BREVITIES FROM “HANSARD.”

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1059, 19 November 1877, Page 3

BREVITIES FROM “HANSARD.”

HAPPY BELIEFS. Mr Rees —I speak in the best interests of the country. Sir George Grey—l assure hon. gentlemen I will sit here without a sixpence in the Treasury, if necessary; and the public voice will support me in that. Colonel Whitmore —Honorable gentlemen, I feel sure, will make all reasonable allowances that I can have any possible right to expect from them. I have this advantage at least: I commence my work without the least illfeeling towards any lion, gentleman in this Council, and with the consciousness that no hon. gentleman entertains any ill-feeling towards me. HAPPY COMPARISON. Mr Taiaroa—lt is a very good thing that the meetings of this Parliament are held in Wellington, because it is a very windy place, and we hear the wind blowing about here every day. I liken the wind to the speeches that are made by hon. members of this House. The winds blow from all quarters, and so with the votes of hon. gentlemen : they are given this way to-day, and another way to-morrow, and another way the next day. HAPPY INDIFFERENCE, Mr Tawiti—lt does not matter what I have done in opposition to the wishes of my tribe, which they conveyed to me by telegraph. If, when I go back to them, my people say that I have done wrong in not attending to their requests, I shall reply to them, “ You can turn me out.” Mr Rowe —Telegrams and other means have been employed to influence my vote, but I have been so long connected with politics that these influences are not likely to have much effect upon me. I hold that every man who represents a constituency should be able to exercise an independent judgment as to what is right or wrong. I heard my hon. friend the member for Auckland City East say what the constituencies were likely to do in three or four weeks. Well, sir, I am not afraid of my constituents. I do not come here as a mere delegate, and I hope my hon. friend does not do so either. If ninetynine out of one hundred of my constituents were to tell me tolact in opposition to my own judgment I should feel justified in opposing their direction. All their telegrams and all their influence would, have no effect upon me. HAPPY MEMORY. Mr Swanson —I knew Mr Sheehan when he was in his mother’s arms, and I am proud to see him where he is, and of the share 1 had in bringing it about, ROUGH RETORT. Mr Barff (interrupting Mr Whitaker) —I rise to a point of order. The Standing Order says that no newspaper is to be read in this House, I am led to make these remarks chiefly because the hon. gentleman said that he does not believe in newspapers. Mr Whitaker —I understood this to be the authorised version of the Hon. the Premier’s speech. But, if newspapers are not to be read in this House, and if the rule can be confined to any newspaper edited by the hon. member who has just spoken, I entirely agree that the Standing Orders should be strictly carried out. LENDING HIS COSTUME. Mr Murray—l think the hon. member for Wanganui (Mr Fox) made a very poor exhibition of himself the other evening; and, should his friends get into power, I would suggest that they should supply him with appropriate costume; and, as the hon. member is fond of quotations, I will supply him with one which he can aptly use in future exhibitions : Here tnen at length I welcome every shame And cancel at threescore a life of fame : No more my title shall my children toll; The old buffoon will suit my name as well. NO GENTLE LAMB. Mr Whitaker—The hon. gentleman (the Premier) was not satisfied with describing himself as being a lamb, but he assumed to bo a “ gentle lamb.” If I were to describe l ho lion, gentleman, I should not say he was a lamb, but I should describo him as alto*

gether another animal—a fox in lamb’s clothing. Ido not say this in a derogatory sense at all; I say it rather in a complimentary way. It means that the hon. gentleman has great acuteness. I think his speech the other night plainly and clearly showed that he does possess acuteness, the acuteness that the fox is known to possess, and that he is entitled to such a description. A DESERVED REBUKE. Mr Bowen —There was an exhibition this afternoon, which I do not wish to refer to further than to say that it reflected the greatest discredit upon the hon. member (Mr Hodgkinson), who made an exhibition of himself, and also, to a certain degree, reflected discredit upon the House ; and I think it is quite time that hon. gentlemen who have a regard for the character of the House should, when such speeches are made, get up and on the floor of this House publicly express the disgust they do not hesitate subsequently to express in the lobbies outside. It will be a good thing, I say, for the tone of this House when that course is taken. WHEN ROUND, NOTED. Dr Wallis — When I find an intemperate man complain of intemperance in others, I say that is hypocrisy. When I find a dishonest man complain that his neighbors steal, I say that man also is a hypocrite. When lascivious people complain of lasciviousness, I say, “ Oh, ye hypocrites ; ” and when I hear those gentlemen, who were in office seven or eight years and never had any policy, say they expect the hon. member for the Thames to bring down a definite policy in two or three weeks, I cannot help saying, in the language of the good old Book, “Ye hypocrites: ye see the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but consider not the beam that is in thine own eye.” REASONING! BY ANALOGY. Mr Curtis—ln the absence of all expression of policy upon this important subject (Separation) we can only conclude that the hon. gentleman and his colleagues adhere to the views which they one and all expressed in opposition. I will put a parallel case to the House. Suppose that by some extraordinary confusion and disorganisation of parties the party in the Horae country who advocate the cause of Home Rule in Ireland had been called upon to form a Ministry. Suppose a Ministry obtained office who one and all advocated Home Rule, what would the House of Commons have said ? Would they have listened to a Ministry who said, “Well, although we hold these opinions, we do not mean to carry them out?” I imagine an immense majority of that House would say at once, “We will not maintain in office a Ministry who hold those opinions. We want a. Ministry who will maintain the integrity of the Empire.”