GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 385, 6 September 1875, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

(From a correspondent of the Press ) LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Friday, Sept. 3. OTAGO WASTE LANDS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The debate on this Bill was renewed by the Hon Dr Pollen. He said he did not favour the holding out of special inducements to men of small capital to enter into the occupation of land when they had no knowledge of the business of agriculture ; and considered there should be a change in the mode of settling on land. The provisions of the Bill referring to the manner in which the priority of application was determined legalised a system of gambling in lands of the worst and most pernicious kind. He should endeavour to improve the Bill in committee. Hon G. Buckley opposed the Bill.

Hon Mr Waterhouse defended the system of deferred payment, saying it was the best possible means of settling the people on the lands. It was probable, and he hoped it would be so, that in a short time the administration of the whole lands of the colony would be in the hands of the General Government, and he did hope that the views of the Premier would not be given effect to. He trusted the Bill would pass, for the passing of the Bill through the Council was not only important to Otago but was watched anxiously by the whole community. Hon Col. Brett opposed the Bill. Hon Mr Hart expressed the opinion that the system of deferred payments was calculated to raise up a class subject to be brought under political influence to the injury of the whole colony. He had seen such a result arise from the system of immigrants’ promissory notes, which in some respects was analogous. However, he should vote for the second reading of the Bill, reserving to himself the right of proposing an amendment in committee. The Bill was then read a second time. HOUSE OF REPREBENTATIYES. Friday, September 3. On the House resuming at 7.30, Mr Wood resumed the debate. The Government had always acknowledged that Auckland was unduly pressed upon by the financial policy of the colony. In 1870 Sir J. Vogel proposed that a sum should be borrowed to place Auckland in the possession of a land fund, but it had not yet got a land fund, and the prognostications of Mr Gillies

had been realised in that respect. The cause of this difference was that in the North Island the natives held possession of the principal portion of the land, and knowing the value of it, would not part with any but the worst. This year another attempt to give the province a land fund was to be made by handing over the confiscated lands, but he was surprised that the Government should hold forth the hope that £ 15,000 would be obtamed as land fund. Even if it was realised by the sales of land, still the cost of surveys would have to be deducted, so that nothing like £45,000 would be available, but he contended that the sura would never be realised, and he would ask if, during the past few years, the Colonial Governmentcould make nothing out of the confiscated lands, how was it possible for them to get £45,000 per annum in future. Barely anything had been gained by the Government under its management of the confiscated lands. The House was being hoodwinked by the Government. He approached the financial statement, and said there was not the slightest confidence ever to be placed in these financial statements which had been put before the House. He referred to the speech of Mr Gillies in 1874, in which that gentleman reviewed the finance of the colony, and which was worthy of notice now ; also to the statements made in the Legislative Council by the hons Messrs Sewell, Waterhouse, and Pollen, the former of whom agreed with Mr Gillies that the debt would be sixteen or seventeen millions before borrowing was done with, whilst the latter, on the strength of Mr Vogel's statements, said no such debt would be incurred, but that the total indebtedness would be fourteen millions, and when that amount had been accrued there would be 700 miles of railway open. What was the fact? The indebtedness of the colony was now seventeen millions, and they had but 336 miles of railway. [Cheers 1 If this was a specimen of the financial statements, what was the use of them ? With regard to the present statement it had been impossible to understand it while it was being delivered, and anyone who read it, except he was an expert in the finances of the colony, could not make head or tail of it. Paul might be mightily pleased, but poor wretched Peter would view the matter in a different light. [A laugh.] Then as to the land fund. The laud fund of the whole colony, as estimated by the various Provincial Governments who would be able to form most correct estimates, was £702,000 for the year. It was proposed to bring the abolition of the provinces into operation before the Ist November next, so that the appropriations by the General Government would only cover a period of eight months. Therefore in making the calculations it would be necessary to make deductions accordingly,which would reduce it so £551,516. This was to be disposed of in three ways. First—There was a charge for payin' nt of interest and sinking fund on the loans and other items amounting to £255,890. Secondly—The cost of the services and the general administration of the waste lands of the provinces and other charges, £262,000 odd. Thirdly Contributions to Road Boards, £333,000 odd, making in all a total of £558,401, to meet which there was a revenue of £451,516, showing a deficiency of £101,8*5. This would be reduced by the issue of Treasury bills to the amount of £58,700 to a net deficiency of £42,185, a deficiency never contemplated by the framers of the Bill, who apparently had always supposed there would be a residue. This residue was to have been divided into two parts. First, the construction of public works. The public works included railways, harbor works, &c, the cost of which was estimated at £1,600,000, to meet which there was absolutely not a shilling either from the land fund or general revenue. [A laugh.]

