SUPPORTER OR CRITIC.

Hokitika Guardian, 16 July 1917, Page 4

SUPPORTER OR CRITIC.

SIR JOHN FINDLAY’S SPEECH. '? MR RUSSELL IN REPLY. Wellington, July 13 The I-loiise was entertained tonight with a vigorous attack by the Hon G. W. Russell upon the member for Hawke’s Bay, in the course of which some lively repartee and interchange reduced the chamber at times to a state of uproarious merriment. The Minister said he regretted having to deal somewhat critically with the speech of the member for Hawke’s Bay, who was elected as a supporter of the National Government. After quoting. Sir John Findlay’s first election speech be asked if his Address-in-Reply ; speech was that of a man who wished to help the National Government. There was shrieking criticism and a suggestion that the House should endeavour to rend the Government. Sir John Findlay: What was that ? Mr Russell: There was not one word calculated to assist the Government in carrying out its responsible ditties. Mr Russell went on to concede that Sir John-had illustrated his command of rhetoric, but a' critical auditor would sa}' that everything that should be in it as a speech of a supporter of the National Government was conspicuous by its absence. The Minister twitted him for uttering opinions respecting the work of the Government which were entirely at variance with his statements during the Hawke’s Bay campaign. The honourable gentleman had had a somewhat rocky passage into the House, but the speaker was one of those who congratulated him on his election. Members: “Glad to hear it,” followed by laughter.

A POINT OF ORDER. Mr Russel next turned his attention to 'Sir John Findlay’s criticism of government by Order-in-Council, remarking cynically that there was one of the "war regulations Sir John did not refer to, and that was the regulation respecting sedition. Sir John Findlay: But Ldid. Mr Russell, after referring to the Government's efforts to maintain the economic stability of the country When a deliberate campaign against the Military Service Act was in progress, pointed out, amid cries of “ Hear, hear,” that the leaders of the campaign were, thanks to the Attorney-General, now in gaol, and the Prime Minister had declared' that they were going to stop there. “But what did my friend, the member for Hawke’s Bay, do?” he asked. “The honourable gentleman defended a man in his professional capa6ity.” Mr M’Combs rose to a point of order, contending that a man’s pri-j vate affairs were being discussed. (Hear, hear.)"" Mr Speaker remarked that the Minister was referring to what took place in public. . ,Mr M’Combs was again protesting. when Sir John Findlay asked the member not to intervene, adding, “ The more the Mblister proceeds with this the better I like it.” PATRIOTISM AND BUSINESS. A fter a caution from Mr Speaker, Mr Russell declared that he had no wish to 'intrude on the private affairs of any member. When a public man and a member of Parliament made such a statement as had the honorable member in his professional capacity then the responsibility lie assumed in that capacity was going to enter into consideration as a member of the House, lie could not.shed the skin of a member of Parliament |nd a public man when lie entered | Court to plead a case, for what he said on that occasion applied to every man then in gaol for sedition. But the Government was firm, the law was carried out and the country had had peace since. Mr Fletcher: What about the Huntlv men ? Mr Russell: I regret that it is necessary' to say' so, but patriotism and business will not mix while the war lasts. SirJolin Findlay: Then why do you mix them ? Mr Russell: And he will have to answer to his constituents, not for defending Mr Webb but for the speech be made in doing so. Wnen Sir John Findlay was indulging in mock heroics and pathos, the one than iu the whole House who said “ Hear, hear” after every, sentence was the member for Grey Lynn, so he (Mr Russell) would leave the lion gentleman with the party' of two he had established in the blouse. (Laughter.) r Sir John Findlay : There’s a party of one, and that’s yourself. (Ren eyed laughter.) SOMETHING ABOUT NAM KS. The Minister, referring to Sir John Findlay’s criticism of the Government’s abolition of the system of land purchase based upon valuation, said that not one estate was purchased under that system. It was true that £50,000 reduction in capital value had been allowed on Canterbury estates, but except one, all were bought before the National Government was created. Mr Dickie : Some when you were in the Government. ■ Mr Russell: Everything be said, j instead of being an attack 'on the j National Government, was an attack'on his friends. I have never struck back at -my own friends. Members : Oh ! Mr M’Combs: Now we know how you got the name “ Rieketty\” The Minister proceeded to make merry over quotations from “advice to politicians” in Sir John Findlay’s book, “ Humbugs and Homilies,” suggesting that there 1 ought to be another edition entitled, ' “Homilies by a Humbug.” THRUST AND COUNTER. . Mr Russell concluded by attacking Sir John Findlay on the six o’clock closing question ‘/I am not going to express my opinion at the present time on that question,” be began, and was greeted with roars of laughter. “I am prepared to state my views when the proper time comes.” Mr Russell, after reading the views on the liquor subject expressed by Sir John Findlay, accused him of having endeavoured to side with both prohibition and the trade. At this point Mr Russell’s time was just expiring. Mr Fletcher rose and moved that be should be granted an extension. Sir John Findlay' seconded, but Mr Hindmarsh rose and in loud tones ex claimed, “ No. We have had - enough of him.” Mr Russell, amid some merriment, inquired : “ I ask the honourable member for Hawkes Bay now:

“Are you going to vote for six, o’clock closing? ” Sir John Findlay: “Yes; and how are you going to vote?” (General laughter, in which Mr Russell joined, but did not reply.) A REJOINDER.. At the conclusion of the Bpeecb, which ended 'amid interjections and considerable cross talk among the benches, Sir John Findlay made a personal' explanation, denying that -he had in any way departed from his election campaign declarations. He also repudiated the suggestion that his professional utterances had anything, to do with his public ones, and concluded by declaring that his observations in the book, “ Homilies aud Humbug,” were base#! upon following the career of a gentleman "who once represented Riccarton. (Roars o’f laughter.)