LOANS TO LOCAL BODIES.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIV, Issue 50, 23 October 1912, Page 7

LOANS TO LOCAL BODIES.

WARD-HLA’ E EPISODE. DEBATE IN THE HOUSE. SIR JOSEPH WARD CENSURED. (Per Press Association.) Wellington, Octobet 22. In the House of Representatives this afternoon, Air Hiue presented the report of the Public Accounts Committee, stating that Sir J. G. Ward had refused to withdraw the words complained of at the committee meeting on Friday evening. Sir J. G. Ward detailed what had occurred that morning at the committee meeting. He stated that the official record of the committee was incomplete. At Mr Allen’s instance the report was altered. Every member of the committee who had attempted to speak on the resolution of the House had been ruled out of order with a rod of iron, and rendered absolutely dumb. The minutes of the committee should have been absolute in their exactitude. Ho desired to say that ho had no personal grievance against the chairman of the committee. Fie was sorry for what had occurred, but he could not withdraw his words. He contended that the chairman’s attitude was hostile throughout the proceedings, and was contrary to conciliation. Ho asked for the Speaker’s ruling whether the chairman had power to rule that the House’s resolution could not be discussed.

The Speaker ruled that the chairman's word was final. Mr Allen said that the only consideration before the committee was whether Sir Joseph Ward would withdraw his words.

Sir Joseph Ward, continuing, said that the resolution of the Flousc had never been before the committee. The extract of the evidence put before the House last night was incomplete, and had been amplified at the instance of the Minister in charge of the committee. If party prejudice was to be carried so far as to cause a false basis on which to proceed against a publicman then there was a poor look-out for public men in New Zealand. Fortunately there was public opinion beyond the House, which would sec that fair play was dealt out to all. Mr Hanan said that' the gag had been applied to Mr Craigie, Mr Myers, himself and others. The proceedings of the committee had been carried out on a Star Chamber system. Mr Allen said that if it was alleged that the chairman was unduly strict there was no doubt that feeling was manifested against him because of his actions in Parliament. Sir Joseph Ward: That is nonsense. Mr Allen : It is all very well to say that; hut I know it is so. He contended that the right thing to do was to withdraw. Nobody could uphold Sir Joseph Ward’s attitude for one moment. If he withdrew he could then challenge the chairman’s ruling by resolution. He thought the chairman had, behaved himself well right through the hearing. If Sir Joseph Ward withdrew he was sure Mr Hine would meet him in a generous manner, right oi- wrong. The chairman •had to be upheld. 1 Messrs Colvin, Hindmarsh and Russell continued the debate till the dinner adjournment. Alter an adjournment of half an hour the committee resumed. The chairman asked for some motion. Mr Allen asked Sir Joseph . Ward whether, after reconsideration, he

would withdraw the words.

“NO PERSONAL FEELING.” j Sir Joseph Ward: I can only say, in reply to Mr Allen, that I am exceedingly sorry I cannot sec my way to do what is suggested. I have no personal feeling of any kind against Mr Hine. I felt at the time that his statement was very offensive to me as a public man, but I cannot and won’t press him to make it possible for me to do what I would be quite willing to do. Mr Allen: I can do nothing else but move that the committee report to the House that Sir Joseph Ward refuses to withdraw Ids words. The chairman then declined to withdraw the words he used. Sir J. Ward said that ho would not take any part in the discussion, nor would he vote on it. Mr Hine said that he had ruled in committee that before reconsideration of the report of the committee took' place the remarks made by Sir J. Ward must be withdrawn. He himself had shown no heat, and he added, “when the volcano burst I was thunderstruck. There was nothing in my manner to imply inutation or offensiveness.” No challenge of his conduct had been made. He went on to say “if Sir Joseph Ward docs the honourable thing he will not find me lacking in doing my share.” Sir Joseph Ward: What does lie mean by that? If he docs not think he was offensive then he does not know what offensiveness is. Continuing, Sir Joseph Ward said that he could not see lii« way to withdraw, bis words. He looked upon the chairman’s request as a personal insult, and as a result used the words complained of. He would rather lie censured by the House than withdraw them. The chairman of committee went out of bis way to be offensive to him. He now submitted himself to any judgment the House might pro-

nounco. Sir Joseph Ward then retired, “THE RESOLETIOX.” Mr Massey regretted having to move a resolution in connection with the incident, though lie would do the same thing if it affected a member of his own party. He moved; That this House expresses regret that the right lion, member for Awarua has not thought proper to withdraw the words taken down and reported to the House by the Public Accounts Committee.

Mr Robertson moved as an amendment, that the House, while recognising that it is the duty of a member to withdraw any expression ruled to be unparliamentary, considers that in this case the circumstances were such as to warrant it in proceeding no further in the matter. The motion was carried. H was also decided to supply the Flouse with as full a report as was available of the whole incident. IN THE EVENING. Mr Witty continued the debate on the Public Accounts Committee report. He thought it was a pity that the Chairman of the Committee had not met Sir Joseph Ward half way. The Flousc had not had an opportunity of considering what had led up to the retort of Sir Joseph Ward. They had no right to pass a resolution condemning Sir Joseph Ward for what he had done, considering the way in which matters had been conducted. Mr Lee said that the chairman’s question was one that really ought not to have been taken exception to. Mr Flanan: It showed what he had in his mind. Mr Lee: Sir Joseph Ward could not take offence at a word passing in the chairman’s mind. The question they had to consider, he said, was whether they were to close the door to order and open it to chaos. There was no doubt but that the words should be withdrawn.

Mr Isitt said that Mr Lee wanted ids pound of flesh. The remark made by the Chairman of Committee meant either that Sir Joseph Ward had suggested a falsehood or suppressed a truth. Fie thought that if the Chairman of Committee would rise up and state that ho had gone too far, he was sure that the member for Awarua would then act similarly. Dr. Newman considered' that the whole thing was sordid and squalid. Messrs Myers, Forbes, Pearce, Ell, and McCallum continued the debate, the latter stating that Sir J. Ward would be justified in going to prison rather than withdrawing his statement. Mr Fisher defended the action of Mr Hine. Mr Y'eitch, in seconding the motion, said, to use a colloquialism, Sir Joseph was in a ditch, and it was not fair to put their feet on his neck. The amendment was not intended as a reflection on the chairman of the committee, but had been put forward by the independent party in the House on its own volition, the object being to settle the matter amicably. Mr McKenzie expressed surprise, regret, and dissatisfaction with the attitude of tiio Government. Fie did not think the half-hearted amendment would be acceptable by Sir Joseph Ward. He believed that the incident would rebound to the credit of Sir Joseph Ward. Mr Robertson’s amendment was lost by 38 to 33. AFTER MIDNIGHT. After midnight the Prime Minister’s motion was put and carried by 39 to 32.

The Speaker requested the Sergeant-at-Arms to request the attendance of the member for Awarua. When Sir Joseph Ward entered lie was greeted with applause from the Opposition.

The Speaker head the resolution to him.

Sir Joseph, Ward said that had ho not felt deeply that an’insult had been levelled at him he never would have taken the firm and consistent stand ho had. Had Mr Hi no stated that ho had not intended to be offensive he (Sir Joseph Ward) would have withdrawn. He accepted the censure from the stand-point of making strong protest against the partial conduct of the chairman. He thanked those who bad spoken on his behalf. He accepted the decision with equanimity. The incident then closed, and the House rose at 12.50.