An Hon Member—Then where were the provinces to get the works from ?

Mr Wood was not talking about the provinces now. | A laugh.J He was talking about the interests of the whole colony—- [“ Oh!”J —but he would say this, that the provinces had entered into engagements for many of these works, and if colony took over the provinces it would have also to take over their liabilities and engagements, whereas it had not money to meet those engagements with. The colony was in a state of bankruptcy. [Opposition cheers and laughter from the Ministerialists.] He averred deliberately, and was prepared to prove it before any committee the Government might appoint, that the colony had entered into engagements which it could not meet. He had endeavored for a long time past to find out the Government side of the question, and although in some respects he had been supplied with what he asked for, there were many things he did not want. He did not expect to see as a return of revenue from land, such items as goldfields duty or railway receipts. Yet this was what he had been furnished with. However, he wished to make some few remarks on it. The Provincial Government of Canterbury estimated its revenue for the year from the sales of land at £120,000, pastoral leases £44,000; total, £164,000. What did the Colonial Treasurer estimate the land fund of the same province for eight months at?—£161,758. [Loud laughter.] In Otago the Provincial Government estimated the land revenue for the whole year at £230,000. The Colonial Treasurer for eight months estimated it at £271,821. It was impossible to find words which one could use in the House to characterise estimates like these. [Ministerialists —“ Hear hear.”] Yet it was upon such estimates as these that the House was asked to vote millions or hundreds of thousands of pounds for public works. [Ministerialists It was upon these estimates that the Government was going to bring in a Bill to establish Road Boards, For the year the land revenue of Otago was £232,000. The expenditure was, interest on provincial debt, £94,900; the same on railways, £5462 ; expenditure as per estimates, including grants to Education Boards, £158,896 ; contribution to Road Boards, £IO,OOO ; giving a total of £257,000 odd. To meet this there was only a revenue of £164,000, and an estimated expenditure of £173,000, so that there was another defi ciency there, giving for the two provinces a deficiency of between £20,000 and £30,000. He might go further and show the House too much. [“ No, no.”] He was going to refer to the Auckland finances, although perhaps he should not have done so had he not been attacked in a most unwarrantable manner for what he had said when addressing the House on the second reading. He had then had occasion to enter into a defence of Auckland against the charges which had been brought against it of her finances being scandalous.

He had not attacked anybody himself, but had merely stated that the province owed no one anything, and that it had a balance at the bank. That had been taken up by the member for Franklin, who of course with that candour and nice regard for facts that characterised all followers of the Government, had misquoted his words, saying “ the member for Parnel has told the House Auckland has plenty of money.” He never liked to disturb hon members when speaking, but had felt bound to get up and remark “ I did not say we had plenty of money, but I said we have a balance,” and added, “of £3000.” The member had not made any further comments on what he (Mr Wood) had said, but remarked, he would turn him to the tender mercies of that great lion, the Colonial Treasurer, (A laugh.] When the Treasurer began to speak he (Mr Wood) was mangled accordingly, and told that the £3OOO balance had been brought about by a gift from the General Government of £6OOO, in fact an instance of their eleemosynary charity. The fact was, this £6OOO was the just right of the province, for by an agreement entered into by the late Superintendent it was agreed that the sura of £4OOO should be advanced to the province of Auckland as soon as the Appropriation Act was passed, and £6OOO should be paid three mouths afterwards, and a similar sum at a subsequent period. That agreement was ratified and affirmed by this House, and the Provincial Government of Auckland had as much right to that £6OOO as any province had to its capitation allowance. Yet they were told it was given to them. So long as the late Superintendent was alive the money was paid, but the moment the present Superintendent came into office not another penny could be got. When they applied for the money all sorts of excuses were manufactured, and they were politely told for one thing that there were not five quarters in the year. However, they got the £6OOO five weeks after it was due, and then it was said it was given to them, Hon Major Atkikson— Hear, hear. Mr Wood (sarcastically)—“ Hear, hear,” is it ?

Hon Major Atkinson —Hear, hear. Mr Wood —lt is “ Hear, hear.” Then the lie was fixed upon him by the hon member for Franklin, who ' had sanctimoniously turned up the whites of his eyes, and with a Chadband expression, and in a Wesleyan parson’s whining tone cried “ Hear,” and threw out inuendos towards members. [Sen* sation and cries of “Order.”]

Mr Speaker —The hon member must be aware that expressions such as those could not be allowed.

Mr Wood —Then such expressions should not be allowed to be used by other members, and if anyone in that House made use of expressions towards him such as the member for Franklin had done he would return them. It was not true in any way that he had sold himself to the Superintendent of Auckland for £l5O for six months, a sum less by £7 10s than that which the members of that House received from the Colonial Government. That was an inuendo which had been thrown out against him which he would not stand, and the hon member had added with a sanctimonious voice, “ Lead us not into temptation.” Think of a man being tempted to sell himself for £l5O for six months ; what a terrible end he must come to. But when that hon member came into that House mocking purity, he said nothing about the fact that he had been negotiating in a private room with Ministers for the purchase of land for thousands and thousands of pounds, on which he was only to cover the expenses—only to get a few insignificant profits. [Cheers and laughter.] If he might be allowed, he would quote Scripture to the hon member, and say to him “ Take first the beam out of thine own eye, then shalt thou see clearly to take the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” He had been accused of selling himself for a much larger sum than that. He had been offered office by Mr Stafford in 1872, but declined. He had been offered office by Mr Williamson, but declined. He would ask bow many members in that House would have done that. He had accepted office under Sir G. Grey, because three days before the meeting of the Provincial Council that gentleman had told him he had not an Executive officer to meet the Council with. He offered his services immediately, and Sir G. Grey should have them as long as he wanted them, provided he had sufficient leisure, whether he received anything for it or • not. He saw how the land lay. He knew Sir G. Grey would never be a nominated Superintendent, and if he [Mr Wood) had chosen to come there and laud Ministers he might have been a nominee Superintendent, and instead of getting £l5O for six months, might have got £6OO or £7OO a year for a long while perhaps. [Cheers.] He then entered into an explanation respecting the balance of the £3OOO, and said that as a fact at the time he spoke there was a credit balance of £4376, instead of a debit balance, as had been stated in error by the bank clerk.

A Member —There is the mystery explained then. Mr Wood—Yes, but it shows there have been no lies. When gentlemen attempted to take advantage of an opponent and fix a stigma on his name they should be sure they were right. When the member for Auckland West addressed the House on the second reading of the Bill, he told the Colonial Treasurer there was no real surplus, but a manufactured surplus. In reply, the Treasurer said he should like to know how to manufacture a surplus, and challenged the hon member to prove he had manufactured a surplus. He (Mr Wood) could tell how it was done. It was by borrowing money. Scarcely any members of that House in their private life would sit upon couches paid for by other people’s money, but they would come there and sit upon these horrid benches which were bought with other people’s money. Even that wretched tawdry mixture of a church and dancing saloon—[a laugh J—in which they met had to be paid for out of other people’s money. Ministerial residences were paid for, mended, and patched with other people’s money. Travelling expenses were paid for out of other people’s money, and everything was charged on the loans. After some further remarks, he expressed his opinion that an amendment should be moved, and if no one else did it he should move, that the land fund shall be appropriated annually by the Parliament of the colony in such a manner, and for such purposes as it may think fit.

Mr T. L. Shepherd drew attention to the inaccuracy in Mr Wood’s figures. The latter had refused to give credit for Otago railways

paying interest on the cost of construction above working expenses. There was an error of £28,000 in one of them alone. Mr J. 0, Brown moved—“ that the Government, having intimated their intention of introducing a Bill constituting boards of works in place of Provincial Councils, and as the same would have an important _ effect on the present discussion, it is expedient to adjourn the debate until the new Bill is before the House.” Mr Stout spoke in favor of the amendment, and said the cardinal principle of the Abolition Bill was that the Assembly should vote the surplus revenue, and if the Board of Works were to vote that sum, the cardinal principle of the Bill was gone, the Boards would be virtually Provincial Councils, and they were asking the provinces to borrow under a different name, and to give them ie ® instead of eight. Let the Bill be drafted between this and Tuesday, when it could be brought down. He would not argue the financial question, inasmuch as the statement of the Treasurer regarding this new Bill had completely taken away the old ground of argument. The Government should enable the House to see what would be the financial effect of this new system, of which they knew nothing more at present than that the hon member for Dunedin proposed to bring down a Bill constituting certain Boards of Works, which it was presumed would perform the functions of the existing Provincial Councils. If theGovernmentdid notacquiesce in the adjournment, they would be asking the House to proceed with a debate the main aspect of which had been changed by the new Bill proposed to be introduced by the Government, He thought withal the Government were to be highly commended for taking this last step. It was to their credit. In effect they said, “ After all that has been said, our ideas of abolition have become so completely muddled that we deem it advisable to abandon it for the present.” Another phase of the question, which had not jet beta touched upon, was this, that the Opposition were not fighting for place or power. They did not desire to turn out the Ministry, because there were many men on the Government benches whom they thought a great deal of. It was not therefore a personal question, it was simply one of principle. All they asked now was that the new Bill should be brought down, in order that there might be a full and intelligible discussion of it. How could a member be expected to vote on a question, when he was not aware as to what he was voting for. Nobody but the member for Dunedin knew what was really in this Bill. Mr Takamoana spoke against the Bill.

Mr Katbne supported the measure. Mr Sheehan defended Mr Wood from the charge levelled at him by Mr Shephard of having spoken to his constituents. The House then adjourned for the customary interval at 10.35.

On resuming, Mr Macandrew called attention to the state of the House, the bells having been rung a quorum was soon in attendance. Messrs Reid, Fitzhbrbebt, and Murray in turn addressed the House, speaking in favor of the amendment, but the Government replied never a word, nor would they put up a man. Mr Fitzherbert getting passionate characterised the Government as a set of dumb dogs, and subsequently created roars of laughter by saying that by taking the drug prepared by the member for Port Chalmers they have caused a premature abortion of their own offspring. Mr White at midnight moved the first adjournment, which was negatived on the voices, and then Mr Murray moved the adjournment with the same result. During Mr Murray’s speech Mr Stout (it being then one o’clock) raised a point of order that the House could not sit on Saturdays without provision being made for so doing. The Speaker at once decided that Mr Murray could proceed, and he did. The question was then put, when on a division there appeared for the amendment 15, against it 37, Ayes, 37 —Messrs Atkinson, Ballance, Bastian, Bluett, J. B. Brown, Bryce, Buckland, Carrington, Outhbertson, Gibbs, Harrison, Ingles (teller), Jackson, Katene, T. Kelly, W. Kelly, Buckie, May, McGillivray, McGlashan, Sir D. McLean, Mervyn, O’Neill, Ormond, Parata, 0. Parker, G. B. Parker, Reynolds, Richardson, Richmond (teller), Shepherd, Stafford, Tribe, Wales, Webb, Williams, Wilson. Noes 15—Messrs Bradshaw, J. C. Brown, Dignan, Fitzherbert, Sir G. Grey, Macandrew, Montgomery, Murray, O’Rorke, Reeves, Reid, Sheehan (Teller), Stout, Swanson (Teller), Thomson. Hon Major ATKINSON said that, at this late hour, he would not reply, but would take an early opportunity of doing so on Tuesday. The original motion was then put and carried, and the Bill ordered to be committed on Tuesday.

The Times explains the attitude of the Government thus :— 11 An arrangement had been made by the “ whips ” on each side, that a certain order of debate should be observed, after which Hon Major Atkinson was to reply, when the division would be taken on the main question; but during the course of the night’s debate, this arrangement was intercepted by Mr J. C. Brown, member for Tuapeka, who moved an amendment. The Government held that this amendment was a breach of the party compact above mentioned, and neither replied themselves nor put up any of their supporters to speak on their behalf. The consequence was, that the argument was all on one side, and charges were freely made, which may occasion a good deal of recriminatory remark on a subsequent occasion, and which undoubtedly must leave a feeling of rankling bitterness behind.”