ADDRESS IN REPLY DEBATE

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 442, 24 February 1912, Page 5

ADDRESS IN REPLY DEBATE

NO DIVISION YET,

HOUSE ADJOURNED TILL

MONDAY

The Council met at 2.30 p.m. and immediately adjourned owing to the no-confidence debate proceeding. The House met at 2.30 p.m. The Minister for Labour, in answer to Mr Glover, said that under the Workers' Dwelling scheme 73 houses were in course of construction. A large number of further applications had been received, but it would be too expensive to allow applicants to select single sites. A limit of six applications must be adhered to ottierwise the co3t of supervision and collection would be too great. Altogether 126 applications had been received under the present systems, and he hoped by the end of the year 250 houses would be erected and occupied. Mr Isitt resuming the debate on the Address-in-Repiy and the amendment thereto ; complimented the mover and seconder on ther speeches. The reason why he could not remain silent was that a member of the House had been most cruelly and malignantly slandered. He did not wonder that the Opposition was elated, and he did not grudge them a little elation after their long period of melancholy. He proceeded to criticise the policy of the Opposition, which he described as a miserable, attenuated policy. The arguments of the Opposition were the reproduction of the same old bone. They asked to be placed in power to carry out a policy against which they had voted tooth and nail. He accepted without reservation the statement of members of the Opposition that they were guilty of the charge of hurling slander upon Sir Joseph Ward. Those slanders had been utered, however, and people outside the House placed their own construction upon them. He admitted that the Government had to a certain extent done work meet for repentance. He referred, inter alia, to the military scheme. He did not care what Government was in power if the Governmet Department attempted to force the territorial scheme in the way they did they would wreck the whiole scheme. U<■* deprecated dealing with young lads who followed the dictates of their fathers as if they were criminals, branding them at the outset of their lives as criminals. He proceeded to criticise the Reform party, and asked where the reform came in. Their platform was weaker and they sought for the power or strength of it. MR. BELL EXPLAINS. Mr Bell next rose and explained in connection with words used by him during the election that he had no intention of taxing the Premier in connection with the loan of improperly accepting money. Sir Joseph Wa>.d acquitted Mr Bell personally of the construction put upon his remarks, but said the main point was the impression which such remarks made upon the public mind. [BLACK PAMPHLET AGAIN The question of the Black pamphlet here cropped up and Sir Joseph Ward said he had never attributed it to the Opposition, but declared it was promoted by a supporter of the Opposition outside the House. Ninety-nine men out of a hundred looked upon it as a blackguardly way of attacking a public man. Mr Massey said Sir Joseph Ward was wrong if he said the author was an Oppositionist. Sir Joseph Ward said he was not wrong. There were men who had not quite so much information as he had, and if he saw fit to do so he could put one or two men in gaol that day. ALLEGATION OF BRIBERY

Mr Dickson then rose and said h 9 wished to make reference to the statement that an alleged inducement of £IOOO had been offered to a certain member. Mr Payne had stated to him in Auckland that he was going to support the Opposition on a no-con-fidence motion. Later he received information that Mr Payne was going to break his pledge, and that bets were being made on that contingency. He put the question to I\lr Payne in the presence of Mr Massey on Friday last, that he (Mr Payne) had been offered money to vote with the Government. Mr Payne refused to say anything at first, but eventually said "I have been offered it. I have been called into an office in Auckland." Sir Joseph Ward: You should say what office, and who the people were. Mr Dickson said he could not do that; he would leave the matter to MrPayne. Mr Payne: You know. Mr Dickson: I do not. Mr Payne: You do; say it now. Mr Dickson said he was very pleased to understand tha Mr Payne would say who had acted this contemptible part of endeavouring to get a man to break his pledge for payment of £SOO. He did not wish it to be understood that he (Mr Dickson) suggested that the offer had been made by any member of the Government party. He was quite satisfied other members had made statements similar to those which he had just made. In his opinion, Mr Payne was not the only man who had received similar offers or had inducements made to them. It was the duty of the member for Grey Lvnn to explain to the House. Sir Joseph Ward said it was the duty of every member anxious to maintain his dignity and that of the House to make a clear statement on a matter like this. Mr Maasey said he was present when the statement was made. Mr Dickson averred that Mr Payne had told him he had been offered £SOO or £IOOO in a merchant's office in Auckland to break his election pledge. MR. PAYNE'S STATEMENT. Mr Payne, by a personal explanation. said he was called into the office of Mr Maurice O'Connor by Mr Chas. McMaster, who said "Do you know, I have been authorised to give you any-

thing between £SOO and £IOOO if you will ~o in th e direction of the Ward party." I took no notice of his remark. Mr Payne proceeded to say that he believed Mr MeMaster was now taking round a petition calling upon him to resign, because he had gone back on his election pledges. The House adjourned at 5,30 p.m.

EVENING SITTING. ALLEGED BREACH OF PRIVILEGE On the House resuming in the evening Sir Joseph Ward raised a point as to^whether a breach of privilege had not been committed in connection with correspondence submitted with regard to the allegation that Mr Payne was offered a bribe to support the Ward party. Mr Massey explained that he had been giving the whole of the circumstances connected with the interview with between himself and Mr I'avne, and had quoted 'those portions of a letter which he had read to Mr Payne. Sir Joseph Ward considered the allegations directed at Mr Brown and himself. He wanted to see the letter so that he could prosecute the man who wrote it. The Speaker ruled that there was nothing in the letter making any direct charge against Sir Joseph Ward or Mr Brown. In his opinion it was no breach of privilege to lay a letter on the table. Mr Payne wished to raise the question of a breach of privilege on his own account, and asked that the original document be placed on the table. Mr Brown also wished to raise the question of privilege in his own case. Eventually, Mr Payne moved and Mr Veitch seconded: "That certain extracts from the letter constitute a breach o? privilege." He took up the cudgels on behalf of Labour. Mr Atmore urged the House to get on with the vote but Sir Joseph Ward objected to the suppression of the dicuasion. The Hon. R. McKenzie said the thanks of the House were due to Mr Veitch in giving a lead in the matter. There was a feeling of intimidation in connection with the Labour Party, and Mr Veitch's attitude would have a most salutary effect. The result of an inquiry would be that an ofFer only had been made, and that no money had passed. Mr Forbes said the whole thing was a poetical fake, and had been arranged with the object of damaging the Government party and the whole of an evening sitting had been occupied in the discussion. Sir Joseph Ward muved that a Committee of Privilege be appointed consisting of the Hon. J. A. Millar. Messrs Allen, Fraser, Hannajn, Nosworthy, Lee, Russell, Reid, Robertson, G. M. Thomnson and Veitch, to report within three days. MR. MASSEY'S RESPONSIBILITY Mr Massey said he intended to take full responsibility for what he had done, cyen if it was necessary for him to hand in his resignation, and again face the electors. Mr Brown asked to be given that opportunity to prove to the world that the statements made by the leader of the Opposition were infamous slanders and lies. The debate was adjourned until 7.30 on Monday.

MR ROBERTSONS' PLEDGE. [I!Y TICTjUGRA'PH.—I'RKSS ASSOCIATION". J Palmerston North, Thursday. At a meeting of from 700 to 800 flaxmill hands, who had gathered together from their mills thoughout the West Coast to discuss the dispute here, the political situation was reviewed. It was resolved to free Mr J. Robertson (Otaki) who w;ts nominated by the Flax Empluyees' Unions, from his pledge to vote against Sir Joseph Ward, and to strongly urge him to vote for the Government on the no-confidence motion. The motion was parried by acclamation, with only two dissentients, both.of whom, it was explained, had no votes in the Otaki electorate, while the others had, and represented all parts of the electorate. The meeting closed with cheers for "Robertson and Radicalism.'"