GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Kumara Times, Issue 282, 30 August 1877, Page 2

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[PBESS AGENCY.] HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Wellington, August 28. The House met at 230 p. m. The Wanganui Gas Bill was read a second time.

In reply to questions, the Government said, that if parents of any deaf, dumb, or blind children were unable to pay the cost, the Government would assist to send them to the Victorian Asylum. The Government did not intend to pay the police long service extra pay.

George Jones, proprietor of the Oatnaru Mail, was brought to the bar of the House to answer a charge of breach of privilege to an article on Mr Whitaker in relation to the Native Lands Bill. In reply to a question from the Speaker whether he had any explanation to offer, he made a long statement to the effect than he had no personal feeling against Mr "Whitaker, and wrote in pursuance of his duty as a journalist, with a view to exposing what he believed'a great public wrong. He had been informed of the facts by former residents in Waikato, and they talied with his own knowledge acquired during several years’ residence there. He had been for several years familiar with these transactions, and never heard Mr Whitaker’s connection with them disputed. He quoted speeches made in the House on Native Land Bill, showing equally strong language used by members. He believed he did his dutyas a journalst in doing as he did,, and it was impossible for him to surrender his convictions. If the House on enquiry thought him indiscreet, he would abide its decision. Mr Whitaker considered that the explanation aggravated the offence, ha would have accepted an apology, but now thought it best to try the matter in a Court of law. Either Jones deserved to be'in gaol or he (Mr Whitaker) deserved to be expelled from the House. He moved that the explanation was unsatisfactory, but that Mr Jones be discharged in order that Frederick Whitaker might prosecute him in the Supreme Court for libel. Mr. Hislbp objected to this course as grossly unfair, and moved as an amendment that Mr Joyce be discharged. Mr Joyce objected to refer k the case to an inferior tribunal.

Mr Gisborne said Parliament could order the Attorney-General officially to prosecute Mr Jones, in a Court of lav for libel.

Mr Travers supported this! course. The speaker characterised the libel as a gross one, specifically made against a member of the House. The House could enquire into the case or adopt Whitaker’s, the most iSpper course—Let Frederick Whitaker and Geo. Jones fight out the matter fairly in a Court of Lav?.

Mr Rees said the present charge against Jones was not libel but a breach of privilege, an offence against the ■House, not against Whitaker. If the -latter wanted personal redress, he should not have brought the matter before the House at all. ' 'Mr Fox supported Whitaker’s motion ; Button supported Gisborne’s proposaV Tole, Thomson, and Delatour Urged-au i&djournmeut of the debate. Atk isnn opposed, and Stafford supported Gisborne’s proposal, but urged that < Jones’ statement be printed before the master, be decided. Wood (Mataura) i«n L.Hodgkiusou thought the House - •sh -uld deal '-with the matter.

The debate was interrupted by the usual adjournment. The privilege case was continued. After.the adjournment Mr Bowen urged that the question be relegated to ordinary judicial tribunals. Mr Sheehan considered that the House should itself deal with the question of privilege, leaving Mr Whitaker his legal remedy for libel if he wished. He urged that the matter be referred to a select committee. He believed that ■Jones was wrong in his facts, having •confounded the Attorney General with his son. Mr Stout supported reference to a •committee regarding privilege, leaving Mr Whitaker his, ordinary remedy. Mr Whitaker's original motion was negatived on the voices. Mr Hislop’s •amendment then became a substantive motion. Mr Fox proposed to add the words “ That the House did not desire to proceed farther in the matter of privilege, in ; order not jta prejudice the position of dither party, in a court of law, should legal proceedings be taken,” Mr Reynolds thought Jones should be fined and kept in custody till he apologised. Measrs Joyce and Bunny supported the reference to a select committee. Mr Travers suspected there was some-, body behind Jones. The House was bound to accept Mr Whitaker's positive denial. Jones should have done so and apologised, instead of which he was impertinent enough to quote member’s -speeches in justification of the libel. He urged sending the case before a jury, where justice will ;be done to all par- . ties. j " ■ -