A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE. And a Loss of Dignity.

Free Lance, Volume II, Issue 63, 14 September 1901, Page 8

A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE. And a Loss of Dignity.

LIBERAL Niw Zealand has at least something to learn fiom Consei\ati\e England Recently tlic l\u turnout of Now Zealand which pi ides itself on being the most, libciallv constituted in the woi Id suddenly discovered that a broach of its pnvilegc had been committed Thoie is no doubt that it w .is (onn.ntied and that having dis(o\eied the bieach the tionble was unduly distended by two days' acrimonious and unnccessaiy dispute Given a piopei sense of its own vaunted dignity the populai Chanibei might have dispassionately pioc eedod to judgment, and settled the mattei piompll\ by the infliction of a te ( Jin 1 1 al line The House intended to make an example of an \ one who would daie to broach Paihainentaiy pnvilege. and, aftei two clays' stnung to uphold it they must certainly admit to having failed ignobly Parliament and Pi ess aie both servants of the people Mi A X Cohen is a servant oi the people as a Press representatne and he ceitainly did his papci the Duncdm ' Stai and the public at laigc most excellent scivice by obtaining foi them a complete and fan and ace mate lepoit of the evidence given in Committee on a mattei which was fi aught with such ycneia! niteiest the piomotion and flotation ot mining companies Although he committed a technical Ihukli of the standing oid<Ms it m\ol\ed no loss of self-iespeet oi

breach of honour on his part On the contraiy, ho displayed a full sense of the honourable tiaditionsof his piofession by lefusing, even at the nsk of Parliamentary pains and penalties, to divulge fiom whom he obtained his report Throughout tins business the popular sympathies must be with Mi Cohen for his action is likely to gain tor the people the privilege of watching moie narrowly the proceedings of their iepresentati\es in Select Committees of the House * * » Therefore, this undignified squabble is likely to result in much good. If it lcsults in the amendment of the Standing Orders which pre-vent journalists from reporting Committee matters (with necessary exceptions, of course), the two days' Parliamentary wrangle ill be followed by lasting benefit. Ihe Mother of Parliaments, the Commons, is so little ashamed of the dehbeiations of Committees that she has long 1 enounced the 'pnvilcge of excluding journalists from them * * ♦ Might not the offspring of that mother follow the maternal example ? The offspimg lathei fancies its bioadei view of things, being young, but its liberalism might take an example from her consenatism. It appeals almost as if the House lathci welcomed the simplicity of this matter of privilege aftei the dry-as-dust matters of public utility No one will blame members for sticking to their book but when an hour s work is spiead over two days, and the alleged dignity of the House is not only not upheld, but actually suffcis most severely by a stiong infusion of paity acrimony into the debate, an amendment of the Standing Orders is called for to pi event a iccunence of the serio-comedy, and to afford the people, through the agency of the Press, a laiger and more direct knowledge of the business transacted by Committees