PARLIAMENTARY NEWS.

Waikato Times, Volume I, Issue 41, 3 August 1872, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY NEWS.

Wellington, Wednesday. Mr. Sheehan has given notice to move for the production of all correspondence relating to the recent alterations in fees charged iu the Deeds Registry Office, Auckland. The Hon. Mr. Vogel has presented the petition of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce relative to> the licensing of quartz crushing batteries. Last night Mr. J. Shepherd's motion expressing regret at tl*e hon. J. D. Ormond's circular was negatived, after a brief debate. Mr. Ormond explained the circular was only issued to obtain information upon a point suggested by Mr. Brogden. Mr. Par ita's motion in favour of the return of confiscated lands to the natives was negatived The Public Health Bill, Assurance Companies Bill, and Public Trust Office Bill wero considered in committee to-day. In reply to a question put by Mr, Header Wood, the hon. Mr. Ormond stated that Mr Brogden had submitted proposals for a company in London for the construction of New Zealand Railways, and that papers on the subject would be presented. Mr. Sheehan moved the resolution standing in his name in favour of the office of Attorney-General being - made a Ministerial one, to be held by a member of the House of Representatives. \lr. Shepherd, of Otago, opposed the motion. The hon Mr Fox and the hon Mr Gisborne explained the position of the present Attorney-General as the holder of the Patent Office, and that he was only removable by address to his Excellency the Governor from both Houses of the Legislature. They would support the proposal if the resolution were altered so as to affirm that the office should be held by a responsible member sitting in either of the Houses of Parliament; and requesting the Grovei ument to endeavour to give effect to the arrangement as soon as possible They would then endeavour to ascertain whether the present Attorney-General was disposed to retire, and if so, upon what terras. Messrs Reynolds and Fitzherberfc strongly opposed any alteration in the. present system. The debate is unfinished. Mr Bathgate has introduced a National Banking and Currency Bill,

Mr G. M, O'Rorke to-day moved a resolution in favor of the location of the Hew Zealand University at Auekland,, and- the endowment of it with the Government House, Albert Barracks, reserve, and adjoining- waste lands. He declared that the present position of the New Zealand University, without any local habitation, professors, or lecturers, was a- nvere sham. The removal of the seat of Government had been a great blow to Auckland, and the Assembly might now well endf>w a seat of learning there. Mr Curtis supported the motion. He objected altogether to- the- existence of rival universites, but would not object to the establishment of a university college at Auckland if the Otago University were placed on the same status with a colonial examining body overshadowing both. Mr Reader Wood would support the motion if another Government House were first erected, otherwise the Governor would he prevented from visiting Auckland annually ag.be now did. Mr Gillies supported the principles involved in the motion, although he did not exactly agree with the wording of it He was. opposed to the establishment of rival universities. He desired to see a university college established at Auckland, and suggested that the Otago University should take the same status, and that the Colonial University be simply an examining body with, the solapower to-confer degrees-- He did not altogether agree with the division of the Albert Barracks Reserve, but feU strongly the. necessity of placing the two islands on an equality for obtaining highclass education.-

| Mr Fox opposed the motion, owing to the | confused maunor in which it was worded, j To divido all the mqney voted between Auck- | land and Otago would be unfair to other i plaoes, and would utterly extinguish the i present University Act. Otago would never I consent to any alteration of the status of its | university. He would be glad to see a similar j university established at Auckland. | Mr Gisborne supported the amalgamation ; of the two existing Universities rather than ' furthor separation. Educational separation i was really the thin end of tho wedgo for ; financial and political adaptation. Sir David Mouro opposed the motion, which ' he said really moant that because Obago had I helped itself to establish a University it was i now the duty of tho colony to help Auckland jto one. If Auckland established a college itj self lie would then willingly support a motion J to render it assistance. j Mr Bathgate supported the motion. He i said the Otago University would never ro- | llinquisb the right of conferring degrees. ! Mr Rolleston opposed the motion and defended the New Zealand University. lie J moved the adjournment of tho dobate. Ho ' hoped the New Zealand University would not | be interfered with until time had been allowed ! to prove its real value. If the resolution were | modified so as to simply promote the estabj ishment of a University College he would j support it> I Mr Swanson tliought if the resolution were- | passed Auckland would probably find that it had obtained a white elephant. He did not ree how the mouey to build another Government House could possibly be found by tho provinceThe debate was adjonrned for a week, Wednesday night. The Permissive Dill, introduced by Mr. Creighton* was read a second time to-night, after division. In moving the-second reading, Mr. Crcighton referred to the controversy in. Auckland which arose out of the last lionisingmeeting. He said the action of Auckland publicans on that occasion was sufficient proof of the necessity for legislation restricting the liquor trade. The Bill provided that when a housa had been closed through the misconduct of a tenant, it would be again licensed if placed under dillerent management. Mr. Richardson presented a petition from the Primate of New Zealand, the Dean of Christchurch, and a number of clergy and laity, in its favour. Mi. A. Clark seconded Mr. (Jreigatou's motion. Mr. Ivatene urged the propriety of either forbidding the introduction of all spirits into the colony, or of making the trade free to all. The Hon. Mr. Gisborne opposed the permissive clause,, and urged that compensation should be granted to those a fleeted by tho ActMr E. J. Johnstone opposed the Bill as beine antagonistic to the real interests of sobriety anil morality. Mr. Gillies supported the Bill. He thought that no teetotaller- lxjli'eved any Bill could make innkeepers keep better houses and better liquors. Mr Sfcymour thought that licensing could best be dealt with by the Provincial Council. Messrs Andrew, Biumy-,. McGlashon, Tribe, Buckland, -Jackson, and Collins spoke against the Bill. Mr. Stewart would support it if it were largely modified. ° The Hon. Mr Vogel believed' that the persistent agitation of a few had invested the question with, a lictitious importance.. Its advocates greatly lacked charity, and the Bill, itself proposed an immorat policy of confiscation. It-might in some places be: used to shut up legitimate public-houses with a view of starting sly grog-shops. Those who signed a document for shutting up houses should, as a test of their sincerity, be made to pay compensation to. those whose property was injured; by-their action, and he believed more strictness should be exercised in granting licenses. Messrs Bathgate, Richardson, Murray; O'Connor, Mc-rillavray, Pearce, and Hunter supported the second reading. Mr. Swanson said the Bill was; an,- interference with the powers of the Provincial Legislatures. Messrs. Reynolds and McAndrew opposed on similar grounds. Mr McAndrew moved: that theBill be read a second time that day aix months. Mr White opposed the Bill. Mr Sheehan also opposed it, but offered to support a measure to prevent the introduction of any liquor into the colony, or its manufacture. The Hon. Fox made a very long and eloquent speech in favour of the Bill. On division, the second reading was carried by 28 to 26, several of those who spoke against the Permissive clauses voting for the second reading of the Bill with the view of exercising those clauses in committee.