GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Globe, Volume VII, Issue 712, 30 September 1876, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

(Per Press Agency .) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Friday, September 29. The House met at 2.30. LIGHTHOUSE AT CAPE SAUNDERS, Mr Seaton asked if the Government had taken any steps towards erecting a lighthouse on Cape Saunders? Hon G. McLean said the Government were proceeding with the erection of the lighthouses as rapidly as was in their power, and amongst the next lot would be the one on Cape Saunders. RAILWAY IN OTAGO. Mr Bastings asked if the Government would guarantee 5 per cent upon £50,000 to a private company for the purpose of constructing a railway from Waipapae to Tapanui? The Premier said the question had been already settled by the House, and Government could hold out no hope to the hon gentleman. THE FORBES HALL CONTRACT, Hon F, Whitaker made a statement with reference to the Fotbes-Hall mail contract, the break down of which involved the colonies interested in a loss of £28,030. He said one of the sureties became bankrupt in consequence, and that the dividend from the estate would amount to about £2OOO or £2500. Mr Cunningham had proposed to pay as his share of the liability £IO,OOO, to accept which in discharge the colony of New South Wales had consented. The ponition then would be that half of the £2OOO from the bankrupt estate, with the amount from Mr Cunningham, would make about 10s in the pound on the whole amount of the bond. The Government proposed to telegraph to New South Wales, accepting the compromise suggested, and stopping the legal proceedings commenced in America and England. HARBOR BOARD BILLS. The following Harbor Board Bills were introduced and read a first time Bluff, Lyttelton, Timaru, Wanganui, Hokitika, Patea, Waimakariri, Moeraki, Wellington, and Foxton Harbor Board Bills. privilege. Before proceeding to the orders of the day, Mr Larnach called attention to a question of privilege regarding a very defamatory article which appeared in the Timaru Herald in relation to the honorarium question. He hoped the House would express an opinion regarding the article, which was very strong, and he asked that the clerk be instructed to read it. Mr Andrew opposed the reading of the article. If they did so it would appear in every newspaper in the colony, and he thought it would be better left unread. Mr Reid never saw any good result to arise from the House taking notice of newspaper articles, and the House generally came out worst. It could only lead to a waste of time. Great latitude was allowed in these things. Mr Pykb pointed out that the House could say nothing about the matter until they first heard the article read. Then they would be in a position to pass judgment. The article assailed the reputation of the whole House in the most gross manner, and he absolutely refused to believe that any member of that House could have penned so atrocious a slander. Mr Murray said it did not become the House to take notice of these anonymous and scurrilous newspaper correspondents. Mr Button said the proposed procedure was like shooting a small bird with a large gun, or like the King of Israel going into the desert after a flea. Mr Wason moved —“ That the article be taken as read.” Mr Joyce said it was reported that a member of the House wrote the article. Mr Stafford said Mr Wason’s advice was very wise. He deprecated the insertion of the article in Hansard, In circulating it so widely he thought nothing but injury to the House could result from such a course. If they took notice of every abusive article, or even libellous article, that appeared about them, they would have little else to do. No man in the colony was better abused than himself, but he systematically passed all attacks unnoticed. Mr Morris was anxious that the article should be read. He was decidedly opposed to hushing up the matter. He wanted to see it in every paper in the colony. Mr Hamlin said he would not submit to lie written down as one of a ring of thieves, as they were called in that article.

r< Mr B. WOOD thought the Government ought to lead the House in this matter, and tell what their opinion was. He, for one, did not think the matter worth considering. Mr W. Wood said the statements of the article were false as regarded himself, and he thought the article ought to be read, Mr Swanson thought they had arrived at a period of the session when they might well find something better to do. He would just ask them—had any single newspaper ever said anything about them worse than what they said of each other ? The House was acting ridiculously in this matter. Mr O’Eoeke, in order to get out of the

