Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PARLIAMENTARY NOTES.

[by electkic telegraph.] Wellington, Thursday. PUBLIC AGCOSJHTS COMMITTEE. The House resumed its sitting at 7.30 last night, on the adjourned debate on the Public Accounts Committee. Mr. STOUT said-lie did not want to serve on the Committee ; he wanted Mr. Sir GEORGE GREY wanted, the Committee increased from fourteen to fifteen. This was opposed by the Government, and a long, sharp, and in some respects personal, debate ensued. Sir George Grey wanted Rees placed on the CommitMr. READER WOOD warmly supported Mr. Rees, and considered it an insult to Auckland if he was not put on. A division was taken, and lost by 41 to 29.

Mr. DE LAUTOUR then moved that Mr. Reynolds be struck off, so that Mr. Rees might be put on. Mr. REES said it was a real shame that the Government objected to him being on the Committee. It was an insult to Auckland, and discreditable to the House to do so.

Mr. READER WOOD followed, saying that Mr. Rees was as fit to be on the Committee as he was. It looked as if the Premier was afraid to allow Mr. Rees to examine the accounts.

Mr. REES spoke with vehemence against the action of the Government. Their opposition to him would excite the indignation not only of New Zealand, but of the other Colonies and at Home. Mr. MACANDREW condemned the high-handed action of the Government. Mr. SWANSON wanted to know why the Government was not better represented on the Committee '? Mr. MOORHOUSE defended the action of the Government, as Mr. Rees was unfit to be on the Committee on account of his financial ignorance and offensive declamatory style. Mr. HAMLIN considered the Government had acted tyrannically. Mr. PEARCE supported the Government, and so did Mr. TRIBE. Mr. SHRIMSKI said Mr. Rees ought to have a seat on the Committee.

Several other members spoke for and against, and Sir JULIUS VOGEL replied at some length, not blaming Mr. Rees, but the indiscretion of his friends in trying to force him upon the House. The result was that Mr. Rees was rejected on the voices, and the House adjourned at 1.40 a.m.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OAM18760629.2.11

Bibliographic details

Oamaru Mail, Volume I, Issue 59, 29 June 1876, Page 2

Word Count
360

PARLIAMENTARY NOTES. Oamaru Mail, Volume I, Issue 59, 29 June 1876, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY NOTES. Oamaru Mail, Volume I, Issue 59, 29 June 1876, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert