year to year of the poor travelling continually through the country. He hoped he had said enough to convince honourable members that this Bill was a very just one, and was founded on justice; that they were willing, as a country district, to provide for their own poor without any assistance from the city: and he thought that, considering the fact that they were situated in a remote part of the country, divided from Wellington by a high barrier-the Tararua Ranges the settlers who were a hundred or a hundred and fifty miles away, and so far back [as the Manawatu River, should not be taxed in the manner they had been for years for the maintenance of the poor of Wellington. He believed, if the question were put to the citizens of Wellington, and a plébiscite taken, their own sense of justice would revolt against it; and he had the clearest evidence that those gentlemen who were opposing this measure were not properly representing the citizens of Wellington in the matter. It was a cruel course to talk out a measure of this kind, as had been done on one occasion, and he hoped those tactics would not be repeated. | Tactics such as those were only calculated to lead to reprisals. It was an insult to honourable members that they should be prevented from voting on a measure of this kind. He had stated facts and figures, and he would now leave it to honourable members, relying on their sense of justice, to do for the ratepayers of the Wairarapa what he demanded Mr. DUTHIE thought the honourable member who had just sat down could scarcely be in earnest in asking the House to pass this Bill. He had talked for twenty minutes, and one would suppose that the first object he had in view was to talk this Bill out himself. He (Mr. Duthie) did not think this was a Bill that ought to receive the support of the House. It was a well-known fact that men spent the strength of their manhood in country work, and if age overtook them and they were unable to follow their usual vocations they gradually drifted into the towns, and the towns had to take the burden of all old and needy people on their shoulders. It was only fair that the country districts should contribute to a reasonable extent to the support of these institutions. In that House he had always urged that the present prevailing idea of subdividing land into unreasonably small areas should not form the basis of settlement; but, when they found the landowners of the country seeking in this ungenerous fashion to thrust the burden of the poor upon the towns, he thought that these large landowners, who were quite able to do so, ought to bear their share of the maintenance of the poor, when these people had become unfit any longer to remain in their service by reason of infirmity and old age. Then, again, in subdividing this charitable-aid district, although a hospital had been established in Wairarapa, and was valuable for urgent cases, they could not forget that hospitals of a more efficient character were to be found in the cities, and it was desirable that these city hospitals should be first-class institutions, in which dif ferent diseases could be treated by proper classification. A system of small hospitals would be both inefficient and expensive, and he thought aid ought not to be given in that direction. These objections were prominent to him, and on these grounds he should consider it his duty to vote for the amendment. He did not, however, wish to prevent the honourable member from getting a division on his Bill, and would not follow that honourable gentleman's example by talking at length, so as to endanger the Bill. He only wished to place his views on record. Mr. MACKINTOSH rose to support the measure. He considered it very desirable indeed that the country hospitals should be supported. It was not a desirable thing to collect all their sick into one huge building. It had been proved elsewhere, particularly so in Melbourne, that such a building, after a little time, became dangerous in the extreme. There was not a particle of plaster or brick in the building that was not saturated with disease-germs. It was advisable that the hospitals should be far apart, and that the diseased should not be collected into one building. As to the superiority of medical gentlemen in the cities, no doubt here and there would be found very expert surgeons; but he had known doctors in the South, in hospitals out of Invercargill, equal in every respect to the doctors who usually resided there. There was such an institution as the Riverton Hospital, and that institution had been found to be very valuable. It prevented persons from being carried all the way to Invercargill. Accidents had occurred on the gold-mines, and had been attended to very quickly in Riverton. The Riverton Hospital, he maintained, had had surgeons from the very commencement equal in every respect to the medical men of the Invercargill Hospital, and it was not at all desirable to collect all the poor even in such magnificent institutions as the old men's homes. A much better method would be to provide for them in the country. If these men had their own way they would far rather reside with some private family than take up their abode in these magnificent buildings. He trusted the amendment would not be carried. Mr. O'CONOR said the honourable gentleman who had just discussed the question had discussed it in a way with which he quite agreed, but he could not agree to the conclusion the honourable gentleman had