Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, SEPT. 8 1905. NEW LIBERAL PARTY.

The courteous amenities of Parliamentary procedure are,’ unfortunately, very often at a sad discount during sessions of [legislative discussion, and in all such oases the community receives a shock arising from the rude and even violent innovations of Parliamentary propriety of which turbulent malcontent members are guilty. Of all the institutions established for the progressive good of the people the House of National Legislature is .certainly the most important as the supreme centre in which national interests are focussed, and upon the enactments of which the prosperous development of those interests very largely depend. It would naturally he thought that representatives constituting such an assembly would have too lofty a conception of their dignity, duties, and responsibilities than to allow any. insulting outburst of vicious spleen to degradingly disfigure that dignity, and with hot-headed recklessness, to scout for the nonce, what is due to the high importance of national statesmanship. The latest instanoe of gutter-grub abuse and insult within the walls of Parliament occurred when Mr Bedford, one of the immaculate ‘ New Liberal ’ quartette incontinently broke through every rule of respect and decorum, to say nothing of dignified manliness, by hotly stigmatising the honored leader of the Government “a cur.”.. Mr Seddon’s admirable attitude toward the afterwards apologetic offender was generously magnanimous and forbearing as the culprit’s conduct was reprehensible and contemptible, for which Mr Bedford has reason to be thankful. Had he applied such an opprobrious term to some governmental a stringent penalty would most certainly have be'en exacted. It is after all but a poor solatium for the party abused that the abuser should afterwards make an apology. In any case the blow has been struck, the sting has been given, the insult launched, and a mere conventional “ apology,” only wrung from the offender under stress of general condemnation is insufficient to heal the wound [that has been wantonly inI flicted, and, at the same time, raises a strong doubt as to its genuineness. ! If the House had applauded Mr Bedford would his apology have been so readily forthcoming, if at all ? Of that we take leave to doubt, for it is inconceivable that such vicious feeling should bubble oyrer in the expression of such an insult, and then voluntarily relapse into a genuine penitence instanter. Mr Bedford vented his insulting bitterness upon a man nearly, if not quite, old enough to be his father, a man who has become an honored veteran in New Zealand political life, and against whom, however much his political opponents may differ from him, no belittling disparagement can be truthfully levelled. 'Well will it be for this fiery young Kufus if he reaches the end of a lenghtened political career to bo esteemed and honored as much as is the man whom he so grossly |villified. Cases such as these show the necessity that exists for sterner provision being made in the “ Standing Orders ” of the House, with the view of forestalling and effectively preventing any recurrence of such disreputable episodes. As a young man Mr Bedford is no doubt animated by an ambition to elevate himself in the world of politics. That ambition is a laudable one, but we _ would re mind: him that distinguished statesmanship is not to be reaolied by insolent blatancy or -coarse insult, and, further, we would impress upon him the fact that a man unable to control himself would never, by any community of people, be deemed qualified to jn any sense oqntrql the interests of others; A reference to history ydll at once show him that Britain’s most diatinguishod statesmen, as also those qf other lands were, in the fullest sepse of the term, gentlemen, and in winning their distinctions they added to their great capacities the potent moral power of dignity, magnanimity, and an unvarying respect for others. If Mr Bedford and his ‘ New Liberal ’ colleagues will study and follow these illustrious examples, they will, at all events, ever command general respect,

MR FISHER’S APOLOGY When tho nows was first llasliod that Mr Fisher had apologised to tho Premier, we felt Jtliat though late in tho day, that young man had como to a senso of reason, and was prpparod to do now what ho should have done immediately ho found that voucher 15819, of whiohjso much fuss had boon mado, was for a payment to Mr Sneddon and not to Captain Soddon. Mr Fishor has at last thought fit to make a full and ample apology, but in such a wiiy as to give tho impression that tho •aim is rather to create jnow interest in a subjoot on which ho has completely failed. Ho admits that tho AuditorQoneral’s finding is correct—it would not matter a straw whether die admitted it or not —but ho persists that such a voucher was actually in existence, and'now almost openly states that a forgery had been committed by some one and that money has not only boon obtained by false pretences but that it has been paid without the responsible officials having a proper record thereof. “ A public enquiry ”is the remedy proposed by Mr Fisher, as if that could make any difference, beyond pandering to the vanity of a certain few. Mr Fisher has surely been given more publicity than he requires j the public are sick of the whole sorry business. Wo can offer no opinion as to the four officials who swore to having seen the voucher. If they made a mistake it was a very serious one ; but the mere fact of State business being bandied about in this way leaves only the one conclusion. Mr Seddon, in his goodheartedness, may view the matter lightly, but the public require to be protected from disclosures of departmental business, and they look to the Government to do their duty in the matter in accordance with the regulations. We again sincerely deplore that a man of Mr Fisher’s ability has not the sense to see that even now his wisest course is to make a full and ample apology and rise above the whole miserable business ; to try and fit himself for statesmanship and to eschew all mud-throwing tactics in favor of fair and square fighting.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GIST19050906.2.9

Bibliographic details

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1551, 6 September 1905, Page 2

Word Count
1,044

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, SEPT. 8 1905. NEW LIBERAL PARTY. Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1551, 6 September 1905, Page 2

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, SEPT. 8 1905. NEW LIBERAL PARTY. Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1551, 6 September 1905, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert