Untitled

Inangahua Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1272, 20 July 1883, Page 2

THE GOVERNMENT, THE CANTERBURY COMPACT AND THE PROPOSED "DIVERSION." «• We make the following extracts from the report ifi yesterday's N. Z. Times of tb£ debate o£ the previous night on Mr Montgomery's resolutions : — Mr Levestam : If Sir Julius Vogel's policy could have been kept intact, it would have been successful, but logrolling had practically defeated that policy. It was almost impossible for persons who felt aggrieved to obtain redress under the present central system, and that was one reason why he objected to it. If the Government did not want a larger majority, why had they entered into a new compact with the Canterbury and Westland members ? (Mr Fish : " Hear hear.") They had asked that the balance of the £180,000, after extending the railway to the Red Post, should not be spent until Parliament met again. Goverment promised to keep the balance in hand, as asked by those members. That was the engagement which the Government had just made. Hon Major Atkinson : The meaning of that is that Government will not consent to the alteration of the loan schedule at all. I state that publicly, and is the meaning of what the hon' member has read. (" Hear, hear.") Mr Levestam asked why the Governmnet did not state that to the Canterbury members ? If this matter had not been brought up now, the Canterbury members would have remained in the belief that the Govern ment were ready to hand over the balance of the £180,000, after completing the line to the Red Post, for con structing the East and West Coast Railway. If the Government had

made up their minds, as stated, and if they wanted to be straight-forward, why did they not state to the Canterbury members that they did no* see and necessity for the East andi West Coast Eailway at present, amt therefore could not derate any of the £180>, 000 to this purpose ? (Hear, hear.) Mr Fish, in referring to the interview between Canterbury members and the Minister of Works, said it was so humiliating for the Government to have to give a written pledge, that they ought to shrink into the smallest pair of boots they had. (Laughter.) Those members, their own supporters, would not take the word of a Government, but must have it in writing. (Hear, hear.) Surely it was time to have a change, to get rid of these shameful compacts. (Hear, hear.) The Government had been cornered, a pistol presented at their breast, and a bayonet at their throat, and they were told, ** Your money or your life. " The Government loved their life, and they said. " Take the money." (Loud laughter.) r Holmes charged the Government with breaking a written promise given a few days ago to Canterbury members On the West Coast railway question. That promise was that the balance of the £180,000 should be hung up, until Parliament in a future session could, if it desired, divert that money to a different purpose than that stated in the loan schedule. (Treasurer: " No.") Then, if that was not the meaning of the promise, the Canterbury members had been deceived. Treasurer : You have what I stated publicly at Nelson. Mr Holmes said that was not the question.. A solemn promise had been given and written down by another Minister and if those members had been deceived, the people of Canterbury would not be satisfied with the action of the Government Two alternative routes, as a blind for Government supporters in the House to pacify their constituents, were dangled before them as a snare. Mr Conolly : It was stated by Mr Leveßtam that there was a Canterbury compact He also said the Government were ready to divert the balance of the £180,000, and he put that as a contradiction of what had been said in the Public Works Statement. Mr Fish had described the transaction in a reckless maner; and Mr Holmes went further, and said if they had not promised to do this they, had hoodwinked and humbugged their Canterbury supporters. About three-fourths of the Canterbury members, who generally voted with the Government, were said to have been humbugged on this question ; whereas another charge was that those districts which were represented by Government supporters were specially favored. These two charges answered each other. The words used in the Public Works Statement clearly expressed the decision of the Government, and there had not been the slightest intention dh the^mitr of the Government to consent to divert any part of the £180,000 to any other purpose than that stated in the loan schedule. In fact, coming from the district he did, lie could not have remained in the Ministry if there, had been any intention to divert part of that sum to any other purpose. The Canterbury members, he believed, were all invited to attend the meeting that was held. ("No; Yes.") They stated their proposals in writing. The Premier replied verbally, and he believed it was then requested that his answer should be put in writing. Yet it had been charged in the House that it was a disgraceful thing that the word of the Government could not be taken, but had to be put in writing. Mr V. Pyke: Was the Minister of Justice present at the interview ? Hon. Mr Conolly : No, I was not Mr Pyke : Then it is all hearsay evidence. Won. Mr Conolly said he was stating what transpired, although he was not at the meeting; and he protested against the degrading language which had been applied to the conduct of the Government in this matter. It was true a survey of the Arthur's Pass route was promised to be made, in order to determine as to reserving 15 miles of land on either side of the route to be selected. It seemed to be considered disgraceful and corrupt for the Government to make this concession of a survey along the route recommended by the Commission. The cost of that survey would be about £4000 ; yet Mr Fish had said £20,000 was to be spent on this work to satisfy Canterbury members. It was insulting to the Canterbury members to suppose that they did not understand the plain words in the Public Works Statement. Bather than be a party to any such a fraud as that suggested against the Government, he would have felt it a duty to his constituents to resign his place in the Government. He therefore protested against these improper charges, which were a discredit to these who made them. (Hear, hear).