THE PRIVILEGE QUESTION. R. THOMPSON'S EXPLANATION. VOGEL CHALLENGES THE SPEAKER'S RULING. LAST NIGHT'S DEBATE. (BY TELEGRAPH-OWN REPORTER.) Wellington, Nov. 17.

Te Aroha News, Volume V, Issue 229, 19 November 1887, Page 4

THE PRIVILEGE QUESTION. R. THOMPSON'S EXPLANATION. VOGEL CHALLENGES THE SPEAKER'S RULING. LAST NIGHT'S DEBATE. (BY TELEGRAPH-OWN REPORTER.) Wellington, Nov. 17.

Nothing was discussed yesterday but the breach o£ privilege case. It has absorbed public attention to the utter exclusion of such minor questions os retrenchment, economy, and protection, and these are whoUy -f argotten in the general oxoitemer-t. , Never before in the history of this Parliament has a member been "named," although his words have been taken down \ and *he galleries cleared. Members might therefore be pardoned for the display of { feeling on such an eventful occasion. The question has been discussed in every conceivable phase; recoids have been searched and authorities examined, and, as may be supposed, opinions arc very divided- The feeling of the larger section of the House appeared to be m the direction of upholding the action of the Speaker, which was considered to be warranted by the language and conduct of Sir J. Vogel. On the other hand, the Opposition party and those who arc moving in this direction showed a determination to support tho leader of their party in the course he had adopted. Efforts were made during yesterday forenoon to come to some arrangement, but Sir -T. Vogel absolutely refused to budge an inch from the attitude he had assumed, and would not retract or apologise. Pic was occasionally consuited by his Mends, prominent amongst whom are Air Seddon, the member tor Kumara, and Mr Hutchison, member for Waifcotara, and it is said they fully concur in the course he was pursuing. Ministers met and discussed the question, but were unable at that time to come to any conclusion respecting the course to be adopted. It was generally agreed in political circles that it was a- very dillioult matter to know how to deal with an lion. gentleman whose physical iniirmity entitled him to special consideration, and, indeed, secured it for him dm ing the whole time that the affair was under discussion. It- was hoped that some arrangement would be arrived at betoie the afrernoon sitting commenced, but such was not the case. The Premier was compelled to state that l!overnment had not yet seen their way as to whatcourseshould take, but they hoped they would be able to arrive at a solution of the difficulty by 7.30, till which hour he moved the adjournment, of the House. It was evident from the appeal ance of the House that quite a number ot members were anxious to unburden themselves, and a necesarily brief discussion limited to certain points followed. Dr. Hodgkinson evoked a choius of " ohs ! " by the statement that while the floors were closed last ni^hfc tho Speaker had not been treated with the lespect which his position entitled him to. Mr Seddon appealed to the Speaker not to let it go forth that this was &o ; and Sir JMaurice said no disrespect had been shown to the chair. Mr Scobie McKeimc put it to the Speaker whether the question put by Mr R. Thompson was not offensive in its original form, and the Speaker admitted that it his attention had been drawn to it, or he had known that it contained a personal reflection on tho member for Chrisfcehurch Xorfch, he would have required it to bo either withdrawn or modified. Mi R. Thompson, who a^ked the question which has been the cau&o of the whole trouble, made an explanation of his action, although intenuptions and points of ox dor raised by Messis Seddon, O'Callaghan, Levestam and other speakers were so frequent that he could only pioceed under the pi'otection of the Speaker. Ho said he never intended to rellect in any way either on Sir Julius Vogel personally or on his iniinnities. He claimed the right, which all members posseted, of inquiring into any expenditure which did not appear to be justified, or wasunfaiily chaiged upon the public revenue. Mr Thompson proceeded to sayamidstcontinued and persistent interruptions that he had visited (Government Buildingsand foundit was only since hehad placed this question on the order paper that any steps had been taken by Sir .1. Vogel relative to these men to send them back to their legitimate occupation. Mr Levestam i ai&ed the question whether it was not really Thompson who should apologise. Mr Seddon took exception to the action of the Speaker in clearing the galleries, and complained that reports furnished to local papers were partial, and that whatever action they took should be open to the world. The Speakei explained that the order to clear the galleries did not apply to this day's sitting, and he would not renew it unless occasion required it. The House thereupon adjourned, and during the remainder of the afternoon knots of members anxiously discussed the situation, nnd the bestway out of the difficulty did not appear easy to discovei*. Sir R. Stout was at the House, and appeared to be in the confidence of Sir Julius Vogel's friends in the inattei". It transpired later in the afternoon that Government had decided to submit an amended resolution, which was practically a vote of censure on Sir J. Vogel, and the other side would meet it Avith an amendment questionIng the Speaker's ruling. When the House met at half -past seven, the galleries were filled in anticipation of the resvmed debate on the question of privilege, brought about by the motion placed on the order paper yesterday by the member for Marsclen. Immediately the Speaker took the chair, the Hon. E. Richardson read a memo, from Sir J. Vogel respecting his employment of the Armed Constabulary man, and stating that Government were aware of the terms on which the man was, engaged. Mr Walker said that it was clear that Sir J, Vogel had informed Sir (ieo. Whibanore that he was willing to pay out of his own pocket for the man s services, and he .charged Ministers with not making that information public, as the statement made at the afternoon sitting by the member for, Marsden left no such iniprefosion on honmembers' minds. Major Atkinson indignantly denied having acted otherwise than in a most straightforward manner, and said tho remarks made were calculated to engender bad feeling.' The adjourned debate on the privilege question having been called on, the Premier eaid :— *" With the permission of the House and the hon. gentleman I would say I have been endeavouring to arrange so that this matter might be satisfactorily settled both to the House and to you, sir, and to the hon. member for Chrisfcehurch ; but, I am sorry to' Bay I have not been able to do so, and therefore I propose to take -this course - a course which, while being moderate, will foe sufficient at the same time to vindicate the dignity of the House. I propose to ask leave to withdraw t!:o motion of which I gave notice, nnd if the House see's fit to allow me to withdraw it I

