Mr. HALL was not in ignorance of how the question stood, but though the other branch of the Legislature might claim the right of interfering with Bills of Supply, it was a right which the House of Representatives never admitted.

Mr. CARLETON asked if the honorable member seriously disputed the powers having been given.

Mr. MOORHOUSE considered that the House

was perfectly justified in supporting the view of the honorable member for Heathcote. The clause in the Act of 1865, relied on by the honorable member for the Bay of Islands, was read differently by him, and in a much more restricted sense. In addition, there were passages in the Constitution Act not repealed by the Act of 1865.

Mr. VOGEL thought there was no advantage to be derived from discussing the question at that time, and he would, therefore, move that the amendments be taken into consideration on Monday.

Mr. BUNNY thought that the Act of 1865 unmistakably gave the Legislative Council the power against which the House now protested. Clause 4 was as follows:

"The Legislative Council or House of Representatives of New Zealand respectively and the Committees and members thereof respectively shall hold, enjoy, and exercise such and the like privileges, immunities, and powers as on the first day of January, 1865, were held, enjoyed, and exercised by the Commons House of Parliament of Great Britain."

He thought the Government should take steps to bring in a Bill next session to repeal that clause in the Act.

Mr. HAUGHTON hoped the Government would that night give notice of a Bill to repeal the clause in question. It was perfectly monstrous to think that both Houses should have the same power as the House of Commons.

Mr. CARLETON said that the power they had given to the other branch of the Legislature was not contrary to their Constitution Act as it would have been the case in Victoria, where the Upper House was an elective body. As to bringing in a Bill to repeal that power, it could not be passed without the consent of the other branch of the Legislature.

The SPEAKER thought the more prudent course to adopt would be to appoint a Committee to report upon the question. He did not feel competent to give an opinion on the subject offhand. He did not know that they could call this Bill purely a Bill of Supply. The matter was of considerable importance, and one with which the House should not proceed in a hasty manner. Mr. VOGEL deprecated any further discussion upon the question. He would move that the amendments of the Legislative Council be considered on Monday.

Motion agreed to.

lative Council with respect to their amendments in this Bill; the managers on behalf of the House of Representatives to be Mr. Hall, Mr. Curtis, and the Mover. Motion agreed to.

PROVINCIAL SHEEP ORDINANCES
VALIDATION BILL.

On the motion of Mr. HALL the order of the day for the second reading of this Bill, was discharged from the notice paper.

The House adjourned at nine o'clock p.m.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

Monday, 12th September, 1870.

Reports-Privilege-Sheep Diseases-Press Telegraph Association-Railways Bill-Temporary Loan BillAppropriation Bill (No. 2)—Deputy Superintendent of Wellington-Immigration and Public Works Loan Bill-George Green Land Claims Bill-Messages from the House of Representatives.

The Hon. the SPEAKER took the chair at two o'clock.

PRAYERS.

REPORTS.

The Hon. Major RICHMOND, C.B., brought up the report of the Printing Committee.

The Hon. Mr. SEWELL brought up the report of the managers of the conference upon the Provincial Ordinances Validation Bill, which was agreed to.

PRIVILEGE.

The Hon. the SPEAKER.-In order to avoid any misapprehension on the subject of the Traquair and Stuart Hundreds Bill, with reference to any rumours of the Bill having been tampered with in its transmission from the House of Representatives to this Council, or a different Bill having been foisted on the Council in place of the one officially transmitted, I think it my duty to state that, in my opinion, there is no ground for any such rumour, and that no other Bill than the one officially received has been in circulation in the Council; neither does it appear that any copies of any other Bills were obtained from the Clerk's office contrary to the custom which has hitherto prevailed and my instructions.

SHEEP DISEASES.

The Hon. Mr. CAMPBELL moved, That the Government be requested, during the recess, to prepare a Bill to give effect to the provisions contained in the reports of the Select Committee appointed to consider all the Ordinances of the various Provinces now in force for the prevention and eradication of scab, or other contagious diseases, with the view of framing a general law

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE could not promise that the Government would prepare a Bill, but would promise that they would take the whole

Motion agreed to.

