“Spoils to Victors’ Charge Answered

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 710, 9 July 1929, Page 1

“Spoils to Victors’ Charge Answered

MR. DAVY’S RETORT RECRIMINATIONS DEPRECATED (From Our Resident Reporter) WELLINGTON, Today. A piquant reply to the “spo Is to the victors” charge made against the Government by Mr. H. Kyle, member for Riccartcn. has been issued by Mr. A. E. Davy, of the United Party, ""“["disapprove of Mr. Bodkin’s statements in the House which raised this issue,” states Mr. Davy. “I am in a position to say that the Reform Party, during its tenure of office, did not abuse its trust by appointing purely party supporters to important public offices. 1 also know that the United Party, during its tenure of the Treasury Benches, has not been guilty of unfairness in making public appointments. In point of fact, if members will examine the lists of public appointments made by the present Government they will see that the pre-por-tion of Reform is much greater than that of United Party supporters. “Most unworthily, one member lias raised the question of the appDintment of Mr. R. Masters as Government nominee on the Transport Advisory Council. This is to be deplored, because Mr. Masters is a business man of great ability and heavy commitments, who has rendered public service in the past, and the acceptance by him of an important public post which makes gTeat demands upon his time, and for which he receives no remuneration, is a. matter for congratulation rather thah criticism. It is to be regretted that we have not in our midst more men of the stamp of Mr. Masters, willing to make sacrifices for the public vroal. “If this line is to be persisted upon, one might ask whether Mr. Coeates. during his Prime Ministership, gave any other reason than the fact that Mr. C. J. Carrington was chairman of his election committee when lie appointed Mr. Carrington to the Legislative Council. “One might ask also whether Sir George Eliott, when he was Mr. Eliott, was not prominent by association with those furthering the finau cial and political interests of the Reform Party, and whether the Hon. T. Shailer-Weston, both before and after his appointment to the Upper House, has not been similarly engaged. j “Personally, I see nothing wrong ! with any of these appointments and jdo not consider thean in any way ‘spoils to the victors.’ “One might suggest to members of the House of Representatives that recriminations of this kind are no? helpful, and that the public would appreciate their settling down to consider the problems which confront them.”