HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Wanganui Chronicle, 27 July 1901, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

The House met at 2.30. An Imprest Supply Bill was brought down by Governor's message. On the motion to go into Committee of Suoply for its consideration, Mr. Fisher moved an amendment that a select committee be appoinited to inquire into the conduct of the Police Department as administered by Commissioner Tunbridsre. He said he was prompted to bring forward than motion because of the widespread complaints throughout the colony at the administration of viie police force by Cbmmissioner Tunbridge. He wished to njake it clear that the motion in no way applied to the rank and fi'ie of the force. Ita scopß was limited to Commissioner Tunbridge and the higher officers, who were directly under his control. He proceeded to make serious charges agitinst Comroissione'r Tunbridge, going very fully invo details. Mr. McGowan defended Commissioner Tunbridge from the attacks that had been levelled against him, and said he had always found him most anxious to do the service of the colony in the best manner possible, and to do fairly by all Cases that camo before him. If it* were otherwise, he (Mr. McGowan) would have no hesitation in saying so. Mr. Fisher had not qtioted ons strong instance against Commissioner Tunbridge. If it could be shown that Commissioner Tunbridge had done anything against any of his officers, he (Mr. McGowan) would only be too willing to facilitate inquiry into the matter, but nothing had come under his notice whioh would warrant such action. Mr. Millar said Commissioner Tunbridge was highly respected throughout the colony, buth inside and outside the service, and the whole trouble was that he was too: clever for the schemers in the police force. Mi. Wilford contended that matters were not satisfactory in the police force in Wellington. There were two factions, and so long as thafe continued the result would not be satisfactory. Mr Napier said in so far as Auckland-was concerned matters were most satisfactory. Mr. Seddon said they should keep this matter out of politics. Political interference in the pasil had been detrimental to the police force. He highly complimented Commissioner Tunbridge. He had been told before appointing him that he was one of the ablest men in the service at Home, and since his arrival here he had don© first-class work. The Government desired to have the police force kept as perfect and independent as possible, and did noli want to have the force dragged into our political life. It would not promote harmony in the force, or further the ends of justice, to have these charges bandied about the floor of the House, and he hoped the member for Wellington would withdraw his amendment, and let the House get on with the Bill. A large number of other members also spoke, the tone of the discussion being strongly in defence of Commissioner Tunbridge's administration. The debate was interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment. The House resumed) at T. 30. ■Mr Fisher's amendment was negatived on the voices, and. the House went into Committee of Supply for the purpose of putting an Imprest Supply Bill for £470,000 through its initial stages. In committee on the Bill, Captain' Russell pointed out that there- was an increase of £190,000 in imprest to date, as compared with the corresponding peiiod last year. He would like some explanation for so vast an increase. The Hon. Mr Seddon said the increase in the Estimates was very large, in addition to which there "were very large orders from the Agent-General. The additional imprest was due to the increased general expenditure, both in the Public Works Fund and the Consolidated -. Fund. _ Captain Russell contended that the Estimates had nothing to do with th& matter, as they were not before the House yet. The Premier should give the House some idea of the nature .of the increased expenditure. , The Hon. Mr Seddon replied that if the public works expenditure was increased the imprest must also be increased. Mr Massey asked that some of the items be given. Mr Seddon retorted that the money had been expended in accordance with the directions of Parliament. Captain Russell desired to know when the Financial Statement and Estimates would be brought down. Three months of the financial year had gone, and the ! House knew nothing of the public expenditure; The House had a right to1 know the details at the earliest moment. £940,000 had already been voted for Imprest this year, and members had no idea how the money has been spent. Mr Seddon said he hoped to bring down the Statement the week after next. There

were good, reasons for bringing the Statement down early this year. It was necessary at tiie present rate of expenditure to go into the finances carefully, and the Government were desirous of obtaining the assistance of members as soon as .possible. The Bill passed through committee without amendment.

On the motion for the third reading, Mr Massey inquired why the return showing the travelling expenses of Ministers had not yet been laid on the table. In this respect Ministers were simply treating the House with contempt. The Premier would find his Estimates would go through quicker and easier if this return was forthcoming.

