Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5430, 22 August 1878, Page 2

The importance of the question of privilege, brought before the House of Representatives by Mr. Whitaker on Tuesday last, does not seem to be fully appreciated. As we understand the matter, it involves the “ wrongful,” or illegal, receipt of salary by the Premier and other members of the present Government, and consequently the forfeiture of their seals in the House. It appears that in taking office they have altogether disregarded the provisions of the Disqualification and Civil List Acts, or, perhaps, considered them as only intended to affect or bo applied in the case of their political opponents. The “continuous” Government ceased to hold office on the 13th October last; four members of the new Go-' vernment Sir George Grey, Mr. Larnach, Mr. Macandbbw, and Mr. Sheehan —were, on the same day, appointed to be members of the Executive Council, but were not appointed to administrative offices until two days afterwards, that is on the 15th October; their respective appointments were then notifiedintho “Gazette.” Now the Civil List Act, we believe, requires, in order to entitleMinistorialoffice-holderstopayjthat they shall not only bo members of the Executive Council, but that each shall hold one or more of the Ministerial offices mentioned in the schedule to that Act. If this be so the four gentlemen whom we have named above have received two days’ pay in excess of what the law allows. The Premier may, perhaps, place this as a set-off against the temporary loss of pension to which he has been subjected by the representative of an “outside Power,” the Governor, in mistaking the date of his entering upon office. This, however, is not the worst part of the business. The Disqualification Act provides that every person appointed to any office to which any salary or emolument is attached shall bo disqualified from sitting or voting in the House of Representatives. It is true that it also provides that Ministers shall not be affected ; but it annexes the condition, apparently, that in order to bo within the scope of the exemption, they must hold the offices of Executive Councillor, and, simultaneously in addition, one or other of the offices— ColonialSecrelary,C'olonialTreaaurer,&c., &c., &c., specified in the schedule to the Civil List Act. This condition was not complied with by the gentlemen we have mentioned for two days, and thus they placed themselves within the scope of the penal clauses, and outside the exemption of the Disqualification Act. The case of tho Premier is, however, different from that of tho others. He is with them so far, but they aro not with him in what afterwards took place. CAESAR and PoMi'EY were very much alike, “ specially Caesar but Cesar’s specialty was, fittingly, in going more wrong than tho others. It seems that in January last tJjo Rm’uior divested himself of the only

administrative office, that of Commissioner of Customs, which he then held, and thus became only a member of the Executive Council and Premier. To these offices no salary is attached. If, therefore, during several months he received salary illegally, ho must, for the reasons before stated, have vacated his seat in Parliament. What is still more remarkable in this very remarkable concatenation is that the Attorney-General appears also to have disqualified himself. Mr. Stout was appointed to bo Attorney-General five days before he was appointed to bo a member of the Executive Council ; he would thus be disqualified as a member of the House of Representatives for having held an office of emolument without being a member of the Executive and a Minister. We have here altogether what is vulgarly called a very pretty kettle of fish. The Attorney-General is reported to have promised “ to consider “the situation.” It appears to ns that the sooner he does so, and takes the necessary steps to “fix” matters up, tho bettor for his colleagues and for himself ; if wo remember rightly, there is a penalty of £IOO a day for silting in the House when disqualified ; and although no member of the Opposition would probably desire to imitate a high example and institute legal proceedings against the delinquentMinistera, the penalties may, we believe, be sued for by any. one whose sense of duty might call upon him to seek a moral or material refresher in that course. When the Attorney-General tells us how, in his opinion, matters stand, wo shall have some pleasure inrefarringtoarid reproducing from “Hansard” tho debates of 1876 on the subject of disqualification. The high constitutional doctrines then propounded by Sir Gbohob Gkby and his friends, will be of great assistance to the House in dealing with the subject, and will be full of instruction and amusement for the “people.”