FINANCIAL ADVISER.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 815, 12 May 1910, Page 4

FINANCIAL ADVISER.

SEQUEL TO MEMORABLE DEBATE.

THE HON. W. P. BEEVES DESIGNS-"

The Government has been notified by the Hon. W. P. Beeves of his resignation of tho position of Financial Adviser to' the Government in London, which hi has held since he retired from the office of High Commissioner for the Dominion.

In connection with this subject the Prime Minister (Sir Joseph Ward) statei that lur. Reeves cabled his resignation a; from March 31, as soon ■as ho btcama mrare of the attitude taken up by a section of the' House in Tegard to his ap pointment. ■ Under the terms of his appointment, Mr. Eeeves could have retained the position until the end of June. Sir Joseph adds that it is highly necessary that New Zealand should have a financial adviser in- London. He feels that Mr. Eeeves, who, in his opinion, was a very capable person to fill the position, was very badly treated in regard to the matter by the House.

The appointment of Mr. Reeves to the position, it Will be recalled, was the subject-of a memorable stonewall in the House last session. When the General Estimates came down early in December Mr. Massey moved to strike out the vote for Mr. Beeves's salary, viz., In so doing, he expressed the opinion that the position ■ had been specially created for Mr. Eeeves. During the "discussion which followed several members on the Government side, notably Messrs. Euseell, Clark, and Davey, adversely criticised the appointment. Before the motion was put the Prime Minister replied that he could assure the House that the appointment would not have been made if it had not been warranted. The division on the question resulted in the vote being struck out-by 35 vote 3to Following was the division list:— • For tho rejection of the item (35) :—. Ministerialist.—Arnold, Clark, Davey, Glover, Hanan, Hogg, Jennings, Poole, Kusselh. J. C. Thomson, Witty. Opposition.—Allen, Anderson, Buchanan, Buick, Dive, J. Duncan, Fisher, Hardy, Herdman, Hemes, Hine, Lang, Mander, Massey, Newman, Nosworthy, Okey, Pearce, Phillips, Scott, Gj M. ThomsonWright. .. ■ " ' ■ :■ . Independent.—Luke, McLaren. In favour of the item (25).— Ministerialists.—Brown, Buddo, CarrolL Colvin, Jill,. Field, Forbes, Foivlds, Hall, Hogan, Laurenson, Lawry, M'Donaid, E, M'Kemie, T. Mackenzie, Millar, Poland, Eeed, Boss, Seddon, Sidey, Smith, Stallworthy, Te Eangihiroa, Ward.

When the Supplementary; Estimates were brought down, however, it was toimd that-the vote had been reinstated. As a, further protest against tho appointment, Mr. Massey moved that thn vote.be reduced by .£39!), but his amendment was defeated. He then moved that the vote be reduced by ,£398, and, later, by £397, and so on, intimating that if necessary his party was prepared to exercise its right to move 3D!) motions on the subject." As tlie matter still remained unsettled on Christmas Eye, tbo llouso (it will be remembered) adjourned over Christmas until the following Wednesday, when the battle was resumed. Two important questions were then raised by Mr. Massey as to the validity of tho proceedings. Hβ contended that the proper course to adopt if it.was desired to restore the vote would be to recommit the General Estimates; and,, further, that such-an item did not come within the scope or purposes of the Supplementary Estimates. On both poinU ho was, however, over-ruled. At 4 o'clock on, tho Thursday morning Mr. Hogan raised a point of order, that there was no Standing Order which permitted the tedious repetition of amendments' to reduce a vote. Mr. Wilford (the Chairman of, Committee) held that it had been the custom of the House to allow divisions to bo taken as was being done. This ruling was afterwards confirmed by the Speaker. When the Hpnso resumed that afternoon' Mr, 'Massey said he understood that the Prime ■Minister had a statement to make. Under the circumstances his party would have failed in its duty to the country had they not inadp a strong and determined protest;'. Sir' Joseph Ward (id reply) said that thero was no precedent so far as he knew for striking out a vote against which there was a full commitment His duty, unless the country was to bo placed in a wrong position, or unless tho Government was to be forced to pay out of "unauthorised" .an. amount which had already been authorised by Parliament, was to bring forward tho item again. "I wish to repeat/' he added, "that lbavo been all along will, ing to keep the matter perfectly clear till June 30, without any commitment beyond that date so far as the Government is concerned." Mr. Massey remarked that had the House been told that earlier in the debate, tin- obstruc. tion would not have continued. Sir Joseph, in a, rejoinder, said that all he had intended to convey was that he was ■iuite willing. to leave the position perfectly clear until June, when the House would have an opportunity to consider tho matter. Upon a final division, an amendment by Mr. Massey to reduce the vote by .£1 as an indication Hi it the office of financial adviser in London should not be continued was negatived by 38 votes to 27 (several Government member-; rev-ersin? the vote they hid previously given), the voting being as under:— ■ '

For the amendment (27):. Allen, Anderson, Buchanan, Clark, Dive, J. Duncar., ■ Eraser, Guthrie, Hirdy. Herdman, Berries, Lang, Luke, M'Lareu,_ Malcolm, Mander, Masscy, Newman, Noswor.thy, Okey, Fearce, Phillipps, Poole, Khodes, .•jcott.'-G. IF.'.Thomson, ■Wright.'■ ''

Against,.the amendment (38): Arnold, Browp, Buddo, Uuxton, Can-oil, Craigie, Dillon, Hon. T. Duncan, EII, Field, Forbes, Fowlds, , Graham, Greenslade, Hall, Hanan, Hogau, Jennings, Laurenson, Lawry, Macdonald, E. M'Kcnzie, L'. Mackenzie, Millar, Ngata, Pnrata, Poland, Keed, Koss, Seddon, Sidey, Smith, Stallwortlty, Steward, E. H. Tarlor T. E. Taylor, J. C. Thomson, Ward.

The pairs were as under:—For . the amendment: Bollard, Buick, Fisher. Against the amendment: Colvin, Russell, Te Kangihiroa. i