whole of the report of the Commissioners, but only one or two paragraphs. They stated, on page 2, Your Commissioners are of opinion that Lake Ellesmere is rapidly becoming depleted of flounders of sufficient size to be of any value for the purposes of food; and that, while it still contains a large number of small, immature, and undersized fish, it contains a very small supply of the larger fish which were formerly obtained from the lake. "Your Commissioners consider the principal causes of this are not far to seek. By the regulations gazetted in April, 1885, the mesh of the nets allowed to be used was 4in., but this was lowered to 4in. by regulations of the 10th January, 1888, and these are the regulations now in force. On inspecting the nets actually in use in the lake we found few with mesh that exceeded 4in. These nets will take the yellow-belly and black flounders, which are the predominating varieties, from 8in. and upwards, measured over all-that is, from the tip of the snout to the end of the tail. The so-called 'three-corner' flounders of less length than 8in. are taken by such mesh. "A second cause of the depletion of the lake is excessive fishing. There are about twenty boats on the lake, and each of these boats has nearly two miles of set-nets for flounders." Further on they said, 44 Mr. Durant, the president of the Fishermen's Union, in his evidence, states that there are twenty-one boats engaged in fishing on the lake, and that each boat averages four cases, containing each about twelve dozen, per day. We think this estimate very excessive; but, even if half the number stated by him were taken by the fishermen-viz., two cases to each boat, of twelve dozen per case-the daily take would amount to over 6,000 flounders. The actual number taken can, perhaps, however, be more nearly obtained from the examination your Commissioners made of the books of the fish salesman to whom the flounders are forwarded for sale. We find the actual number of cases forwarded to him from Lake Ellesmere as the take of eighteen boats in sixty weeks, from the 2nd January, 1892, to the 3rd March, 1893, amounted to 5,785 cases, or an average of 96 cases per week. To this must be added the number of cases sold locally, which, your Commissioners were informed, would amount to about twenty cases per week. This would make the total take per week equal to from 116 to 120 cases of about twelve dozen each, or over 17,000 flounders per week." So, the Minister would see, it was a matter affecting a very large source of food-supply. Further on the Commissioners stated, "Your Commissioners are of opinion that no flounders should be allowed to be taken, either in Lake Ellesmere or elsewhere, under 10in. in length, and that the size of the mesh of the nets used should not be less than 5in. Your Commissioners are of opinion that, if the interests of the public and of the fishing industry only were to be considered, a still larger mesh and size of fish should be fixed; but, having regard to the interests of the fishermen, and knowing the difficulty they would have to obtain a living from Lake Ellesmere if the limit was fixed at 11in. or 12in. as the minimum size at which flounders should be taken, they make the recommendation as above." Further on they said, We "The evidence shows that the nets in use last about six months, though one fisherman says, with care, his nets last eighteen months. We recommend that, if the suggested alteration is made in the size of the mesh, twelve months' notice should be given to the fishermen. see no reason why the same size of mesh should not be fixed for the whole of the South Island, or, at least, for the whole of Canterbury, and strongly recommend that such size be adopted for all flounder-nets." This was a very clear and decisive report. There was no hesitancy on the part of the Commissioners as to the matter of this fishing industry, and the Government had had that report before them for six months, but were yet unable to say what they proposed to do with it. He hoped the Minister would give effect to this recommendation-would apply it, if not to the whole of the South Island, at least to Lake Ellesmere and the bays of Banks Peninsula. Mr. WARD might say, in reply, that, in his belief, the size of the mesh should not be under 5in. The honourable gentleman would see that a number of persons had been engaged for many years in this industry, and they had meshes of smaller size. To a number of people the sudden change of the mesh to one of 5in. would be no small matter; consequently the Government did not desire to embarrass a number of these poor people by suddenly asking them to change their nets. The matter had received the close consideration of the Government, and, if the practice of catching these small fish were continued, steps would be taken to prevent it. Mr. WRIGHT begged to move the adjournment of the House. The statement made by the Minister that no action would be taken, on the false assumption that they would be damaging the interests of the few fishermen concerned, was not in accordance with the tenor of this report. This report pointed to the fact that the nets lasted only for a period of six months, or, with the utmost care, for a period of twelve months; and it was advised that, in order that no injury should accrue to these fishermen by making their nets useless, twelve months' notice of the change should be given. All he asked was that notice should be given, and that these people should let their old nets gradually wear out, and be given time to replace them by new ones. If the Minister, or those who furnished him with his reply, had read this report, the honourable gentleman would not have made the statement he made that afternoon. Mr. BLAKE said if the mesh of these nets was to be 5in. square it would let a flounder through of a larger size than was mentioned in the report. The diagonal of a mesh 5in. square would be 7 in.; and a 5in.