A BREEZE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 145, 11 August 1911, Page 5

A BREEZE.

Mil. MASSEY AND THE HON T. MACKENZIE. THE HINE CHARGES. Commenting in the House of Representatives yesterday upon the failure of the Government land settlement policy, Mr. Massey was interrupted by a remark by the Hon. T. Mackenzie about “another Hine enquiry.” Mr. Massey retaliated with a pointed reference to a Government operation in real estate. The Government, ho said, had been offered a property, not far from Wellington, which was valued by its owner at £2OO an acre. The Government Valuer assessed the value of the land at £BO an acre. Eventually it was purchased by the Government at £l5O an acre. ' This transaction had never been explained. The land had not been settled, nor was it likely to be at such a value. “The hon. gentleman must not interject when I am speaking,” said the Leader of. the Opposition. “He will find that I have my answer ready.’ Rising to speak soon afterwards, Mr. Mackenzie remarked that, when the Hine enquiry was sot on foot, it was intended to show that the Government of the country was corrupt. He had stated at the time that tnis could only be done by showing that the Land Purchase Hoard was corrupt. This had never been done, Tue member for Stratford had stated quite spontaneously, Mr. Mackenzie'added, that he connected the Government, with the charges. When the House resumed in the evening, Mr Hine endorsed the statement of the Minister'for Agriculture that he (Mr. Hine) had connected the Government with the Hine charges. The facts revealed at the enquiry had proved that the imputation was well founded. It had to be remembered that the committee of enquiry had consisted of six Government members and four members of the Opposition. No member who was making a charge against a Government could expect a unanimous verdict in his favour, especially when, as in this case, one of the chief members of Parliament (Sir Joseph Ward) was a member of the jury. Anyone taking the trouble to go through the report of the enquiry would find that on nearly every occasion the voting was six to four. On one or two occasions it was five to live. Mr. Hine remarked that the Flaxbourno case was essentially one in which the Government of the day was implicated.

The Acting-Premier asked whether the lion, member was in order.

Mr. Speaker ruled that Mr. Hino was in order in replying to the question put by a Minister (the Bon. T. Mackenzie). The Flaxbourno case, Mr. Hino continued, was one in which a man who sometimes helped the cook and sometimes acted as groom was paid £631 for 200 days’ work. Sir John Findlay had never tendered any evidence to contradict this statement. The evidence at the enquiry, Mr. Hino contended, was quite enough to satisfy any fair-minded person that the imputation (against the Government) was proved up to the hilt. Later, the Hon. G. Fowlds remarked that it was something to have it admitted on the floor of the House bv the member for Stratford that ho did intend to cast an imputation against the Government of tho day (in connection with tho Hine charges) Ho Imped the member for Wairarapa would now feel sorry for some of the things he had said tho other night, and would make tho “amende honourable.”—“Dominion.”