come to. It was not a question as to the vast accommodation that could be given to the poor of this country; it was a question, to his mind, of breaking up districts, which had been attempted over and over again, as they knew in that House, for the purpose of relieving a certain portion of the ratepayers of their proper burdens. He said that they should not permit anything of that kind. There was no greater burden inflicted upon the struggling portions of the colony than this hospital and charitable aid. It equalled the whole amount derived from the property-tax, and it was so distributed that, where the districts were the most populous | and the poorest, there the burdens were the He felt quite certain, in regard to the matter of heaviest notably so in the towns. Let them hospitals, that there ought to be branch hospitake the taxation in the City of Wellington, for tals. Then the honourable member for Masinstance. On what class did this charitable- terton would not have such objections as he aid rate fall? Upon the struggling house- had to the present state of things. He did not holders-on the poor people; and they had know whether they had a local hospital in the districts in the colony which were enormously honourable gentleman's district, but, if they wealthy, and contained the very best land in the had, he had no doubt they got some assistance colony, where no rate was ever struck, and the from the main Board in Wellington in connecowners of these properties contributed nothing tion with it. Even in his own district in Aucktowards the support of the poor of the colony land they were constantly getting into conflict or the maintenance of hospitals. He looked with the district represented by the honourupon this separation of districts-this cutting- able member for Marsden, where they had off of districts so as to make the richer por- a separate district. They were continually tions contribute as little as possible towards having to write lawyers' letters to the Board, the sick and the poor-as doing a great in- which, whenever they had a poor person to justice to the colony as a whole. He quite support, paid the passage of that person to concurred with the honourable gentleman who Auckland, where the local Board had to suphad last spoken that the town was a wrong port him. They had had the same experience, place to bring the aged to, and he quite agreed too, with Waikato, Napier, and Gisborne; and with the honourable member that it was a half of their time was taken up in detecting great mistake to pile up these great buildings the palming-off of poor people on them; showabout the large towns; but he could not agreeing that it would be probably a wise thing to with the conclusion which the honourable have the whole District of Auckland under one gentleman had come to that the districts large Board. He had no doubt they had spent should be cut up so as to throw the greatest hundreds of pounds in litigation in adjusting burdens on those least able to bear them. He the question as to which body was responsible would not support the Bill. He had never for the support of the poor. They had even supported a Bill of that kind, and as long as he come into contact with Wellington over this had a voice in the House he would always pro- question. The City of Auckland was larger test against the iniquitous system in which than the City of Wellington-at any rate, it was hospital and charitable-aid maintenance was more beautiful-and the people were being conthrown upon the struggling townspeople and centrated in Auckland. He had no doubt, as poorer classes. time went on, and the people became aware of the great advantages of the Province of Auckland over Wellington, they would have a very large number of people continually being concentrated in Auckland, and they would have to maintain them. He had no doubt that Christchurch had the same complaint against Dunedin, Christchurch being a much more attractive city than Dunedin. The people were being concentrated in Christchurch. Mr. BUCKLAND said the hospital and charitable-aid taxation was not altogether in the direction the honourable member for the Buller had mentioned, as half the money came from the consolidated revenue. When this Bill was before the House a good many years ago he had supported it, but having had some experience of the working of the Act, he now intended to oppose this Bill. He wished to point out that the tendency of all poor people was to drift into cities, and, that being so, he thought it was only fair that the cities should have some relief, and the country people should contribute their fair share. There was another matter which had lately affected this question, and that was the Labour Bureau. The action of Labour Bureaux had been to supply the country districts with workmen. They were sent out at the Government expense, and they left their wives and families behind in the cities at the expense of the Hospital and Charitable Aid Boards, and the consequence was that a very large increase had taken place in charitable-aid expenditure. He regretted to say that when these men got an opportunity to go into the country they forgot that they had left their families behind. The poor unfortunate women had to go with their children to the Charitable Aid Board and get relief from the Board, and this relief was given at greatlyincreased expense to the local charitable-aid bodies. For these reasons he entirely disapproved of this Bill. He