PRESS TELEGRAPH ASSOCIATION. The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE, C.M.G., desired to ask the Hon. the Colonial Secretary, without notice, why the telegrams of the Press Association, addressed to the Evening Post, at Wellington, had been detained here until the telegrams for the Independent were issued.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE said he was not aware that the fact was as stated by the honorable and gallant member. He believed the telegrams came very late, and that the officers of the department were up all night receiving them. He would, however, make inquiries into the matter.

RAILWAYS BILL.

A message was read from the House of Representatives, stating that, having disagreed to the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Railways Bill, they request a free conference on the subject of such amendments.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE moved that the managers of the said free conference, on the part of the Council, be the Hon. Mr. McLean, the Hon. Mr. Campbell, and the Hon. Mr. Robinson. The Hon. Dr. GRACE moved, as an amend ment, that the name of the Hon. Mr. Russell be substituted for that of the Hon. Mr. Campbell.

Question put, "That the name of the Hon. Mr. Campbell remain as one of the managers," upon which a division was called for, with the following result :

The name of the Hon. Mr. Russell was therefore substituted for that of the Hon. Mr. Campbell, and the motion, as amended, agreed to.

The Hon. Mr. McLEAN, in a subsequent part of the proceedings, said that, as one of the managers appointed by the Council to the conference with the House of Representatives on the Railways Bill, it was his duty to report that, after a lengthy consultation, they had been unable finally to agree. They had gone through the amend ments in the Bill, and had only come to an understanding upon some of them. He had taken upon

fresh managers, would effect the desired object. If such a course were not taken the Bill would drop, which would be a great calamity to the country. If he could do so, he would move that a fresh conference be ordered and fresh managers appointed.

The Hon. the SPEAKER.-Has the honorable member the Bill in his possession?

The Hon. Mr. McLEAN.-Yes; here it is. The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON said that he desired to state, as one of the managers, that the honorable gentleman had not expressed, to his satisfaction, the conclusion which had been arrived at. They had parted on the understanding that they did not agree. It was suggested that they should recommend to the Council a fresh conference, but the Hon. Mr. Russell and himself would not consent to that. He had listened patiently to the reasons brought forward at the conference, and he had not been convinced that the amendments in the Bill were better than those which had been made by the Council. He hoped that the Council would support the decision of the majority of the managers appointed to act on its behalf.

The Hon. Mr. H. R. RUSSELL quite concurred in what had been stated by his honorable friend Mr. Robinson. The conference had separated on the understanding that they could not come to any agreement, and that they should not recommend a fresh conference.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE thought that, as the conference had come to some partial agreement, it would be a great pity, in the interests of the Colony, to drop the Bill altogether.

The Hon. Mr. MANTELL would like to know how the Bill came into the possession of the Council, because the conference had been asked for by the other House?

The Hon. the SPEAKER.-I have gone carefully into the question, and taken the best advice which was available, and I have arrived at the decision that, when a conference is desired by a House in possession of a Bill, it is requested either by message or by conference. If it is by message, reasons are sent, and an answer returned; if by conference, the reasons are given to the managers, to be handed over by them to the managers of the other House. From that analogy I presume that in the case of a free conference the same course would be gone through, namely, that the viva voce reasons would be given and the Bill handed over. Therefore, the Bill is now in possession of the Council.

The Hon. Mr. MANTELL would refer to the precedent of 1867 in respect to the Public Debts Act, in which a conference was requested by the other House, and the managers failed to come to any agreement. There was no pretence made of returning the Bill to the managers, and nothing had been done. The House of Representatives requested another conference, proving that the Bill was still in their possession.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE did not see how the managers of the House of Representatives could hand over the Bill to the managers of the Council, because the conference represented both

Houses. The managers of the House of Representatives had reported the result of the conference to their House, and it seemed to him that it rested with them to decide what should be the next step. If they sent the Bill to the Council with reasons for disagreeing, the Bill would be in the possession of the Council, but at the time that the conference was asked it was in their possession. There was no reason why they should hand over the Bill to the managers of the Council any more than that the managers of the Council should hand it over to the managers of the House of Representatives.

