THE LITERARY TOUCH IN "HANSARD"

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 137, 27 February 1918, Page 8

THE LITERARY TOUCH IN "HANSARD"

ETHICS OF CORRECTING PROOFS AN INCIDENT IN THE FEDERAL HOUSE When members of tlie Labour Party in the House of Representative!! took: exception recently to an alteration in "Hansard", proofs by the I'rimo Minister, the Speaker (Air. W. Elliott Johnson), states tho Melbourne correspondent of the Sydney "Sun," set out to review the position. Tho Prinie Alinister had intimated in a speech in tlie House that he was prepared to stand asido if he were in the way of .the formation of a truly National Government, but when the speech was printed in. "Hansard" a few days later it appeared that Mr. Hughes had said he .would stand aside "if Mr. Tudor was prepared to agree to a policy acceptable to tho Nationalist Party.." That much had been added to the .uttered speech. Mr. Speaker subsequently,."referred' in the House to the matter as follows:— "I should like to refer to.a matter, mentioned in the House during the present sitting, regarding the revision of 'Hansard' proofs. I felt it was necessary for me to take some notice oE certain observations and criticisms made in this Chamber, and therefore I asked the Principal Parliamentary Reporter to furnish me with a 'report in such terms as he thought advisable. The report is as follows:— No New Matter. " 'In reply to Mr. Speaker's inquiry concerning proof revision by honourable members, and with special - reference to an alteration made by the Prime Minister, to which,-exception has been taken, attention is directed to the following extract from the memorandum attached to each set of proofs issued to members: — Honourable members are respectfully requested to note +bat emendations which alter the sense . of words in debate or introduce new matt-er are not admissible. "'The terms of this memorandum were determined by Mr. President Baker and Mr. Speaker Holder in response to a request by me, dictated by a desire to preserve the fidelity of the official report, that honourable members in revising the proofs of their'speeches might be, restricted to the correction of errors. This suggestion was founded upon much reasonable criticism of the extent to which certain honourable members exercised the privilege of revision, and was also put forward in the discharge of what'l conceived to be my duty as the officer responsible to Parliament for the production of the reports. " 'In accordance with instructions_ I .then received, all cases in which doubt has existed as to whether the limits laid down in the memorandum have been exceeded have been referred to Mr. President or Mr. Speaker for acceptance or rejection of the proposed alteration. In these instances members have sometimes desired to employ verbiage which apparently altered the sense of the words used in debate, and in other cases have fought to introduce new matter. Applying the decision of the presiding officers m these instances to the alteration recently made by the Prime Minister, it should certainly he accepted. "Although the alteration unquestionably qualified we phrase originally used, it could not, in mv judgment, bo regarded as an alteration of sense within the definition'or the terms laid down by many presiding officers 1 . decisions, nor ' according m similar decisions could, it be designated new. niatten If it be 'Considered- that my discretion, in this -instance, was wrongly exercised, it would be necessary to in future reject a considerable number of emendations which have : hitherto been accepted -without question as not. infringing thr* ( ™e. , , " 'Further experience ot the latitude allowed to honourable> mergers in proof revision, however, indues? me to nga surest that they should be - strict y confined to the correction of errors m the report. The alteration S in ph" 0ology made by some honourable mem bers are frequondysoextenmveaso render it extremely difficult, an the vey, Cited time available for the purpose, to determine whether or not the rue has been infringed. In of the trustworthiness of the reports, t '&%». of » ta 3' o ", d ai! • Miihodviii" an accurate ..ecord ot ae I bate, I respectfully .invite Hie rOC ° n! V eration by the presiding officers of the existing practice, «<B. HARRY FRIEND. " 'Principal Parliamentary Reporter.' " Mr. Speaker's Comment. •'"With reference to this report" said ; fhe speaker, "1 desire- to miorm iho House that, while honourable members i generally exercise .the privilege.. of revision only w the ext'uit o correct ! w errors, and some members no ■ at all, others do so with a considerabl ' amount" of freedom, not only m tt i direction of amplification and quail ' cation, but aiso in otherwise alters " the pfirnseology ot their speeches. "AVhere this has been, dono with • reasonable limits and without altori; ' the sense of their utterances or mt; : ducing new matter-although in soi : cases it has caused inconvenience ai delay in checking and resetting su<, : emendations have been allowed to pasi "it not infrequently happens that s the effort to crowd a number of sub- . jects and arguments, into a tmie- ; limited spoech, especially Wen. the train of thought is disturbed bv inter- ' jections or othor distracting influences, ; betrays some honourable members into • expressing themselves in terms which, i when read in print, are found eithei to obscure their meaning or to convey I an erroneous impression. And lam not , prepared to say that in such circum- ■ stances honourable- members are not • entitled to make corrections necessary I to convey the meaning they intended when speaking. . . "In a publication which circulates so largely among public libraries m various countries, m literary instit--1 utes, in universities for the use of stu--1 dents of constitutional history, and m . shorthand schools for the purpose of ' dictation, alterations, involving. ini- ■ provement in literary composition, ■ greater elegance of diction, er lucidity ■ of expression should perhaps be en- ; couragod rather than- otherwiso; hut , if the general trustworthiness of 'Hani sard' is likely, in consequence of emen- | dations, to 'be. seriously affected, its I value as a reliable record, of our dc- - bates will he greatly impaired, and it ' may he necessary in tho future, unless ' the House otherwise decides, to confine 1 emendations strictly to the torrec--1 tion of obvious errors." When the Speaker had conoluded reading his review. Air. Mathews quito i seriously forecasted that the Speaker, s t remarks would in future.be accepted as l a. standard at all universities and , shorthand schools. "It is a gem, - lie added. "