thought, if it were possible, it would be better rather to increase the size of the districts than to decrease them. Mr. FISHER asked what was the death-rate of Auckland. Mr. BUCKLAND said the death-rate of Auckland was not as large as the death-rate of Wellington. He must protest against this Bill being made law. He could not quite understand the support it had received from the honourable member for Wallace. He did not know why that honourable gentleman supported it, unless he was going to bring in a Bill to get a local Hospital Board in his district. He could assure that honourable member that he would have some trouble in getting a Bill of that kind through the House for the disintegration of their hospital and charitable-aid system. At one time, he was free to admit, he held entirely opposite views, and he had spoken in the opposite way, and had also voted for this Bill; but at that time he had not had the experience which he now had, and he was free to admit that, with the experience he now had, he was not so pig-headed as to come there and, because he had voted four or five years ago for a thing, to look up Hansard and see how he was to vote now. The hour of half-past five o'clock having | Zealand. I have heard an address from Sir arrived, Mr. SPEAKER left the chair. HOUSE RESUMED. Julius Vogel on the subject of thrift, and it was a highly-amusing address to me; and the Mr. SPEAKER resumed the chair at half- Financial Statement of the Colonial Treasurer past seven o'clock. FINANCIAL STATEMENT. ADJOURNED DEBATE. Mr. M. J. S. MACKENZIE.—Sir, I propose to occupy the attention of the House for a short time in discussing the Statement now before us; and in doing so I confess I feel myself at a very considerable disadvantage, inasmuch as the Statement has been already to such a degree torn to rags by Opposition speakers and indeed, I may say, by Government supporters that there is very little left for me to do. I confess that I have been waiting for the Minister of Education, or, as by the irony of fate he is now called, the Minister of Labour. I have been waiting for him to give his opinions -he is generally ready enough to do so-upon the financial condition of the colony, and I regret to find myself compelled, after waiting several days, to come to the conclusion that the honourable gentleman has no ideas on the subject. Nevertheless I am in hopes that we may still have the benefit of that jocular effervescence which the honourable gentleman is in the habit of giving us as criticism. I confess it requires a considerable effort to discuss this Statement, because, in the proper sense of the term, it is not a Financial Statement at all. There is a thin fibre of finance feebly endeavouring to force its way through a great mass of fustian in the Statement. I fancy that the vital and relevant portions of the Statement could have been comprised in three pages-that in those three pages the whole of the financial position of the colony could have been set forth; and the rest is simply padding. It reads, for all the world, like a speech on the third reading of the Appropriation Bill, which, as honourable gentlemen know, is a sort of conglomeration of what we have been discussing during the session. But, Sir, I would not so much care for that. No man would be more willing than I, no matter what the style of composition of the Statement, to give full credit to the Treasurer for it if I could approve of the financial policy sketched out in it. But I do not hesitate to say that a more vicious and dangerous finance was never before proposed to this House, and I say, further, that it is all the more vicious and all the more dangerous on account of the curious cloak of virtue and economy with which it is enveloped. Sir Julius Vogel used to come down upon us with his rampant policies like a troop of warrior horse, and we recognised at once the enemy, and knew what to expect; but the honourable gentleman comes creeping upon us under a mask of prudence and economy. There are members in this House who have not had the same acquaintance with him in finance that some of us have had. If they were as experienced as we are they would recognise that the Premier is in public life the Jubilee Plunger of New is an equally-diverting lecture upon economy. And every brother-rake will smile to see I cannot but think that the colleagues of the Mr. TAYLOR.-You have got it. I Mr. W. P. REEVES.-What is the total ? Mr. M. J. S. MACKENZIE.-The total expenditure for that year was £3,997,178, and for the previous year £4,082,634. Mr. W. P. REEVES.-Does that include interest and sinking fund? Mr. M. J. S. MACKENZIE.-The honour- | finitely more radical-they partook, it seemed able gentleman says we have got it. I am at the time, of the nature of an earthquake. going to show the House that we have not got There was consternation a year ago on the it, or, rather, that we had got it from the pre- face of every Civil servant in the colony, and vious Government, but not from the present there was a great deal of very natural appreone. It so happens that we are in a position hension among the inhabitants of the colony to compare, on the principle already stated, the generally, who thought that this was retrenchretrenchments of the present with those of the ment run mad-they could not understand it. late Government. It is within the memory of One public servant after another had to go, most honourable gentlemen present that when and it even seemed