The Hon. the SPEAKER said that a somewhat similar case had occurred some years ago in the English Parliament, in which the procedure had been in accordance with his decision.

The Hon. Mr. MANTELL said that it must be borne in mind that the House which asked for a conference had to receive a report from its managers; then it was for that House to decide whether it would accept the report. It might happen that the House would agree to the amendments, and, in order to do so, it must be in possession of the Bill. The Council had no cognizance of the Bill until it was returned in the ordinary way from the other branch of the Legislature.

The Hon. the SPEAKER.-That has already been done, because the honorable member, Mr. McLean, has given a vivá voce account of the conference, which is tantamount to the reasons having been sent by message.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE said that, constitutionally, the Council had never had possession of the Bill since it was returned to the House of Representatives with amendments. The Bill must be sent by message, and not through the managers of the conference. If the Bill were in possession of the Council, it would be for the Council to take action. The Bill must be sent from one Speaker to the other, but he did not understand that the Speaker of the other House had forwarded it. Although the honorable member had the Bill in his possession it was not in possession of the Council.

The Hon. the SPEAKER.-It is in possession of the Council so soon as he makes his report.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE thought, with all deference, that a Bill could only be sent by message, and that there was no other constitutional way of doing so. The Standing Orders did not contemplate any Bill coming back through the managers of a conference. What authority had those managers to bring up the Bill to the Council?

that the Hon. Mr. Robinson and the Hon. Mr. Russell would have refused to accept the Bill, and the Hon. Mr. McLean had acted improperly in taking it at all. The course proposed would be in direct opposition to that which was taken in respect to the Public Debts Bill, which, under similar circumstances, was declared to be in the possession of the other House.

The Hon. Mr. ROBINSON desired to say that neither he nor his honorable colleague Mr. Russell were aware that the Bill was in possession of the Hon. Mr. McLean.

The Hon. Mr. McLEAN disagreed altogether with the doctrine of his honorable friend Colonel Kenny, because, being first on the list, he was the leader of the managers. He had expressed his own view of what had taken place and had made his report. He was asked if he had the Bill and he had then given it up.

The Hon. Mr. SEWELL said that, putting aside the question of a conference, if the other House dissented from the amendments which had been made in the Bill by the Council, and sent it back with their reasons for that dissent, it would be in possession of the Council. Before taking that step an intermediate course had been adopted. A conference had been held to ascertain whether the two Houses could agree. That conference was unable to agree, and then the action taken must proceed in the same way as if the other House had expressed its dissent, the managers bringing the Bill back stating that it was in their possession, and that the other House had dissented.

The Hon. the SPEAKER.-I find that, according to May, there do appear to be cases in which Bills have have been returned by the managers. All that I am aware of is, that one of the managers gave the Bill to the Council when he was asked. I now rule that the Bill is in possession of the Council.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE moved that a message be sent to the House of Representatives, inclosing "The Railways Bill, 1870," and inquiring whether they concur in the amendments made in the said Bill by the Legislative Council. Motion agreed to.

The Hon. the SPEAKER subsequently announced that he had received a message from the House of Representatives, stating that they had rescinded their resolution refusing to agree to the amendments of the Legislative Council in "The Railways Bill, 1870," and that they agreed to those amendments.

TEMPORARY LOAN BILL. This Bill was received by message from the House of Representatives and read a first time. The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE, in moving the

The Hon. Colonel KENNY said that it was for the other House to say whether it would take the advice of the managers or not. If the majority of the managers of the Council could not agree with the managers of the other House, how was it that the Bill was handed over to the honorable member who differed from the majority? He believed

recent outbreak of war in Europe, complications might arise which would increase the difficulty of raising loans, whilst, on the other hand, it might render the impossibility of having funds in hand still greater, for, if England became involved in war, we should have to take immediate steps for our own protection against foreign aggression. The Government fully felt this responsibility,

an item of that class. Instead of carrying out great works, they ought to set their house in order, in consequence of the great alteration in their financial position. The last quarter's customs had fallen off to the extent of £25,000, as compared with the customs duty of the same quarter of a former year, and he believed the customs revenue would steadily fall lower and lower, and that it would be years hence before they could carry on large coloniz ing schemes. They should reduce the expenditure to the very lowest possible dimensions. Their produce would be sold at a rate so miserably low that the private income of a large section of the Colony would be considerably reduced. They ought to practice the greatest possible economy in the public departments. They should not now plunge into what ought to be an unnecessary loan of £500,000 without placing a limit to the rate of interest. He felt sure that a great deal of it would be required; and, indeed, if the Government would honestly tell them the real circumstances of the case, the facts would show that a portion of it had been forestalled. It might, however, do greater harm to throw out the Bill than to accept it. They had not the power to introduce words limiting the interest, and, if they had, he was not prepared to endanger the passing of the Bill by doing so. He considered that the Government were bound to detain the Parliament until the Californian mail arrived, although it might be an unpleasant duty, when they would receive a report from the Commissioners giving them the information which it was necessary they should have. The last written news was from a time anterior to the commencement of the war, and he believed the Commissioners had expressed an opinion that they did not think war probable.

The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE.-I will not say that, in private correspondence from the Commissioners, the expression may not have occurred that they did not think war imminent, but it is not fair to refer to private letters as reports from the Commissioners.

The Hon. Colonel WHITMORE, C.M.G., said that they had no information with regard to financial matters, which could possibly give them an idea of how their financial position would be affected by the outbreak of war. If the Government were in possession of that information they would know how far they could draw on the Imperial loan in case of absolute necessity, and how far it would be possible to raise money in the English market at present. The increase in the marine insurance, if it meant anything, must be in the direction of danger of our being drawn into hostilities. For the reasons he had stated, he would vote for the second reading of the Bill, but not without a protest. The Government ought never to have been in a position to require it, and they ought to have much better information than they possessed before such a very unusual step was taken by them.

The Hon. Mr. MANTELL said that if any honorable member would move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months he would support it. There was no doubt that if they gave power to the Government to raise the half million

VOL. IX.-87.

loan on any terms they would get it, and that the Colony would have to pay for it. The acceptance of the measure would commit them to a repayment of £750,000. To vote against the second reading of the Bill would be merely a waste of time, but he would support a motion for the second reading of the Bill that day six months if any honorable member would propose it.

The

The Hon. Mr. CAMPBELL felt it to be his duty to support the Bill, but he could not but express his regret that, owing to the blunders with regard to the banking arrangements, the Colony was brought into such a position. passing of the Bill would do a great deal of injury to the credit of the Colony. If the Government had been in a position to have the whole of the banks of the Colony to manage the finance, they could have gone and asked them to lend the money for a short time. Instead of that, they were asked to pass a measure of this kind, in which no limit was placed in respect to interest, simply because the bank on which they relied was unable to grant them the assistance they required. Looking at the large amount of money which the Government proposed to spend and borrow, it was their duty at once to make a change in their banking arrangements. The Colony must meet its present liabilities at all hazards, whether it paid 6 or 8 or 10 per cent., and it was the duty of the Legislature to place the Government in a position to meet its liabilities. The only other course open to the Government that he could see was, to pay no money whatever to the Provinces if they were placed in financial embarrassment. The Hon. Colonel Whitmore had said that it was the duty of the Government to detain the Assembly until they had received a letter from the Commissioners, but he did not see what good that would do. They all knew that war had been declared, and no letter would make them any the wiser. He hoped that the Government would take into consideration the position of their banking account, and rectify their position by connecting themselves with all the other banks.

The Hon. Dr. GRACE thought that this was a business-like measure. His honorable friend Mr. Campbell said that it was incumbent on the Government to change their banking arrangements, but, in order to enable them to do so, they must have funds, and it was therefore necessary to pass the Bill. The honorable member also said that it was the duty of the Government to withhold money from the Provinces. There were certain Provinces which could not carry on their ordinary administration without the money which they received from the General Government, and, although he was in favour of their absorption, he could not support any such proposal. In reply to his honorable friend Colonel Whitmore, he would say that the Colony was more pinched for money just before the loan which was raised by the Fox-Whitaker Government than it was now. A great deal of the honorable member's argument as to the improvidence of the administration of the Government was not founded on sound reasoning at all. The honorable member was rather inconsistent; he seemed to think