THOSE INVITATIONS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1248, 5 October 1911, Page 5

THOSE INVITATIONS.

HOT WORDS IN THE COUNCIL. STRONG PROTESTS. "TREATED AS IF THEY WERE NOBODIES." Tho Coronation invitations mado their appearance on tho lloor of tho Legisiativo Council yesterday. Last lhursday tho Hon. C. H. Mills addressed a question to the Attorney-General asking him whether ho would explain: (1) Why the members of tho Council did not receive from tho Government a copy of (lie first invitation sent through tho fremiti- to the New Zealand Parliament by the joint-com-mit tc-e of tiiiio Houses of Lords and Commons, inviting eight members of the Now Zealand Parliament to attend Hie King's Coronation in London? (2) Why they did not receive a copy of tho second invitation sent by the same committee through tho Government inviting eight members of the Legislative Council to attcird tho fiamo ceremony? (3) Will tho Attorney-General lay on tho table of tho Council copies of all cables, letters, or papers received by the Government in connection with the Coronation invitations, with copies of the replies thereto, sent by the Government? Tho reply of the Attorney-General to t'ho questions was: "In answer to questions 1 and 2, all I liave to say ia that I have nothing to add to the statements mado by the Prime Minister, reported in Hansard No. 10, IPJI. Jly answer to question No. 3 is 'No.'" ;" "Crude, Undignified, and Discourteous." The day following the abovo reply the Hon. C. H. Mills gave notice of his intention to move as under: — "That the members of tho Council aro dissatisfied with tho crude, undignified, and discourteous reply given by the Attorney-General yesterday. . . . Also, that tho Council is dissatisfied with tho curt refusal to lay on tho table of tlto Council any papers, correspondence, or cables relating to the matter to which tho Council is entitled, and which refusal in my opinion is an insult to the Council." The abovo motion had been given notice of for yesterday, but when it appeared on the order paper it had bean reconstructed Oo under:— "That this Council is dissatisfied with'the answer given by the. Attor-ney-General in repiy to the questions on. tho Order Paper of Thursday, Sep- •• tember 28, on tho subject of tho Coronation invitations, and regrets tho refusal given to the request to lay on the Cablo any papers, cables, or correspondence relating to them." Tho Hon. C. H. MilW remarked that ie noticed that the motion as ho originally gave notice of it had been altered until it was h.irdly recognisable, ilo had been concerned as t'o whether or not ho had used the words in an unparliamentary sense, and he had since looked up tho dictionary meaning of tho words. "Crude" meant hasty or ill-advised, and ho thought tho Attorney-General was both hasty and ill-advised in his reply. Tho speaker proceeded to deal with tho moaning of tho words "discourteous" and "curt," used in his original motion, and to justify their use. In his opinion tho Council had been inexcusably overlooked i"i the matter of the invitations. As to the refusal to lay .t'ho papers asked for on the tablo of the Council ho thought the Council should see any papers asked for, provided that they were official and not confidential. Tho reply given to the first question ho had put on tho Order Paper was' not an answer. When ho spoko before, ho had no intention of disrespect to the Leader of tho Council, out at the same time members of tho Council expected courtesy. A reasonablo answer might havo been given. Deep Disappointment. The Hon. J. B. Callan seconded tho motion. Ho had road'' theii'reroarks -'of* the Prime Minister to. the other House, to which they had been referred by tho Attorney-General, and he felt deep disappointment at tho manner in which tho Council had been'"treated in regard to' the invitations. Could any sane man attempt to arguo or deny that members of both Houses were included? (Hear, hear.) It seemed to him that any member of the Council with any scli-respect at all could do nothing under tho circumstances but protest. However, that invitation went to members of tho other House, and tho answer was that they could not go. Then it was learned that another invitation came from Homo inviting eight members of tho Council. They heard nothing of it until after tho time to go Home. The reason given in the other House was to his mind flimsy. He was surprised nt tho conduct oi tho Prime Minister. That conduct was foreign to tho idea lie had always held of tho Prime Minister, and he