Mr Seddon said the return referred to had been overlooked through stress of other business, but it would be .available in a day or two. There was no necessity to keep the return back, and there was no warrant for attempting to make capital out of the matter. The increased imprest was due to the fact that the expenditure was going up, and was already in excess of last year. Certain reductions in taxation had been promised. He referred particularly to the Mortgage Tax, but he was afraid these remissions could not be granted unless an increase was made in another direction, viz., in the graduated Land Tax. The Bill then passed its final stages. MINERS' RIGHTS. Mr R. McKenzie moved the second reading of the Miners' Rights Fee Reduction Bill, to reduce the fees "payable in respect of miners' rights in certain cases. He said the time had come to reduce the fee for miners' rights as low as possible. The mining section was the heaviest taxed in the community, and had never been leniently treated by Parliament. The Hon. McGowan said the miners' right was no longer, as in the old days, an element of title. It was an infliction, rather than a right, and should be reduced as low as possible. He supported the Bill. The second reading was agreed to on the voices. ' SHOP AND SHOP ASSISTANTS BILL. Mr Barclay moved the second reading of the Shop and Shop Assistants Bill, which he said was one of the slaughtered innocents of a previous session. It provided for & weekly half-holiday for chemists and also for domestic servants. For the latter a. day could be fixed between the servant and the mistress. He considered that if the conditions and social position of servants were better there would be no lack of suitable girls for housework. The second reading was agreed to on the voices. TOTALISATOR ABOLITION. Mr Ell moved the second reading of the Tofcalisator Abolition Bill, to abolish the use of the totalisator. It was the opinion, ie said, of one of our Judges that the large percentage of crime by young New Zealanders in a calendar lately before him arose mainly from gambling. The State prevented other forms of gambling, and branded bookmakers as blacklegs, and to be consistent should abolish the totalisa-

Mr Lawry maintained that the increase in gambling- was not due to the use, but ;o the repression *of the tbtalisator—such

repression as was given effect to in the Bill introduced in 1894 by Sir Robert Stout, limiting the number of totalisator

permits. Jf the lion, gentleman wished, ta

become a reformef, let him bring in a Bill to devote all "tote" moneys to charitable «*»

purposes. Mr Carncross believed that the aboli-

tion, of the totalisator would no more suppress gambling than Prohibition would prohibit alcoholic trade. The totalisator had been a great factor in the decrease in. the number of race meetings throughout the colony owing to the limit of permits. Mr Laurenson strongly supported the Bill, holding that the real question was whether the State should legalise gambling in any form. Mr A. L. D. Fraser, in opposing the Bill; contended that the totalisator brought about an improved breed of horses and encouraged the importation of the best blood from Home. Another great recommendation in favour of the machine was that it was conducted on a cash basis.

Mr Herries thought the. House should have an expression of opinion on the Bill from the Government benches. • He defended the totalisator as being the best form of gambling on horses, but if the Bill passed its second reading he hoped the lion.- member in charge would insert a clause in committee to meet the cases of racing club which had made programme engagements some time ahead.

Mr Meredith supported the Bill. He looked upon the. totalisator as^a, very great evil, and what was morally wrong could not be legally right.

Mr Willis said the State was inconsistent in allowing the totalisator to exist. If sweeps were yiegal the totalisator should also be illegal.

The Hon. Mr Carroll said he had always been opposed to the abolition of the totalisator, and he had seen no raeson to change his views. Gambling would exist in one form or other. If they abolished one form it would break out in another. Tilings connected with sport had been in a very bad way some years ago, gambling beingrampant in all shapes and "forms, but the atmosphere had since been cleared, and the totalisator now served to minimise the great amount of racing in the colony. Years ago there had been no proper supervision or regulation of the sport, but all that) had now been changed, and the Racing Conference which met annually was composed of men whose only desire was to upraise the sport- of racing. If the totulisator were aoiisuied an undesirable class would come to the .front who. were now kept in check. If he thought the gambling spirit could be eliminated from human nature he would support the hon. gentleman, but he felt sure he would be disappointed with the effect that would be produced if the totalisator was swept away.

Mr Bennett opposed the Bill. Mr Gilfedder had just risen to speak when the debate was interrupted by the 10.30 adjournment, and the House rose.