-square mesh Sir J. HALL thought the last speaker was under a misapprehension, because a mesh hung diagonally would let a larger fish through than a mesh hung on the square. would let a fish through very much larger | get this information. Now they had got the and wider than that specified in the report. information they were not prepared to do anyIn his opinion, a square mesh of 5in. would let thing with it. He had it on the best authority all the flounders through that were in Lake that a 5in. mesh was the correct thing for Ellesmere at the present time. the lake. If so, why did not the Government adopt the recommendation of the Commissioners? This was only of a piece with all the actions of the honourable gentlemen with regard to Commissions and Committees set up to investigate matters of various kinds. They got the report, and took no notice of it. Why? Simply because they were afraid to offend some of their followers, and for that reason they disregarded the recommendations made in reports. He was therefore not at all surprised at the honourable member for Ashburton bringing the matter up. Mr. BLAKE said his opinion was that the mesh was too large. Sir J. HALL said the Commissioners went carefully into this question. They went on the lake, and considered all the circumstances, and he thought they had made a reasonable report. He had always done his best to protect the interests of the fishermen, but he would not object to the report being given effect to, provided the mesh was hung diagonally, and not on the square. To put an end to this longcontinued controversy, he thought the Government should alter the mesh without delay. Mr. WARD said the Government would see that the report was gone carefully into, with a view to considering the whole matter. Mr. SANDFORD said he had received several communications from those interested in the Ellesmere Lake fishery. The fishermen did not object to the length of the fish being stipulated for, but they did object to the size of the mesh. They said the lake fish were of an entirely different shape from those caught in the sea, and that a 5in. mesh would let a 12in. fish through; whereas at Lyttelton a 5in. mesh would not let a fish through of a much less size. They told him they had no objection at all to strict regulations; but they had a very strong objection to the nets being hung on the square, because they could not catch fish at all in such nets. He should like to know from the Minister-because it was not stated in the report-what reason was assigned by the Commissioners for recommending the square mesh to be used. Practical men said that such a thing was actually unknown. There must have been some reason behind the report to induce the Commissioners to make this suggestion. The fishermen thought this report had been drawn up in the interests of the trout-anglers, and against the interests of the flounder fishermen. He thought the Government should inquire very carefully into the whole of the circumstances before giving effect to the report, and desired to enter his protest against hurried action which might have a disastrous effect upon a number of hard-working men, many of them with families. Mr. VALENTINE had just heard the Postmaster-General make a statement to the effect that the Government would make careful in quiry and give effect to the report if necessary. The Government knew that they had had this report in their hands for the last six months. Had they looked at the report? He did not believe the honourable gentleman had ever read it; the Government knew nothing about it. Almost every report that came down to those honourable gentlemen was shelved. This Commission was set up by themselves to Mr. WRIGHT said, in reply to the honourable member for Christchurch City (Mr. Sandford), he might say that the fishermen themselves had sent in a petition during the present session, in which they practically agreed to all the recommendations contained in the report of the Commission, with the one exception that they objected to the net being hung on the square. The stipulation that the net should be hung on the square was, to his thinking, unnecessary. The fishermen dissented from that recommendation, and from that only. They practically agreed to every other recommendation; and he asked the Government to give effect to the report, not only in the interests of the public, but of the fishermen themselves, whose living would be destroyed if prompt action were not taken in this matter. Motion for adjournment of the House negatived. MOUNT EGMONT MINERAL SPRING. Mr. McGUIRE asked the Premier, Will he appoint a qualified party to report upon the important discovery which has been made on the slope of Mount Egmont - namely, an active mineral spring? This was a very important question. If the hot spring should prove to contain mineral water of a beneficial kind it would impart new life and energy to the afflicted. It would be a great blessing to suffering humanity, as there would be no difficulty in going to the place. He would not insult the intelligence of honourable members by enlarging upon this very important matter, and on the benefit that would accrue to the country by the opening-up of mineral springs and such a magnificent district to tourist traffic. He could simply mention that, instead of travelling, as at present, through hundreds of thousands of acres of worthless land to see mineral springs in action, tourists who visited the Mount Egmont district would pass through the most fertile grazing country in the world, to be rewarded at the end of their journey by seeing geysers in action. It was admitted, he thought, by all parties who had seen Mount Egmont that it was one of the most graceful mountains in any part of the world. He would like to know if the Government would appoint a qualified person to report upon the matter, and, should conditions be favourable, to accompany his report with in- | 1889 (H.