THE MINISTER'S REPLY,

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1794, 5 July 1913, Page 6

THE MINISTER'S REPLY,

DEFENCE MATTERS. LAW MUST BE MAINTAINED. The Hon, H. D. BELL said that if no other members wished to speak, he would make a few remarks before the mover replied. He said that he would speak only for a few minutes, because it was impossible for a. Minister in the Council to speak of the Government's policy before the debate in the other Chamber had closed, and before the Government had brought down their policy measures. He wished to make it dear to the Council, he said, what the actual position was with Tegard to advances to settlers. "No single application," ho said, "for a new loan within the limits laid down—and remember those limits have been extended by the present Government—has been refused. But this is the case, and must continue to be tho case, that as the rate of interest 'goes up, and the loanß of other people fall due, and those mortgagees claim the higher rate of interest, application is made to the Advances to Settlers Department to take up loans hitherto in private hands. Tliese renewals aud mortgagors, mortgaged to private mortgagees who demand the higher Tate of interest— tho demand of these to come on to the State has had to be refused. The State Advances Department could not take these applications unless the national debt wero to go up to twice its present . amount. Even a most extravagant application to the London monoy market could not have met that demand."

Mr. Bell referred next to Mr. Anstey'a charges against the Defence Department. "The Department," he said, "are, if you like, unduly failing to regard the difllculties in particular cases, and tho exigencies of certain classes of individuals. That may be true; it must be true in some cases. I say, speaking with all tho sense of responsibility that in these methods it must bo felt not only by the Minister for Defence, but by every member of the Government, that tho danger has been fat more tho other-way—that tho attempt to refuse military training would be looked over, and.it is that which is much more likely to occur, and it is that, sir, in respect of which the Government hopo that they and the officers will not fail to do tlieir duty. Now, honourable gentlemen know that there has been in sotno cases, not only in one district, organised defiance of the law in this respect. What do you want us to do? Do you want the Government to establish one rule for that place and another rule for another place? Soma uniformity there must be, and if that uniformity is used to meet organised defiance, there must be cases where that uniformity presses on those w<ho are willing to obey the law. The difficulty, believe me, is not that tho Government or the officers of the Service want to lay down hard and fast rules. That is not tho difficulty. It is not truo that tlwy don't_ want to meet individual cases of hardship, but the danger and difficulty is in the establishing of a rule of prosecution whidh will not seem to be specially direoted against these organisations." There were, he continued, doubtless many cases that wero difficult to explain, but honourablo gentlemen ' must, when these eases were, brought bafore them, bear in mind the difficulty that was ever present with the Minister for Defence and the officers of the staff, that they must be just, and whatever happened tliey- must not evade the obligation that the country liad put upon them, to carry out- the law, and to maintain against all opposition, the undoubted supremacy of t)he law. _ He had no doubt that unfortunate cases did occur, but not through the obstinacy of the officers. On the contrary, every effort had been made to avoid them. But there were real difficulties in tho way. Mr. Anstey: Will you havo inquiry mado into these innumerable prosecutions? • '

Mr. Bell: Innumerable' prosecutions must follow if there is organised defiance. It appeared after Mr. Bell had spoken that other members wished to carry it on, and the debate was adjourned at 1.40 p.m., on the motion of the Hon. W. Beohan. It was agreed, however, that the debate would bo concluded next Tuesday.