Manawatu Herald. SATURDAY, OCT. 17, 1891. The Premier Bowled Out.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue III, 17 October 1891, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. SATURDAY, OCT. 17, 1891. The Premier Bowled Out.

In Tuesday's Chronicle appeared a letter from Mr John Bryce. The letter arose from a statement made by Mr Ballance, in his Wanganui speech, that the celebrated episode, the cause of Mr Bryce's retirement from Parliament was not the outcome of a vindictive spirit, but " That the action taken was necessarily taken for the maintenance of the authority of the Speaker." As was likely, when a gentleman is desirous of preserving a good name, the letter is long, too long for reproduction, but a portion is sufficient to prove that the exouse, now put forward by the Premier, was not the reason which caused the difficulty. By simply quoting from Hansard, Mr Bryce has proved, independently of any assertion of his own : Ist, that Mr Ballance's motion was made previous to any ruling of the Speaker against him, "and 2nd, that the final ruling of the Speaker previous to his being sent out of the House was virtually to the effect that the complete words uttered by him were not unparlia* mentary. In another portion of his letter Mr Bryce states : " That the Premier and his friends with distressing iteration declare that they are " sorry foi 1 the incident," but they have done nothing else to rectify the dishonour they have caused. Professions are on the one side, the facts are all on the other?" And again " Why do they shrink troni the responsibility of their action? Why do they cast the odium of their victory on their own nominee;-- '*the

Speaker? The Speaker hardly thought my completed words unparliamentary (!iansard v part 25, p 188, 2nd column) Even if lie had he Would hot have thought them serious enough for' his interference (Bannard, part 25, page 134, 2nd column). In the on'y two cases recorded in relation to kindred proceedings in the House of Commons similar words were not evqn asked to be withdrawn. (Hansard, part 85, page 132.) In the present case the Speaker would not have thought it necessary to request their withdrawal (Hansard as above.) As a matter of fact he never did request me to withdraw them (Hansard, part 5, page 182, 2nd column, line 29.) The allegation that the •*■ peaker did ask me to withdraw the words, is, I understand, 1 now abandoned even by tbe Government and their friends. By no single word or action was I in conflict with the Speaker. Even the clearing of the galleries was in consequence of clamour from the Government benches. Yet the Government, not for, the Speaker's sake, but for their own ends, pursued their splendid path of triumph in the House. They obtained their desire, why should they object to pay its legitimate cost? Their action was gratuitous, eager, deliberate, vindictive. Why attempt to cast the responsibility on their own selected Speaker ? Did meanness ever reach a lower depth ?"