difficulty, moved—“ That the House proceed with the order of the day.” Mr Burns recalled to recollection how absurd the House looked a few years ago in breach of privilege case ’over an article on the Panama service. On that occasion the press broke out with articles ten times worse than tne one spoken of. Mr Lumsden thought those who were not reflected upon in the article ought to have left the matter to those who considered themselves aggrieved. He thought the writer of such an article ought to be exposed. Such villainous slanders ought not to go unpunished. The Premier regretted the matter was brought under the notice of the House at all, but that having been done, and such strong opinions having been evoked he thought the article ought to be read. To him the article carried its own refutation on the face of it. He did not for a moment believe that the colony would believe or think a majority of the House could be bought. It appeared to him that the man who could write such an article would not be much improved by any action the House might take towards him. He deprecated holding up the insignificant writer of such an article as a martyr. _ If

the article was read the House would be in a position to decide upon this matter, and Government would then be prepared to advise what course to pursue. Mr Bees said the Timaru Herald frequently abused him, but he never took notice of it. This, however, was a more serious matter, being a slander upon the whole House. It would not be right to allow such an article to go home without a contradiction accompanying it, The imputations in the article were the very worst it was possible to conceive. Mr Fitzrot said if the hon members were as well acquainted with the Timaru Herald as those who lived near it. They would treat it as a joke. It was one of the best testimonies to a man’s character to be abused in the Timaru Herald. Hon F. Whitaker pointed out that it was only prolonging discussion to refuse to allow the article to be read. Mr Babff said it would appear as if the article was written by one who was a member of the House, and that made it a question as between the House and one of not one between the press and the House. In [justice to the member whose name was

associated with the article as its author, he should be allowed an opportunity of clearing himself. After the article waa read, Mr Larnach then moved that it was a breach of privilege. Sir G. Obey then moved—“ That the House proceed with the orders of the day.” The House had already shown its displeasure on the subject, and he thought that ought to content, them. There was no doubt that the article was unwise and discreditable to the writer. Mr Macfarlane stated that he held in his hand an article much worse than that complained of, but he disapproved of noticing these attacks. The Premier said, having gone so far, they must declare the article a breach of privilege ; but that done, he thought the matter might be let drop. Mr Andrew referred to the strongest passage in the article, and argued that neither the article, nor anything in it. was a breach of privi’-ege. Let those who thought the article wrong answer it in papers of a wider circulation than the Timaru Herald. Hon F. Whitaker said there was no doubt as to the article being a breach of privilege, but as to going beyond declaring

that he would not say. Sir R. Douglas said what they wanted was to find out whether it was a breach of privileg'’, with a view to proceeding against the writer if they found out subsequently that it was one of themselves. Mr R. Wood said it appeared that a cap had been thrown up and that it fitted a number of heads, hence all the bother. There were dozens of such articles as that, printed in the colony. Mr J E. Brown said if the article was considered a breach of privilege, he was prepared to call attention to another phase of the case. , , ~ ■ , Mr Pykb then moved that the printer, publisher, and proprietor of the Thnaru Herald be arraigned at the bar of the House to answer a charge of breach of adjourned to Wednesday next. This would enabled the proprietor of the journal to make an ample apology. If he did not do that then the House could take some other

course. Mr Fyke, in the course of some remarks upon the subject, said he hoped the writer of the article, if in the House, would apologise before next Wednesday. He also announced, that as those who opposed the honorarium were the only ones who endeavored to shield the writer of the article, he would move that those who voted against should not receive it. The debate was adjourned, and Mr Fyke gave notice of motion regarding the honorarium. reporting committee debates. It was ordered that the debates in committee on the Counties Bill should not be reported. cou >ties bile. Id committee on the Counties Bill, clause 35 and a few clauses passed, when the House rose at 5 30 p.m. PRIVILEGE. On the House resuming, , Mr Rees raised a question of privilege y calling attention to another article in Timaru Herald in which Mr Joyce is called “ an ignorant and prejudiced runian. Several speakers strongly condemned sue style of writing of the members or the House, saying that it was beyond all bounds, and 'hat the House owed it to itself to take action at once to stop such conduct. The Premier moved that the printer, publisher, and proprietor of the Timaru Herald be summoned to the bar of the House by the Speaker to answer the charge of a breach of privilege. ;The motion was agreed to, only Mr Wason dissenting.