PARLIAMENTARY.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 991, 29 August 1877, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

Last Night's Proceedings. The Privilege Case. Wellington, August 29. The debate on the privilege case was continued. Mr Bowen urged that the question be relegated to the ordinary judicial tribunals. Mr Shechan considered the House should itself deal with the question of privilege, leaving Mr Whitaker to take a legal remedy for libel if he wished, lie urged that the matter be referred to a Select Committee. He believed Mr Jones was wrong in his facts, having confounded the Attorney-General with liis son. Mr Stout supported the reference to a Committee regarding privilege, leaving Mr Whitaker his ordinary remedy. Mr Whitaker's original motion was negatived on the voices. Mr Hislop's amendment then became the substantive motion. Mr Fox proposed to add the words "that the House did not desire to proceed further in the matter of privilege, in order not to prejudice the position of either party in a Court of Law should legal proceedings be taken." Mr Reynolds thought Mr Jones should'be lined, and kept in custody till lie apologised. Mr Joyce and Mr Bunny supported the reference to a Select Committee. Mr Travers suspected that there was somebody behind Mr Jones. The House was bound to accept Mr Whitaker's positive denial. Mr Jones should have clone so, and apologised, instead of which he was impertinent enough to quote members' speeches in justification of the libel. He urged the sending of the case before a jury, where justice would be done to all parties. Mr Fox withdrew his amendment, to allow r Mr Gisborne to move " That the Attorney - G-eneral be ordered to prosecute Mr Jones for a libel on a member in his place in Parliament." Mr Shechan opposed such a course as unfair. Mr Rees said the Government was defendant in one libel case, and now wished to become plainti If in another. If he were libelled in the Government papers, the House would not pay the costs of prosecuting the offenders. Mr Gisborne's proposal would cover the House with ridicule and the Government with shame. Mr Lusk opposed Mr Gisborne's proposal and supported reference to a committee, which if it saw fit could order a prosecution. Mr Montgomery supported the reference to a committee. Mr Gisborne's amendment to refer the case to Select Committee, on division, was lost by 41 to 34. Mr Bunny complained of the Government whips influencing the vo ;es by stating that this was a Government question. Mr Barff condemned the conduct of Ministers in not taking the opportunity to meet and repel charges even stronger than those made by Mr Jones, which were frequently made against them in the House. He urged that the House shoidd itself deal with Mr Jones. Mr Murray condemned a State prosecution. Mr Thomson moved an amendment that the expenses of the prosecution should not be paid by the colony. This was rejected on a division by 49 to 27. Mr Hislop moved to add words to Mr G-isborne's motion to the effect that if the verdict was for the defendant, or the jury disagreed, the Government should pay the costs of the defendant as between attorney and client. Mr Whitaker accepted this, objecting to the disagreement of the jury being included; but on the voices this was insisted on. On Mr Hislop's addition being made to Mr Gisborne's motion, there was further discussion, and the House divided on Mr Gisborne's motion as amended, which was carried by 39 to 29. Mr Whitaker moved—" That Mr Jones be discharged." Mr Barff proposed to add—" The House being unable to deal with the case." This was ruled out of order. The motion for discharge was carried. Mr Jones was called to the bar and informed of the resolution, and he withdrew. [ln the above telegram a mistake has evidently been made by the Press Agency. In one part an amendment by Mr Gisborne is ?aid to have been lost, and in another to have been carried with an amendment by Mr Jlislop. So far as we can gather, the House has ordered the prosecution of Mr Jones, with a proviso that if the verdict is for the defendant, or the jury are nimble to agree, the Government's to pay the costs of the defendant as between solicitor and client.]