The Dominion. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1910. A PARODY OF JUSTICE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 935, 30 September 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1910. A PARODY OF JUSTICE.

It must have been made very clear to the House of Representatives and to the ' country ; ycster.day that tho Government ■ has thoroughly mado up its mind .'that Me. Hine's charges shall not,'if Ministers can help _ it, be ; submitted fox an impartial . tribunal for investigation. After shirking the question for over a. month, the Prime Minister gave notice of motion some days ago to refer the charges to the Lands Committee of the House, composed mainly of-his own followers. The outcry raised against a course so monstrously unfair evidently convinced the Government that there was "little hope of inducing the country to accopt the finding of a 'body so plainly partisan, and Sie Joseph Ward yesterday brought forward an amendment providing for the setting Up of a special committee to Conduct the inquiry. But again he showed the disinclination of the Government to face the position fairly. Again, ■ the .committee was overloaded with supporters of the party in'power, the. proportion being six Government to four Opposition members, A pretence was/certainly made on this occasion of reducing the proportion oi . Govaw^

inent. members by including a socalled Independent member, but, as was clearly exposed during the debate, the member in question has been regarded by the Government party itself throughout the session as a supporter of the Government.' Ho has never voted against the Government on any vital issue, and his own election professions showed him to be in favour of the Government, although claiming independence of Ministerial control. If the Government was really in earnest in' its desire that Mb. Hine's charges should be investigated by an ' impartial Parliamentary. Committee, why. did not the Prime Minister move to set up a committee consisting of an equal number of members from each side of_ the House 1 Why should he desire in a matter affecting the honour of the whole House to have ,a preponderance of Government members on the committee of inquiry ? Why, if Jie has so much confidence in the ability of members to _ sink their party ~ bias, did he think it necessary to take the precaution to place the Opposition in a numerical minority on the committee 1 The answers to these questions are obvious. -The Government knows .perfectly well that in an. investigation of this kind party feeling must inevitably creep in, however much members . may desire to act impartially Ministers know that, the examination of witnesses will on the one side proceed the object of eliciting evidence in proof; of the charges, and on the other with the desire to rebut them, .and that lonj; before the" proceedings are ended the members of the - committee will have drifted into two separate * sections, corresponding to the political partiesm the House—and with the Government section in' a majority. No one really doubts this Yesterday's debate in the House and the■ votes fecorded on the main question prove it up to the hilt. Let anyone who doubts this study the division list and read the speeches.' The matter was made a party question from beginning to end, and Mr. Hike would be courageous indeed, under such conditions to place,'himself, at the' mercy of so onesided, a: tribunal. as that which the - Government is attempting to force him' to' accept as ■ his judges. So much for the Prime ; M.iniSibe's design to cloak his refusal to-grant the impartial-inquiry asked for, and required, under the offer of an . investigation 1)y a committee of his own= choosing, ] and 1 so 'carefully' selected as... to ensure that the Government will-be certain to have a majority of its own followers thereon. No one, we think, is likely to be deceived by bo transparent a device. ;;On the , contrary, ■it must stimulate, the strong 'and growing, uneasiness arising out of the ■■ persistence and determination shown: by the_ Government, to prevent the very serious charges made by the member for Stratford being inquired 'into by two Judges of the Supreme Court. Why should ; the Government show such distrust of the Supreme Court Bench I Why should .they fear ,', to place the- issue in the hands of a judicial tribunal ,'uriiversally respected; more competent than any other in the country to weigh' the evidence that"may be brought'before it; free from all suggestion of .political bias -or V party interests ? Cannot the Government and its followers see;_that the desperate efforts they are making' to prevent the matter being investigated v by Judges of the: Supreme .Court must .not .only shake - confidence"in'"their.'bona: fides in setting-up their partisan committee of inquiry, nut' must also strengthen the belief that Mh. Hine s charges are well .. founded 1 Are .Mr. Laurenson and Mr., Bus-' SELL so foolish as to think that the grave and improper . aspersions which they cast on the Supreme Court Bench during, the 'course of yesterday's debate are likely, to bolster -.up the attitude of the party; to which- .they .'belong i. They make a very, serious; mistake if they : think anything of the kind. ■ To those who have studied ! the methods of the Government,; the conduct' of Minis-' ters in this matter will not be very difficult to understand;; Finding that it was . impossible to:- ignore Mr. Hine's charges any - longer,:.: . and knowing'that ho had refused to accept'any other tribunal' than ' one composed of Supreme Court Judges, the Government determined to offer what the member for Stratford had already refused, and to set up its committee of inquiry. No doubt Ministers hope that the member for Stratford will adhere to his determination : .not'-- to . appear before a partisan committee; in which case they., will .spread, it that' he shirked the inquiry. Should he appear before; the committee he. will still be at the 'mercy, of ' the Govern l ment\ majority; on i ; that oommittee; What chance'has any private member, or .'of the public, who . runs, . counter, to ; Ministerial 1 wishes, of securing justice .'and 'fair play from'such a Government ? What chance is there, under such conditions, of exposing, so that there can be no room for doubt, such evils as underlie' the charges made by the member' for Stratford, and which the, public interest demands should bo exposed? What further trickery —probably , the Prime Minister would call it. tactics—may be looked forward to when _ the charges come before the Committee of inquiry 1 It was only in keeping with the conduct of the Government throughout'that the Prime Minister and every member of the Cabinet present should vote against- the committee proceedings being open to the press; but even some of_ the members on the Government side of the House could not suffer this attempt to convert the inquiry l into a Star Chamber investigation, and the Govern- i ment was defeated by 38 votes to 30, Although Ministers have been able, by means of their majority, to avoid an' investigation : of Mr. Hine's/charges being made by two Supremo Court Judges, their success has been dearly bought! Tho ' question still remains: Why has the Government fought so desperately to prevent inquiry by an . impartial tribunal, the findings of which would be respected by everyone 1