that the whole service of Sir Harry Atkinson took over the Government the colony would be destroyed by the radical in 1887 he found a very heavy deficit left to nature of the retrenchments of those honourhim by his predecessors, of whom the present able gentlemen opposite. Now, it is a curious Premier was one, and he was compelled to thing that, while the retrenchments of the effect very heavy retrenchments. We thought Atkinson Government stand out so clearly in those retrenchments exceedingly radical; but that particular year, we can travel on down to when the present Government came into office the end of the year 1892 and we find the same we found, much to our astonishment, that they steady march of expenditure. Absolutely that were about to undertake retrenchments of a is the only year that shows a decrease. much more radical character than anything Sir Harry Atkinson had effected. Well, then, Sir, we can now, with the figures before us, contrast the two. We can take the total expenditure of the colony for a number of years past, down to the present year. I am not going to quote details of figures, I am not going to weary Mr. M. J. S. MACKENZIE.-Most certainly honourable members with many figures, but I it includes interest and sinking fund. I have shall show how we can compare the expendi- already explained the principle on which I ture of the two retrenching periods. We can am proceeding, and the honourable gentleman take the total expenditure as it stands in the cannot claim any indulgence on account of public accounts, setting it forth in one column, interest to account for increased expenditure for the last ten years; and in a corresponding last year, because he has had loan-money to column we can show the increase of every year show for it. Well, there it stands, a positive over the previous one; and in another parallel monument of solid retrenchment and economy column we can show the decrease in expendi- on the part of the late Government. But ture over the previous year. I take the total what do we find as regards the present one expenditure under the annual and permanent after the earthquake of retrenchment with charges, because it is absolutely necessary to which they appeared to signalise their accesdo so. If you once commence to make allow-sion to office? The same regular increase, the ances for this item or that which one Government has escaped and another has had to incur -if you once commence doing that, then every Government can claim to be more economical than its neighbour. The only fair way to do it is to take the whole of the expenditure, annual and permanent, as it stands in the public accounts. Very well, if any one does so he will be surprised to find that from 1880, with one exception, up to the present time there has been a steady increase in expenditure, sometimes great and sometimes small, each year over the preceding one; and when they come to the column of decreases over the preceding year they will find that in one particular year, and one only-the year 1889—Sir Harry Atkinson effected a large decrease as compared with the year 1888. The decrease in that year, 1889, stands alone-absolutely solitary-in the whole column, and amounts to £105,456. As I have said before, that is something more than a mere pause in the march of the expenditure of the colony. It is a retracing of our steps, and a retracing of our steps to a very considerable distance. That stands to the credit of the late Government -a decrease in the expenditure in the year 1889 of £105,456 over the previous year, which was itself not a very extravagant one. But, as I have said, the retrenchments of the present Government were to be in same regular onward march of expenditure proceeding from the time they took office down to the present moment. As the figures actually stand in the public accounts for 1891-92 they show that the advance over the previous year is only about £18,000. That is how it stands without making allowances for particular items; but, supposing that we made allowances, what would be the result? Suppose we made allowances for interest which the Government admittedly have not had to pay; if we made allowances for subsidies to local bodies admittedly not paid; if we made allowances for the large expenditure taken from loan and placed to revenue by the former Government, but which these honourable gentlemen have not continued ;-I say, if we make allowances for these things and non-recurrent items, or even without inclusion of non-recurrent items, the increase comes to over £100,000. Taking account of all allowances, the actual increase of expenditure in the past year has probably been £120,000, and that as the result of their so-called retrenchment. And when we come to the estimated expenditure for the current year we find that it is about the sameabout £120,000 above the expenditure of last year. At the present time, it is true, so far as we have the figures, the increase appears to be only about £14,000 or £15,000. But the whole the wrong man. The lesson to be learned is clear. A Returning Officer is not to return a person opposed to the Government. He is to say, "I find that So-and-so, the Opposition candidate, has more votes than the other person, but I declare the Government man elected." Then, Sir, we must remember that, at the same time that room was being demanded for the young man the Minister of Lands was bringing from the South, by parity of reasoning we may suppose that room