THE GOVERNOR AND THE HOUSE.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1048, 6 November 1877, Page 3

THE GOVERNOR AND THE HOUSE.

REPORT OF THE PRIVILEGE COMMITTEE. [By TeLEGBAPH.] Wellington, November 5. The Select Committee appointed to search for precedents and report to the House in relation to the question of privilege raised by Mr Stout, report as follows : “ Your committee, in obedience to the urgency imnoeed on them by the House, met immediately after the adjournment of the House on Friday last, and have since then given undivided attention to the subject remitted to them. Ample discussions have taken place, and a careful research, after precedents has been instituted. Your committee find

that the precedents examined and records of Parliament and writers on constitutional history, passim establish or recognise the principle that any notice by the Crown ot any matter in agitation or debate in Parliament but by the information or agreement of Parliament is an infringement of the privileges of Parliament. They apply this principle to the memorandum of his Excellency the Governor of 27th October ult.. as laid on the table of the House of Representatives by command of his Excellency upon the advice of his Ministers, upon a question to which ho otherwise makes no objection, on the distinct ground that a vote of want of lonfidencein his Ministers is pending. [The exact words ot the memorandum in which the Governor declines to appoint Mr Wilson are quoted.] Under this view your committee have hern unable to come to any other conclusion than the following : —That the action of his Excellency the Governor in noticing a matter in agitation or debate in the House as a reason for refusing to accedo to the advice tendered by his Ministers, was an infringement of the privileges of the House. Your committtee report herewith the minutes of their proceedings.—William Fitzherbebt, Chairman.”

Minutes of evidence and proceedings of the committee are appended to the report, inter alia the following: —“Wellington, 291 h Oetobar, 1877. —His Excellency the Governor is irspectfully advised to command that the enclosed memorandum, relating to advice tendered by Ministers to his Excellency to summon John Nathaniel Wilson to the Legislative Council, and his Excellency declining to accept that advice pending the decision of the Assembly on a vote of want of confidence, may be laid before both Houses of the General Assembly.—G. Grey.” “ The chairman submitted a draft report which he had prepared in accordance with the request of the committee. Moved by Mr Harper. ‘ That the refusal of the Governor to act in accordance with the advice of his responsible Ministers upon the expressed ground that there was a question pending in the House of Representatives affecting the position of Ministers was a question not necessarily affecting the privileges of Parliament. Your committee, however, is of opinion that subsequent notification to the House by command of the Governor of the reference by his Excellency to a debate pending in the House is to bo regretted, and should not be drawn into a precedent.’ Motion withdrawn.

“ Draft report, paragraph 1, read : ‘ That jour committee, in obedience to the urgency imposed on them by the House, met immediately after the adjournment of the House on Friday last, and have since then given undivided attention to the subject remitted to them. Ample discussion has taken place, and a careful research after precedents has been instituted.’ Paragraph 1 agreed to. Draft report, paragraph 2, read : ‘ That this investigation has not resulted in obtaining any precedents in point, but they find it laid down in record of Parliament, and by writers on constitutional history (passim), that it is a broad and well established Parliamentary privilege that the Crown shall not “take notice” of any proceedings ponding in Parliament.’ Amendment proposed thereto, ‘To substitute for paragraph 2 the words “that your committee find that precedents examined and records of Parliament and writers on constitutional history ( passim) establish or recognise the principle that any notice by the Crown of any matter in agitation or debate in Parliament, but by the information or agreement of Parliament is an infringement of privileges of Parliament.’ (Mr Stout.) Amendment agreed to. Paragraph 3 agreed to. Paragraph 4 read—‘That under this view your committee are unable to come to any other conclusion than this, namely, that the notice so taken and published by his Excellency the Governor of deliberations then pending in Parliament was an infringment of the privileges of Parliament.’ Amendment proposed thereto : —To substitute ‘ Under this view your committee have been unable to come to any other conclusion than the following—that the action of his Excellency the Governor in noticing a matter in agitation or debate in the House as a reason for refusing to accede to advice tendered by Ministers was an infringment of the privileges of the House. (Stout). Araemclment carried by 7to 5. Remaining paragraphs agreed to without amendment. Motion —That draft report as amended be reported to House agreed to on division: — Ayes, 7 : Ballance, Gisborne, Montgomery, Rees, Stout, Wakefield, Reader Wood. Noes 5 : Harper, Johnston, Moorhouse, Rolleston, Stafford. Travers and O’Rorke not present. THE GOYERNOR’S REPLY. The Governor’s reply to the address covering the report to the Committee of Privileges, after acknowledging its receipt, says he has referred the question to his responsible advisers. When he has received their advice he will communicate further with the House.