought a distinct breach of faith had been made by the Premier, and he thought it would not redound to the oredit of the Government. Mr Beetham said the reason the natives had voted in a block for the Government was because the Government had given them promises which they were not authorised to give. He thought the Government had taken the very worst course possible in avoiding the resolutions. Mr Fisher said the oourse adopted by the Government was unfair, not only to the House but to the colony. He did not find any particular fault with the four Maori members for having voted as they had done, but he found that the Hon. Mr Ballance in bis meetings with the natives had made the remarkable statement that their lands were to be exempt from rating, and that such promise was to be binding on future Governments. It had been asked by a native member why the want of confidence motion should have been kept so late in the session. He might reply that the Government had been treated to a succession of no-oonfidence motions, and had been defeated on them all. He eaid it was ridiculous for the Premier to taunt the member for Egmont about not being able to carry a no-confidence motion, when the Government bad early in the session been defeated on a t cardinal point o t their fiscal policy by no less than 87 votes. Mr Wi Pere said the reason why the Mao ri members had given a block vote was because the European members had voted against mattera affecting the native race. He referred to the Native Lan ds Disposition Bill. Major Atkinson said it was a great mistake to suppose that the natives were being better treated now than formerly. He might tell them they were being deluded by promises by the Government which would never be fulfilled. He considered the Government were to- blame for wasting the time of the House by not having given a straightforward answer to bis question early in the evening. He said ha had been entirely misled by the aotion of the Government. They were afraid to faca the resolutions separately, and had shirked the whole question. He contended that it was impossible in discussing the Estimates to oonsider whether the East and West Ooast railway should be constructed, as they would be confined to the discussion of the items. As to the Treasurer's statement that 5000 men would be thrown out of employment if the resolu* tions limiting the expenditure to a million were carried, he said that not a single man need be discharged in consequence of it. He again wished to state that the Government bad given him a distinct pledge that be should have an opportunity of moving hiß resolutions, and bad altogether failed to fulfil that promise. The motion for the adjournment of the House was then put and lost. BILLS DISCHARGED. The Hon. Mr Stout moved that the Munioipal Corporations Bill and the Representation [Act Amendment (Bill be discharged from the Order Paper. Mr Wakefield asked the reason why the Representation Bill was withdrawn. The Hon. Mr Stout said it was impossible this year to get tbe four prin* ! cipal cities to agree to the bill. Dunedin and Wellington were already in favour of it, but the other two oitiea were not as yet inclined to support the measure. He hoped by next session to be in a position to pass the bill. The motion for the discharge of tbe two bills was carried.