was also being made for the young men the Premier was bringing from the North, and the other young men the Minister for Public Works was bringing from the West. That sort of thing has been going on all over the colony; so that, while the public has been astonished by the apparent retrenchments of the Government, we have been astonished at the remarkable want of evidence of retrenchment in the public accounts. Then, we find the same sort of thing going on in another direction. Look at the matter of the Rangitikei bridge. That is public-works expenditure, of course; but it is in the same category. The Minister for Public Works the other day, when we were discussing the matter of the letter to Mr. R. K. Simpson about the Rangitikei bridge, laughed at the affair; and yet, what was that letter? I ask both sides of the House. I maintain that that letter was a revelation to the eyes of the people of New Zealand of a meditated act of unblushing public corruption. That is what it was. of the supplementary estimates are yet to come down. The unauthorised expenditure has also to be included. So that, if we make the most reasonable estimate of what must inevitably come before us, no calculations can be made which will set down the increase at much less than £120,000 above that of last year, which was, as I have said, at least £100,000 more than the expenditure of the previous year. Now, this raises an important question namely, How is it, or why is it, that, after the extraordinary retrenchment we were told the present Government was effecting-I say, how is it, in spite of apparent facts, that when we analyse the public accounts we find no evidence of retrenchment? The reason is simple. I claim no great credit for having found it out, and when I do acquire any sort of knowledge I never rest until I have imparted it to others. How is it that, after all the retrenchment they say they have effected, there is no evidence of it in the public accounts? It is because as fast as public servants in a high position were removed in a striking and dramatic manner, and we know the Minister for Public Works loves the dramatic, all the nooks and crannies of the public service were quietly filled up with the followers and hangers-on of the Government. That is the reason of it. It is difficult to get evidence of this in the estimates, but such evidence as we have is of an undeniable kind. We have some evidence in the estimates. We have tried to get returns on the subject of appointments and dismissals, but it is impossible to get them. We cannot get returns nowadays. They are always opposed. But every honourable member I dare say every honourable member even on the other side of the Housefinds that in his particular district some of the dark spots of the Government administration have been illumined as by the flash of a lantern as to the manner in which the appointment of Mr. SPEAKER.-The words were applied to some of those persons to the public service is a member of the Government. I must rule them made. Honourable members may have seen out of order. An honourable gentleman must a telegram which was published in a newspaper not in the course of a debating speech incithe other day, and which no doubt was trust-dentally make a charge of corruption. worthy, since we have never seen it contradicted a telegram sent by the Minister of Lands to some survey officer in the North; Island: "Make room for the young man the Minister of Lands is bringing with him from the South." I am glad to see that the Minister is making a note of it. The honourable gentleman is the Captain Cuttle of the Governmenthe is fond of making notes; but, like Captain Cuttle, he cannot make much use of them afterwards. "Make room for the young man the Minister is bringing with him from the South." Honourable members will note the expression as remarkable: "Make" room. He does not ask if there is room. He must make it. The real meaning is clear: the officer at the head of the department, if he has not room, is to remove some officer not of the right colour, in order to make room. We know what has happened to the Returning Officer for Bruce. Since the election the unfortunate man has lost his billet. Why? Because he returned Mr. SPEAKER.-I must point out that the honourable gentleman has no right to charge the Government, or a member of the Government, with an intention to corrupt any person. Mr. M. J. S. MACKENZIE.-I can quite understand, Sir, that if I were accusing the Government of attempting to corrupt a member of this House it would be an extremely wrong thing. But the fact is that- Mr. M. J. S. MACKENZIE.-I am willing to do whatever you think is necessary in accordance with parliamentary rule. Hon. MEMBERS.-Withdraw. Mr. M. J. S. MACKENZIE.-I have not been asked to withdraw yet. Mr. SEDDON.-You, Sir, asked the honourable gentleman to withdraw the expression. Mr. SPEAKER.-I may say Mr. M. J. S. MACKENZIE.-I think it is right that you should hear first what I have to to say. I was speaking about the action of Ministers in the constituencies. According to the constitutional law of England, and consequently of this colony, you can impeach a Minister for corruption; but how can you impeach him unless you use words imputing corruption? And I would remind you, Sir, if you will permit me, that the honourable member for Waitotara brought forward charges not merely of public but of private corruption, a thing I have not dreamt of doing,-and he was allowed to do so |