PARS ON POLITICS.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XIV, Issue 806, 17 August 1905, Page 26

PARS ON POLITICS.

ie Shops and Offices Bill seems to be ■ar from any settlement as ever, and the cause of another vexatious de3 in the House on Tuesday. Mr sey, who described the Bill as a ie measure, said that the definition i fishmonger as “a man who sold rabwas too ridiculous to need comt. He thought the House should have i satisfied by striking out clause 3 of year’s Act, and putting section 21 t into the form in which it left the ise last year, with the necessary exitions in the case of special trades, srs Bollard, Kirkbride, and Alison , spoke in favour of repealing clause 3 last year’s Act, and of amending se 21. r Fowlds drew attention to the need tome alteration in the constitution of combined districts. He used as an mple the case of the Great North id, with the Grey Lynn Borough on side and the Archhill road district on other. Under the existing boundaries, said, it was possible for the shops on Grey Lynn side of the road to be led at a certain hour, say, six o’clock, I for shops on the opposite side of the d to remain open without restriction, vice versa. As a means of obviating «h anomalies he suggested that a corned district should not include all oughs within a mile of each other, t also all road districts and town srd districts within a mile of any •ough. n the course of the debate bn the Estites on Tuesday evening last, Mr Moss sed the point that the Hon. C. H. Us had no right to charge the £75 iwn by him as travelling allowance ring the Mapourika trip to the Isid». He pointed out that Ministers’ allowances were only chargele for travelling within the colony, d a Minister therefore had no right to arge for the trip in question, which to certain extent was made outside of the lony. Mr Seddon admitted that a miske had been made in the matter, and

said that had he been the Minister the amount would not have been charged. Later on Mr Mills said that he would deal with the matter fully on another occasion. The sequel to that discussion appeared to-dajE‘ in a question put on the Order Paper by Mr Moss, who gave notice to ask the Minister for Customs if he intends to refund any portion of the amount received, and “if not, why not?” The Minister’s reply will be awaited with interest.

AUCKLAND PETITIONS.

Mr Massey presented a petition on Thursday afternoon from a number of residents of Seddonville (Mercury Bay) asking for a grant for the purchase of a horse and cart for the conveyance of children to the Mercury Bay school. Mr Massey also presented a petition from Raiha Weeti, asking for an inquiry into the interests of his grandfather (Hemi Rangiahua) in the Te Akau Block. Mr Moss presented a petition from a number of residents of Turua (Thames) asking for grants for a ferry, and £250 for the Thames County portion of the Turua-Netherton Road. Mr Kirkbride presented a petition from members of the Opaheke Road Board and ratepayers in that district, asking for a grant of £4OO for road works. . Mr Houston presented a petition asking for a grant of £2OO for improving tne Paiaka.Hikerenui Road, and £75 for rebuilding Collins’ bridge on the same road. e

A brief passage of arms took place on Thursday afternoon between Mr Baume and Mr Harding. The latter member made some interjection whilst Mr Baume was speaking, which caused the member for Auckland City to retort that interruptions of other members speeches practically formed the whole of the contributions of the member for Kaipara to the debates in the House. Mr replv to this was that his interjections were always followed up by a vote in the same direction, but after the noisy oratory” of Mr Baume, no one, not even that member himself, knew m which way he was going to vote until he was safe in the lobby, (laughter) Mr Baume said he would challenge Mr Harding to search Hansard and discover any particular instance to which he referred.

In the House of Representatives, Melbourne, Sir W. J. Lyne stated that the Commonwealth has been losing between £30,000 and £40,000 per annum in revenue owing to American misrepresentation of the value of harvesters.

The Trades Marks Bill has been read a second time. The discussion practically was confined to the dissent ol the Oppositionists to the union label clause, which has been adopted.

The members of the New Liberal Party appear to be following up their attack upon the Premier with something more formidable than mere statements. Three affidavits signed by members of the Christchurch General Post Office, setting forth that the alleged voucher actually passed through their hands, seems to afford some ground for Mr Fisher’s statements. The result of the handing in of these affidavits has been a revival of the question and a further discussion in Parliament, which so far has ended in disclosing nothing of much importance. * * * *

In the House of Representatives, Melbourne, on August 10, Mr Johnson moved, “That in view of the certainty

of an enormous trade development along the Pacific route to the East, when the Panama Canal was opened, the question of the control of islands suitable as naval bases, between Australia and Panama, was of the highest importance to British and Australian commercial interests, and that the strategical position of the New Hebrides, with its exceptional harbour facilities, renders it imperative in the interest of British and Australian commerce that their control shall not pass into the hands of a foreign naval Power and that for these reasons it is desirable to provide every reasonable facility for the promotion of British and Australian settlement in the New Hebrides.” Mr Johnson urged that it was necessary for Australia to do something to counteract French influence in the New Hebrides, which now was all directed at annexation. Mr McCay said it was lamentable that Britain alone among the nations seemed

to think it was not her constant duty to watch the interests of her possessions in the Pacific. The British Government appeared unable to recognise the importance of the matter, and the consequences to Australia if the islands were absorbed bv foreign nations would be serious. Australia had serious ground of complaint, and it was time that the Australian Government spoke out definitely and emphatically to the Imperial Government.

Several other speakers spoke in similar terms. They said they considered the time for diplomatic representations had passed. Mr Thomson said he considered the motion should be in a more definite form. He moved, “That the representations already made by the Commonwealth to the British Government should, in the interests of the natives and the settlers of the New Hebrides and of Australia, be renewed and strengthened; that the immediate establishment of a joint land commission is imperative, and that it should be so constituted that its decisions would be just, prompt, and effective: that the delay which has occurred is deeply regretted, and that no settlement will be satisfactory to the Commonwealth which does not decide the possession of the New Hebrides; further, that the only ownership acceptable to Australia is that of Britain, which is justified bv history, the development of trade with the islands, and the wishes of the native population.” Mr Johnson accepted Mr Thomson s motion in place of his own. Mr' Deakin said the Government was in entire and hearty sympathy with the motion. Australian interests necessarily were strongly directed to securing the islands to prevent them being used as hostile bases. Nothing had been done since the Anglo-French agreement had been signed. He would include the motion m a despatch he was sending to the Imperial Government, containing the report of the deputation which had recently waited on him. The motion was carried on the voices.