-50, Vol. III., Appendix to Journals, stantaneous photographs and other photographs. He trusted the Government would see their way to do this, and would take as prompt action as possible. Mr. SEDDON saw by the papers that there had been a discovery of the kind mentioned by the honourable gentleman; but it had taken four or five years to find this mineral spring, and it was very questionable whether the explorer would be able to find it again. However, it was impossible for the Government to do anything in the matter until they received further information; but on receipt of further information the Government would, of course, take the necessary steps to have the matter seen into and duly reported upon. MARTON SMALL-FARM ASSOCIATIONS. Mr. BRUCE asked the Minister of Lands, If he will endeavour to push on the surveys of the Marton Small-farm Associations Nos. 1 and 2, so as to enable the members to proceed with their improvements? It was altogether unnecessary for him to enter into any detail in the way of explaining the question, because it carried on its face all the explanation that was required. He just wished to say, in connection with that, there were a number of small tradesmen who were extremely anxious to get on the land; and, even if they did not get on the land, they wished to spend any surplus funds they had in improving it. But until the ballot was made and the surveys were completed they were unable to do so. Perhaps, also, he might be justified in saying this that in placing this question on the Order Paper he was in some degree pandering to an ignorant feeling which existed all over the colony. He could have put this question to the Minister privately with just as much effect and result as would be gained by placing it on the Order Paper, but if he did not place it on the Order Paper his constituents would think that he was doing nothing in the matter. It was with the sincere hope that it would have the effect in some degree, at any rate, of showing the people of the country that everything did not depend upon placing the question upon the Order Paper that he made these remarks. He knew that the Minister would do everything he could in the direction indicated in the question, but he just thought it to be his duty, from the point of view he had stated, to place the question on the Order Paper. Mr. J. MCKENZIE said it gave him great pleasure to be able to inform the honourable gentleman and his constituents that the survey of the blocks of these two associations was complete, and that the Commissioner of Crown Lands was now arranging for the taking of the ballot, and there would be no further delay in the matter. He was very glad to give the honourable gentleman that information. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES. On the motion of Mr. FISH, it was ordered, That a return be laid before this House, in continuation of a return dated 31st August, House of Representatives), relating to friendly societies; also, a comparative statement setting forth the increase or decrease in the several particulars mentioned in said return between the two last valuation reports of the several districts and orders, so as to indicate whether the several districts and orders are improving their financial position or otherwise. LICENSED HOTELS. On the motion of Mr. McLEAN, it was ordered, That a return be laid before this House showing the number of licensed hotels in the colony in June, 1881, and the number in June, 1893; also the number which have been closed by the Licensing Committees during the same period, and whether any of those closed have been reopened. SHEARERS' ACCOMMODATION BILL. On the question, That leave be given to introduce this Bill, Mr. VALENTINE said it was not usual to object to the introduction of Bills, but at the same time, after the action of the Government on a previous day in striking off the Order Paper some twenty Bills, it was an extraordinary thing that they should now, at that late period of the session, come down and ask leave to introduce no fewer than three new Bills. There might be three more the next day; and, perhaps, before the end of next week there might be twenty more Bills on the Order Paper, and another slaughter of the innocents later on. What did the Government mean by introducing these Bills at such a late period of the session? Mr. FISH was about to rise to make similar remarks when the honourable gentleman anticipated him. It was absolutely absurd that the Minister should commence the previous day to clear the Order Paper, and then at once begin to load it up again-commencing that day with three new Bills. Mr. SEDDON said the Mahinapua Creek and Lake Reserves Bill was a local Bill. Mr. FISH said, at any rate, outside this particular objection which he had, he would like to ask the Minister to explain whether this Shearers' Accommodation Bill had any reference to recent Ministerial changes. Mr. T. MACKENZIE would like to say that it would be infinitely better for the Ministry to select the work they really intended to go through with, instead of wasting the time of the House in taking, perhaps, the second readings of a number of measures that there was no necessity for, and as to the fate of which the Government did not care a twopenny-piece whether they became law or not. Why did they not bring down their more important measures, instead of introducing all sorts of outside legislation ?-which legislation had perhaps been unearthed after reposing for ten or twelve years in the pigeon-holes of the various Ministers. The object was perfectly clear: it was, to befog their minds with intricate Bills, in order to keep honourable members there until they were absolutely unfit for going on with their legitimate legislative work, and when they had arrived at that condition the really important measures of the session would be brought down. The members were then compelled to sit up night after night until three, four, five, and six o'clock in the morning, when, as he had said, members were not fit either mentally or physically to consider them. get measures, and especially labour measures, brought into the House, although the Government did not expect them to pass. He wished all the measures they passed year after year were introduced to the House and then laid aside for a year, so that they might go before the country. If that were done, they would have less hasty and ineffective legislation, and a greater proportion of legislation that would be for the benefit of the people. Even if the Government could be accused of insincerity in this respect, and even if they did not intend to pass this measure, he thought it was wise to introduce the Bill and have the clauses set forth, and then let it go before the shearers and their employers, and probably then, in the following session, they would be able to pass such a measure as would be satisfactory to both parties-at all events, one that would be a fair compromise, and have the effect of improving the accommodation given to the shearers. It was not at all an unusual thing to object to Sir J. HALL really did not believe that this Shearers' Accommodation Bill was any more intended to be passed than a Bill to remove the Emperor of China. It was simply a piece of paper on which was printed what was thought to be a popular proposal that the Government might dangle before some of the electors. But the Government no more dreamt of doing anything with the Bill than they dreamt of flying. It was mere child's-play. Between twenty and thirty Bills had been yesterday removed by the Government from the Order Paper; and now they followed up that action by introducing new Bills which the introduction of a measure, and he wished they had not the slightest idea of passing. His honourable friend need not be at all uneasy. There was not the slightest probability of their being asked to pass the Bill; but it might enable the Government to pretend that they had been obstructed by the Opposition. That was the length to which they would go. Mr. TAIPUA hoped the House would not object to the Government bringing in as many Bills as they liked. He said, "Let them come.' The House was already piled up with Bills relating to the Maoris. They had had their share. Now let the Europeans have theirs, and have a chance as well as the Maoris. Mr. MOORE said it was to be regretted that the Minister should bring down important Bills like this so late in the session. Last night the Premier told them that they were within two or three weeks of the close of the session, and he had the previous day cleared some twenty or twenty-one Bills off the Order Paper. Why, then, introduce others? If the Government were earnest in their desire to pass Bills of this sort, why not bring them in earlier in the session? Besides, the honourable gentleman in charge of this particular Bill was conspicuous by his absence. He would say, if the honourable gentleman was particularly anxious to get the Bill through he ought to be there, and not leave it to his colleague. He had no desire to prevent the Government from getting the Bill introduced, or any other important measures; but at the same time it was not right to the House to have Bills introduced at that stage in order that they might be dangled before the public: and then, during the recess, they would say that the Opposition, or some members of the Opposition, obstructed them, and they were in consequence unable to get the Bills through. Mr. FERGUS did not at all object to the Government introducing as many Bills as they liked. If they hoped by means of the popularity acquired in this sort of way to keep themselves in power, then he had no hesitation in saying that their reign would soon come to an end. He thought it very wise indeed to to defend honourable gentlemen on his side of the House for their objection. He remembered a time, two or three sessions ago, when he wished to place before the country a measure which he thought was in the public interest, and the then Premier, the late Mr. Ballance, objected, and would not let it be introduced. In this case, therefore, he would be compelled to go with the Government for the introduction of the measure, even supposing they did not intend it to pass, as he would like to see it drawn up and placed before the public. Mr. WARD was pleased to see that honourable members were evincing a disposition now to get home. No doubt the haste of the honourable member for Tuapeka to get through the business and to get away accounted to some extent for his opposition to the introduction of the measure. On the other hand, he would point out to those members who said that the Government should not introduce this Bill, after having dropped so many, that on the previous day the Government had got through a large amount of business, and were very much encouraged by the expeditious way in which the work was being done. This Bill was introduced to give honourable members an opportunity of continuing their good work, and he thought it was such a one as would commend itself to members generally. He would point out, to show that the Government were not insincere, that the Infant Life Protection Bill An Hon. MEMBER.-That is not the Bill under discussion. Mr. SPEAKER thought the honourable gentleman might very fairly allude to it, as Ministers had been animadverted upon for bringing in three Bills. Mr. WARD said that Bill was the result of a report that had only been placed in the hands of the Government last week, and therefore it could not have been produced before; the circumstances that gave rise to it were not known in the House or in the country; and when the House considered the causes that led up to the introduction of the Bill there would be no wardens to attend to them. That ought to hesitation on their part in putting it through have been done years ago. He would proall its stages. He would like to say, further, mise the honourable gentleman and the House that it was not unusual to introduce Bills after and the country that he would try to provide, the Order Paper had been reduced. It had so far as he could, for the preservation of the been done in the past; and, when important | natural scenery of those districts. legislation suggested itself to the Government after the Order Paper had been reduced, he thought the House would find fault with the Government if they did not take the necessary steps to introduce it. He thought, under the circumstances, the adverse comments of some of his critical friends were not warranted. Motion agreed to, and Bill read a first time. MAHINAPUA CREEK AND LAKE RESERVES BILL. Mr. SEDDON moved for leave to introduce this Bill. It was a local Bill which he had only received by the last mail from his constituents, and its object was to preserve the scenery that surrounded the lakes in Westland, which was valuable, and likely was to be destroyed. The Bill had been made public in the usual way, and it was in his capacity as member for Westland that he asked leave to introduce it. Mr. FERGUS asked whether the honourable gentleman would not bring in some general measure for the protection of scenery in the various localities. He was exceedingly sorry the other day when he was in Southland to find that the whole of the bush south of Lake Te Anau had been burnt down-he believed, maliciously-by one of the Crown tenants, who paid £5 a year for the right to graze some 10,000 acres of land. The value of this country consisted of the verdure that covered the hillsides, and, in order to keep a few miserable sheep on country totally unfit to carry any quantity, thousands of acres of magnificent native bush had been burnt down. There were some places, of course, where, in the interests of settlement, the bush must come down, but it was a matter for regret that the bush was being so largely destroyed. He would like to see the Government take some steps to see that the Crown tenants did not wilfully destroy the magnificent scenery on the numerous lakes. In this connection, he would like to say that, when coming down the Wanganui River some year or two ago, he was sorry to find that the Maoris were destroying the beautiful ferntrees which lined the steep slopes of the riverbank. He had brought the question before the House last year. He again commended the matter to the attention of the Minister, and he did trust that, if not this session, at any rate during the recess -notwithstanding the work in connection with the general election-the Government would give some attention to the conservation of the natural beauties of New Zealand. Mr. SEDDON said there was a good deal in what the honourable gentleman said, and he thought they should have a report as to each of the lake districts. What was valuable to the colony was its scenery. He thought these localities should be reserved and vested in the local bodies, and perhaps there should be Mr. VALENTINE said, if the honourable gentleman intended to introduce next session a general Bill to deal with the subject, there was no necessity for the Bill now introduced. He had no objection to this Bill at all; it was a very creditable sort of thing for the honourable gentleman to do to protect the scenery in his electorate; and it was necessary that something should be done for the protection of the beautiful lakes in Otago and elsewhere. Mr. T. MACKENZIE appreciated what the Minister had said with regard to his intention to conserve the natural scenery in this place, and he would like also to especially congratulate him because, when he (Mr. Mackenzie) made a motion of a somewhat similar character last year, instead of permitting it to come to a division the honourable gentleman opposed it in every possible manner, and finally stone walled it. Motion agreed to, and Bill read a first time. HARBOURS BILL. Mr. G. HUTCHISON moved, That the amendments made in Committee in this Bill be agreed to. Mr. FISH would like to ask Mr. Speaker's ruling whether such a motion could be carried. He did not know whether Mr. Speaker had looked at the Bill since he (Mr. Fish) had called his attention to it before, but it would be observed now that all that remained of the Bill as it was introduced, and as it went before the Local Bills Committee, were the two words," An Act." All the rest had been taken out absolutely, and the Bill before the House was a new one. He asked Mr. Speaker's ruling, therefore, on the point as to whether the Bill could be proceeded with without going back to the Local Bills Committee. It appeared to him that, if the House permitted such an extraordinary alteration of a Bill as this, after it had been before the Local Bills Committee, there was no knowing what confusion the House, at some time or other, might get into. He did not know whether the principle of the Bill was the same or not, but it appeared to him altogether out of place to pass a Bill with nine sections in it when the original Bill contained only two. Mr. ROLLESTON understood that the Bill in its present form effected the same object as at first, only in a slightly different manner. Mr. HAMLIN, speaking to the point of order, said, the House having committed the Bill to a Committee of the House, it was quite competent to amend it without sending it back to the Local Bills Committee. Mr. ALLEN said if that was so he could not see the advantage of advertising a local Bill at all. That was done so as to allow those locally interested to know what the Bill contained. How did they know whether it altered |