INDIO-STATION MEETING AT KNIGHTSTOWN.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2596, 2 August 1882, Page 3

INDIO-STATION MEETING AT KNIGHTSTOWN.

’■ A meeting of electors of the Stanmore district was held last evening in the Knightstown Public Library, to consider the conduct of Mr W. H. Pilliet as their representative in the General Assembly. Sixty-five persons were present. Mr Dixie was voted to the chair. The Chairman having stated the object of the meeting, said that as chairman he should occupy a neutral position, and express no opinion as to what ho thought of Mr Pilliet’s conduct. £ A Voice—“He is a rat.’’] When not in the chair ho would speak his thoughts, but he would just remark that a member of Parliament in his place in the House was bound to do his beat and as ho had pro uised, and if he did anything ha had not promised he was not the man for the present age. Ha would read a telegram received during the day by Mr W. F. Hubbard from Mr Pilliet, which was as follows :

Wellington, August 1, To W. P. Hubbard. My acta have been miserably conceived (?), and attacks on me inspired from here for special purposes. For instance there was no division on ton per cent, remission. Had there been my action would have been in the direction of assisting working men, but there was distinct n’ derstanding with Government that wages should be raised, which has been done from the 21at of July. Be sure this is read at the meeting. Waltkb H. Pilliet. (The telegram was received with cheers.) He would now call upon some one to address

the meeting, hoping everything would be done calmly and with discretion. [A Voice —“We will burn his effigy.)” Mr B. Olephane said they would see by this telegram that the rise of this agitation was said to be inspired from Wellington, Now he had done a good deal in the matter of of getting Mr Pilliet elected for Stanmore, and he thought if anything had been done from Wellington, he should have beard of it. They would remember that Mr Turnbull, the member for Timaru, was one of the first to move in the House for the removal of Mr Pilliet’s disabilities, and never rested till they were removed. He had telegraphed to Mr Turnbull to this effect—“ See Pilliet, and find out why ho has acted as he has done.” To this he received the reply that the relations between Mr Turnbull and Mr Pilliet would not warrant his asking any such question. Now, he thought that looked very fishy. He then telegraphed to Mr Pilliet and told him that if Co did not apologise to the House, and also to the electors of Stanmore, endeavors would be ( made to bring a charge against him under the Corrupt Practices Act. He then telegraphed to Mr Montgomery, and asked him what he thought of Mr Pilliet, but to this be bad re- - oeived no reply. Bo it was quite clear that - no influence had been excited from Wellington, In the Fbbsb of Monday, a copy of 1 something like an article from the “New Zealand Times ” appeared, which he felt sure was written by Mr Pilliet himself. [Oonfusion, and a voice “Yon don’t know that.”) Well, he supposed so. [Renewed confusion and cries of “ Don’t speak from supposition, but from facts.”) The Chairman here rose and vainly tried to restore order, several men rising and speaking together. Mr Olephane then said—“ If you want me to speak sit down.” Order having been restored Mr Olephane continued—As to the 10 per cent, reduction, they all knew that was passed on the voices, and if, as Mr Pilliet asserted, he was on that side, he , ought to have shown it by saying a word or two on that subject as a working man’s friend. True, he was not one of their district, but he was well acquainted with all the facta about Pilliet, and oonld enlighten them as well as any one else on the subject. He would assert that there was no truth in the remarks made in the telegram that the present action was inspired from Wellington, and would move—“ That this meeting is of opinion that the telegram sent by Mr Pilliet is uncalled for.”

Mr Squires seconded the motion in a brief speech. Mr Dorney would contend that Mr Piiliel’s action was not worthy of blame. He blamed Mr Olephane for the meeting. As a common working-man [A voice—“ That’s what put Pilliet in ”], and also as a Briton, he wished fair play shown to an absent man. In that very room he had heard Mr Pilliet say he would not oppose the present Government ip anything that was liberal or good. They all remembered tfeat. As to what their member had pledged himself to, they must remember that ho was nearly ruined by his first election. At his second election, perhaps be was too ready to sacrifice anything to prevent defeat. He never did say that he would oppose the Government on a wont of confidence motion. [Cries of “ Oh! He did, he did,” and renewed confusion and uproar.) The Chairman rose and threatened to dissolve the .meeting unless order was maintained.

Mr Dorney continued—lf Mr Olephane had said to Mr Pilliet “ Will yon vote against the Government on a want of confidence motion ?” he ought not to have done so. It proved that if the great canvasser Olephane possessed any truly liberal views he would never have done so. [Tremendous uproar.) _ The Chairman—" If you are all going in for a free fight, I shall not be in it.” Mr T. Hawkins said the meeting was called because their member had broken his promises— because ho bad declared over and over again be was an out end out opponent of the Atkinscn-Hall-Bolleston Government, and would always vote against them, and he hud not.

Mr Dorney resumed. Ha was sure under the circumstances a little latitude should be allowed to Mr Pilliet, who was driven into a corner by Mr Olephane’s action, which was uncalled for, and he (the speaker) was now doing what Olephane would nob do to Pilliet, saying it to his face. Olephane had no hue:, ness to write those letters—[A Voice—“ Yet, he had ”J —neither was it to the latter’s credit to go prating about what ho had done for the other. A man should not be tried in his absence, and this meeting was called expressly to condemn him unheard. He would move as an amendment “ That this meeting has every faith in Mr Pilliet, and believes hie telegram.” Let them fairly give him a chsnoe, and if when the session was over he did not come and give them a fair explanation why then let them condemn him. Mr Barker seconded the amendment. Mr Flaxmore said that Mr Pilliet had pledged himself to one course of action, and went to Wellington and acted directly opposite, Mr Dunmill characterised the telegram as a red herring drawn across the trail, and was quite uncalled for. Mr Hawkins said that Mr Pilliet had tried to take advantage of a loophole. r Xhe motion of Sir George Grey was tantamount to a want of confidence motion, and should have been supported by their member. This meeting was not stirred up from Wellington but was colled to pronounce a verdict on his actions, and no doubt he would still hold to the party in office, for ho had sold himself body and eoul to the Government. Mr Cummings reminded the electors that Mr Pilliet’s last words wert — ,c I will study the interests of the colony and my constituency,” and he had studied the interests of the working men by voting for their wages being raised.

Mr Olephane rase to object to the amendment at being a direct negative, but was overruled by the chairman, who then called for a show of hands, and the resolution was declared carried by 39 to 7. Mr Dorney complained that a lot of hands wore hold up by non-electors. Mr Squires the., proposed the following resolution—“ That this meeting is of opinion that Mr Pillieb is unfit to hold a seat in any representative assembly of British people, and has forfeited the confidence of the electors of Btanmore by voting in the opposite direction of his solemn pledges to them.” He would contend that in return for the action they had taken in returning Mr Pilliet to Parliament, he had turned out a traitor of the worst dye. They had worked strongly for him, and he would work strongly against him. As for his pledges he gave them almost unasked, and had afterwards gone and voted in a manner that could never have been expected after his repeated denunciations of the present Government, Mr Plaimore seconded the motion in a speech of a similar strain, regretting they had ever returned enoh a d d rascal to Parliament. [Boar* of langhter.]_ These were his sentiments, and he must give then vent.

After some remarks from Messrs Gerard aud Squires, Mr Dorney moved as an amendment—--11 That no censure bo passed on Mr Pilliet until he had an opportunity of addressing bis constituents.”

Mr Smith seconded the amendment. He though ai Pilliet had cleared himself from Cowlishaw he oonld also clear himself from Clephane. The latter came to him the other day, and asked him this, and told him that, and he replied, " Why, if you knew all this before you must be a d d rogue.” [Langhter/J Pilliet had roted quite right for him, and he would tell them why. If he had not done so, and the Government had been turned out, and Grey would hare tried to get a Government together and failed, and then Montgomery would have tried and failed, and then they wouldn't have got their wages raised. He didn’t want Grey. Ho voted for him once, but be d - d if ever he would da ao again, [Roars of laughter.} He thought Pilliet should have time given him, and so let them wait.

Mr Gerard moved, as a farther amendment —“ That this meeting is of opinion that Mr Pdliet has, by his action, forfeited the confidence of the electors of Stanmore, and calls upon him to resign." Mr Wright seconded the amendment. After an objection by Mr Clephace, which the chairman overruled, a show of hai-di was taken as under:—Mr Gerard’s amendment 29 for, 2 against. Mr Dorney’s amendment—--7 for, 32 against. The original motion—23 for, 5 against. The Chairman declared Mr Gerard’s amendment carried.

Mr Squires moved, and Mr Neato seconded ■ —“ That a petition be signed by the electors present, and forwarded to Mr Pilliet, with the resolutions passed at this meeting.” This was carried by 32 to 2. A vote of thanks to the chairman terminated a very noisy meeting.