Parliamentary Debates Volume 9 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1869 Excerpt: ...that that board was entirely useless to the country. Tlie annual grant had been continued for the last few years, simply because the Estimates had been brought on late in the year, before which time promises of pecuniary aid had been made to the various local agricultural societies, on the strength of which promises those local societies incurred liabilities. On a previous occasion he stated that the board incurred an expense of l,500 in distributing 4,500. In making that statement he failed to take into account the fact that, of the funds at the disposal of the board, 1,000 was given every year for what was called a national show. The appropriation of that money was attended by but little advantage, because it was never decided where the show should be held until within a mouth of the time of holding it, and therefore the grant did not secure an additional exhibit. The only other duty of the board was to divide the State grant among twenty-six or twentyseven agricultural societies, and the cost of doing this was something like 800 per annum. Mr. LOBB seconded the motion. Mr. MACGREGOR concurred in the motion; but, at the same time, reminded the House that an Act of Parliament stood in the way of the abolition of the Board of Agriculture. True, by the House discontinuing the grant, the Act might become practically inoperative; still the board would remain in existence until the Act under which it was constituted was repealed. Under these circumstances he would suggest to the honorable member for East Bourke (Mr. McCaw) the propriety of amending the motion, by substituting, for the words " it is expedient that it should be abolished," the words " it is expedient that no money shall be voted after the end of the present ...