could not understand how on this occasion tho Prime Minister had treated tho Council as if they were "nobodies." To his mind it was only natural to ask that the correspondence should be laid on tho table. He noticed that tho Hon. Mr. Millar had stated that ho had not the slightest donbt that when the Prime Minister returned tho wholo of tho correspondence would bo laid on thn table. He (Mr. Callan) saw no alternative but to voto for the motion. Tho Hon. H. I'. AVigram.said he would not discuss tho main question, but lie was not suro that the Attorney-General had not infringed tho Standing Orders in the answer he gave, as he had referred members to a debate in tho House. Ho felt bound to support the motion, and this caused him regret, because the At-torney-General had endeared himself to the Council by his conduct of tho business. .In any information asked for in the Council he thought they wero entitled to. a reply from the Leader, and not to bo sent otf to seek their information in something thai took placo in another House. "Turned Upon His Friends."; Tho Hon. George Jones mado sundry remarks about dignity. Tho mover of this motion, he raid, turned upon his friends— upon wen he had been associated with for years. Tho Hon. J. E. Jenkinson: "How has lie turned on them?" Tho Hon. G. Jones: "Well, I think that ho lias! If you want a friend, you want ono when you make a mistake—not when you are always right." (Laughter.) ■ The Hon. 0. M. Luke: "Do you admit they hnvi! made a mistake?" Tho Hon. Mr. Jones: "No." Tho Hon. C. U. Mills: "There- is no turning on his friends at all." Proceeding, tho Hon. Mr. Jones remarked that tho cnomios'of Liberalism would never, if he could help it, be advantaged by any act of his. He would be, willing "to suffer much in order that tho men who were doing so well tor thorn should not be disadvantaged. If any discourtesy had been intended, they would do besl" by ignoring it, and playing into the hands of their friends. The Hon. 0. Samuel said ho was sorry to have had to listen to such a speech as that just delivered. It showed that tho speaker was possessed of a party spirit, which was quito out of place in that Council. Tho Hon. Mr. Jones: "It is fealty!" Continuing, Mr. Samuel said that in effect the previous speaker had said that oven if this was discourtesy, he would not resent it. lie hoped tho Council would not suffer discourtesy from anyone without resenting it. If it did it would deserve tho contumely which some people now unjustly heaped on it. A higher spirit should, in his opinion, animate the Council than the spirit which animated 'another place." He could hardly believe Hint one who had. above all others, consistently shown tho greatest courtesy to the Council, intended to be discourteous towards the Chamber. Tt was unthinkable. Tho Prime Minister had always endeavoured to uphold the dignity of the Council. He wa* convinced that it w:;s a tiiiro mistake, and uot intended to cast n flight on the Council, 'lids was a.s to tlto iir.it invitation, but. there could bo no mistake in regard to the second. It Kin the duty of those who received that invitation to send it to those iuvited. There was no excuse- for not forwarding the invitations. Ho was surprised ami grieved that those rcx-iwnsible, for tho suppression of the invitations should havo acted as they did. It was :i disigrceabli; duly he had to do. but he would do it. He "would support tho motion. An Amendment, Tho Hon. K. A. Loughnan said ho did not wish to join in any vote of censure, but at tho samo time ho wished to get

information on tho main point. Ho would movo an amendment that all tho words after "Council" be deleted with a view to adding (he words "Requests that tho Government will explain tho matter ol tho Corouation invitations to the Council. Tho Hon. W. W. M'Cardlo seconded tho amendment. . Tho Hon. J. E. Jenkmson said he preferred the amendment to t'ho motion. Ho would like to have moved an amendment leaving in the first part of the motion, and adding the words "insists that all papers, cables, antl correspondence, except thoso marked confidential, bo laid on the table of the Council." If they passed tho original motion, it was a vote of censure and no more, but with a motion such as his they would get what they were alter. Tho Attonwv-Geueral had been put in a rather difficult position when the Uon. Mr. Mills asked his questions, and, perhaps, without intending it to bo so, tno answer was discourteous. They expected answers to bo given by tho Leader ot the Council, and not to be referred to what took place in another House, ims whole trouble was a sorry, paltry domestic affair, and he was sorry to see.the Attor-ney-General placed in the position lie nas in, but ho had brought it on himselt. A Storm in a Tea-cup. Tho Hon. W. Beehan thought the matter was a storm in a tea-cup, lo his mind tho Attorney-Genera had not treated the Council with any .discourtesy, lie had simplv saved tno time of the .yonneil. If tho Leader of the Council did not "slobber" over somo members oi. the Council they got annoyed. Many a iimo (ho Hon. Mr Ham tic! had voted against the Attorney-General. . .... The Hon. J. T. Paul:.fro crime in that. Continuing, Mr. Beehan said he was sorry the matter had been brought up, and" he I nought tho motion came wita v<-rv bad graco from tho Hon. Mr. Mills. T'ho Hon. C. Louisson thought tho amendment suggested by Mr. Jenkinson was the best. They were entitled to the information, lie could seo no reason tor suggesting that this was a motion ol censure. Tho Attorney-General might well sav: "Save mo from my friends. Tho Hon. 0. Samuel, speaking to tno amendment, said: "If I am not such a servile follower as certain lion, gentlemen.. I never allow any difference of opinion to make mo impute unworthy conduct to any hon. gentleman." . tho Hon. J. Barr said he would support t'ho motion. AVithout any reflection o/i tho Attorney-General they could support tho resolution. Attorney-General in Reply. Tho Attorney-General said ho could make a preliminary observation that several friends of his had been delivering themselves of probationary officers' recommendations that the offender should be admitted to mercy on the ground of his previous good 'ihoractor. With all respect and regard or tkess friends, he would like to say •:ha.t in answering, tho question put on U« Order Paper he had followed '.lie present accepted practice of the House of Commons. When he was in London ho had attended tho Mother of Parliaments and hoard four questions put. To tho first two questions the answer given was "Yes, , and to the last two, "My aimer is no. Ono of-theso involved putting certain papers on the table. Continuing, the At-torney-General said it was not his practice to go in for elaborate explanations on questions of pottering detail. Ho did not think he had transgressed the canons of good .faith or the obligations of tho House. He did not think any of them would chargo him with discourtesy because his reply fell in with the practice adopted in tho Houso of Commons. Ho had said that he was not in a position to add anything to what the Prime Minister had said iu "Hansard," and the hon. gentleman who asked the question was at the time quoting from the "Hansard" in which that reply was given by tho Prime Minister. It was' true ho might have Tepeatcd the Prime Minister's words parrot-liko. Ho might have paraphrased what Sir Joseph Ward had said, and so escaped tho strictures jjassed, but that would have been paltering with the question. Tho Primo Minister had accepted the responsibility of explaining the matter, and he (tho speaker) was not in a position to add to wliat the Prime Minister said. That was i the reason .ho couched the explanation as ho did.'" He was not going to alter (Ilia position ho had taken up then. The original motion was responsible for tho discordant clement introduced into tho debate; A member certainly had a right to say that a reply was not satisfactory, but not that it was crude, discourteous, and undignified. If tho first course had ■ been taken the element of bitterness which had run through tho debate would not have been there. It was surely unusual when a Minister gave an answer not his own, but that of tho Government, for a member to turn round and <movo a censure motion. It was all very well to say it was not a censure motion, but they had to take the spirit in which it was moved. This debate would bo read on the morrow as a bitter and condemnatory attack upon him and his colleagues, and somo of his friends had lent colour to tho suggestion. His answer was that ho had no intention of being discourteous. Ho had followed tho English practice as he saw it there. Whatever outsiders might say he did not stand in the mind of any member (unless it might bo tho member who put the question) charged with discourtesy. Ho was not, he added, in a position to say more in answer to the question than he had said. If tho motion was pasted asking for further information he would refer it to tho Government. The motion, as amended by Mr. Loughnan, was carried on tho voices.