WHOSE EXPENSES?

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1516, 12 August 1912, Page 4

WHOSE EXPENSES?

An item which appears on the Estimates laid before Parliament last week by the Massey Government has provoked some inquiry, and calls for explanation. It will bo found under the votes for the Department of Internal Affairs, and reads as follows: "Inquiry, re allegations Of Me. J. B. Hine, M.P., legal expenses: £504." Our Travelling Correspondent, who moves about the country a great deal; writes stating that the general assumption in the Taranaki district appears to be that the vote is intended to recompense Mr. Hine for tho legal expenses he incurred in exposing the improprieties which came to light as the result of the charges made by him on the floor of the House against certain members and ex-members of Parliament. As a matter of fact the vote, apparently, is intended for a very different purpose. Mr. Hine, when questioned on the subject, stated that the 1 Government had not paid his legal expenses and he could not say what the money was voted for. He certainly had not received it, nor had his solicitor. Who, then, has received, or is to receive, this money ?_ Mr. Hine performed a public servico of some moment when he courageously faced the unpleasant task of exposing the practices which had come under his notice; and it would have- been only fair and' reasonable if the Government had taken on itself to_ see that the expense he was put to in tho performance of his public duty was recouped by the State. Something might also be said for the payment of tho legal costs of the gentleman in whose case the Committee of Inquiry held that the charge laid had not been proved. But in the cases of the three other persons concerned, it would he grossly improper for any Government to meet their legal expenses with the taxpayers' money. Has this been dono? On the face of it the amount of the sum voted would seem to imply that the legal expenses of more than one of the persons charged had been paid, and if that is the case, Parliament should have something to say on the point. The probabilities seem to point to.the fact that cither the Ward or the Mackenzie Government paid this money to save the pockets of the erstwhile supporters of the Continuous Ministry; and if these payments were made in the cases of those persons against whom it was proved, in one instance that there had been a direct contravention of a resolution of Parliament, and in _ the others that they had been guilty of improper practices as members of Parliament, then it calls for the severest censure and condemnation. It is difficult to believe that even the Continuous Ministry would dare to dip into the public purse for the benefit of its supporters in such circumstances. Seeing that the Estimates are really the product of the late Government, perhaps the exMinister of Internal Affairs will explain to the House what the vote is for and who benefits under it. He might also state how it is that Mr. Hine, the person most deserving of consideration, but an opponent of the Continuous Ministry, comes to be passed over.