“AN ABSOLUTE OUR.”

Taihape Daily Times, 13 October 1917, Page 3

“AN ABSOLUTE OUR.”

WELLINGTON, Wednesday. Though the joint caucus might have brought the principal parties in Parliament closer together, it has created bit- , tor feeling in other directions, as was shown by several incidents in the House and lobby to-night during the third reading debate on the War Pensions Bill. Feeling appeared to be high at the commencement betwon those who attended the caucus and the half dozen who were not there, but bitternses grow as the evening went on, until it culminated in a scene between Mr Hindmarsh, Labour member for Wellington South, and Mr Pearce, member for Patea. Mr Hindmarsh hotly attacked the country members for supporting the Government, declaring that they preferred sacrificing men to wealth. Some of the members criticised smiled broadly, and Mr Hindmarsh singled out Mr Pearce, declaring that he was the sort of man who would not trouble about sacrifice of manhood as long as he could remain at homo to make money. Mr Pearce retorted: If I was a youngman I would have been at the front. The answer of the Labour member was: “I can tell by your face you arc an absolute cur.” “Quite right,” put in another member.

Mr Speaker intervened to secure the withdrawal of the offensive phrase, Mr Hindmarsh, following rip his apology, with a complaint that Mr Pearce appeared to think it a laughing matter. There was a sequel in the lobby a few minutes later, when the member who had interjected while the principal antagonists were exchanging hot words found himself in an argument which ended in a heavy blow on the nose for one party, and a grazed wound on the cheek for the other. The same pair renewed fisticuffs in Bellamy’s a little later, and a Minister was among those who assisted to separate the contestants. MORE LIVELY LANGUAGE.

High tension was again reached in the House a little later. Mr Webb was speaking, when Mr Jennings threw an interjection at him in an undertone, and after a sotto voce interheange Mr Webb exclaimed with some heat: “Mr Speaker, the honourable member’s remarks to me are as insulting as his personality. He says that I ought to be at the war.’ ’ Mr Okey: So you ought.

Mr Webb: “Yes, there is another one but, let me tell you,” he went on excitedly, “that I have risked my life every day of my life, and the men who voted me into this House are some of the best fighters of the country. They voted to say should come here to look after their interests and their dependants.”

' MR VEITCH’S EPITHET. Mr Veitch rose a few minutes afterwards, and was commenting on the hold ing of a secret caucus after the whole House had held a secret session, when Mr Okey interjected: “You were invited to be there.”

Mr Veitch; I am addressing the Government and not an insignificant baekblocks creature.

The Premier, who had just entered the Chamber, protested to Mr Speaker that something should be done to prevent such disgraceful scenes as had happened that night. “I expect mem-, bers of Parliament to conduct themselves in order, and to use language not calculated to cause a breach of the peace,’ ’ remarked Mr. Massey.

Mr Speaker called members to order, and this incident of the series ended. One way and another, however, a very bitter undercurrent of feeling was manifested in the last stakes of the Pensions Bill in the House.

The Dominion, in referring to Mr. Poland’s words, says:—Mr Pearce did take notice of them outside the House. Mr Hindmarsh did not leave I his scat, but Mr Pearce met Mr Poland in the lobby. There was a collision, and blows were struck. The combatants were separated by a Minister, who happened to be on the scene, but the affair was resumed in another part of the building a few minutes later. The second act was a more serious bout of fisticuffs. The only obvious fact was that Mr Pearce appeared in the in the course of the night, and Mr. Poland did not.