The Westport Times. THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1869.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 506, 20 May 1869, Page 2

The Westport Times. THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1869.

We fully anticipated, both from the tenor and the result of the debate on the paragraph in the reply to the Superintendent's address containing a reference to Separation, that the subject would again be brought before the Provincial Council, either by Drlrviue, or by some'of the Nelson members who voted on the same side. Our anticipa ions have been fulfilled, for in the Notice Paper for Tuesday evening,, a copy of which we have received, we tind the following resolutions, to be proposed by Dr Irvine aa a substitute for the separation now sought for by the inhabitants of the Nelson SouthWest Goldfields :

1. That while this Council considers that the inhabitants of the South-West Goldfields have no just ground of complaint in respect of the amount of public money which has been annually expended in their district, it is nevertheless of opinion that the agitation which has sprung up there for effecting a disruption of the Province will be constantly renewed until the West Coast shall have had secured to it by law the expenditure within its limits, and for its benefit, of a large and fixed proportion of the revenue there collected, after deducting its share of the general expenses of government. 2. That in the opinion of the Council such an allocation of the disposable revenue is equitable in principle, and expedient in policy; that it would prove advantageous both to the Goldfields and the Province at large; and that it is calculated to further the present and future interests of the West Coast more effectually than if it were constituted an independent county.

3. That the Council, while affirming the suitability of the proposed arrangement to the outlying districts generally, is of opinion that it should be in the first instance only applied in the case of the South-West Goldfields.

4. That his Honor the Superintendent be respectfully requested to cause a Bill in accordance with the first Resolution to be prepared and sent down to the Council during the present session. The hour at which we have received information of this counter movement of the Council prevents us from either pronouncing upon its merits, or ascertaining the opinions of the Separation Committee, who may bo expected to give it early, if they cannot give it their favorable, consideration. From what we learn of the feeling of the Oonob uciubcls <jl' Iho CullUcil, there will bo an effort made by them to deleto the first four lines of the resolutions, but the rest of the resolutions they are disposed to consider somewhat acceptable to their constituents. The principle wbich the resolutions assume to declare is certainly very different to the principle enunciated by Mr Curtis, and condemned by the Separation petition. The question remains—How far is it practicable ? How far does it differ from the principle on which matters are now managed ? And, if different and practicable, how far is it preferable to a division of the district into two counties representing the Buller and the Grey, supposing such to be the condition under which Separation will onlv be granted ? We have information also of several important motions by West Coast members. A motion by Mr Donne, for £ISOO for interior tracks, is likely to be passed, with the amount reduced to £750. Mr Keid has a motion on the paper for £IOOO for steam subsidy, and £6OO is likely to be granted. Notice of three motions is given by Mr Hennelly—for additional salary to the Charleston clerk, for £2OOO for a track from Charleston to the Little Grey, and for £ISOO for a dray-road to Addison's Flat—but their acceptance by the Council is very doubtful, as is also the success of a motion by Mr Donne asking His Honor to urge the declaration of Charleston as a port of entry. Mr M'Dowell's motion for £4OOO for protective works at Westport was to come up for discussion yesterday, and to-day the Estimates are to be re-committed to permit of a motion by Mr Luckio for the reduction of the figures £ISOO to £I3OO for "Three "Wardens and Eesident Magistrates," on the SouthWest Goldfields—a motion which we regret to see proposed, and which, we regret still more to learn, is very likely to be carried.