shall then fcttßpose, 'That this House regrets that the member for Chnstdhwoh North should, by his conduct, <hay« i rendered it necessary for the Speaker to -name him." I think, with that motion boing carried, the whole matter would be disposed of. I 'think, sir, that would be sufficient to vindicate the dignity of this House, and I think the friends of the hon. member, and he has Mends on both sides of the House, should bo quite satisfied with that proposal. Ido hope, sir, that this matter will not degenerate into a party question, but that members on both sides will take a calm view of it. I have done my utmost to bring about a reconciliation, and have now to suggest this course as a moderate and reasonable one, and one satisfactory to all parties concerned. I beg leave to withdraw the motion standing in my name. Mr Seddon pointed out that one indictment having been made, it was proposed to withdraw it and substitute a fiesh charge. The Premier admitted he made a mistake. Major Atkinson: No, I do not admit anything of the sort. Mi- Seddon : The Premier seems to have recognised that the motion was going too far, and he wishes to moderate it. Major Atkinson warned the member for Kumara not to proceed with that line of argument. Mr Seddon had no wish to provoke Ministers, but his temperature was such that he must give expression to the view heheld. He objected to the amendment being withdrawn. The Speaker : In that case, the debate will go on. Major Atkinson invited his friends to vote against both amendment and original motion. (Hear.) The original motion was put and negatived on the voices. The Minister for Education moved, and the Minister for Public Works seconded, the following amendment to Mr Seddon's motion :—" That this House regrets that the member for Christchurch Noith should, by his conduct, have rendeied it necessary for the Speaker to name him " Mr Ballance said it appealed to him that the amendment was very much stronger in the nature of censure than the original resolution, and he would give his reasons. In the first place the original resolution referred to words used in debate, while amendment challenged the conduct of the hon. membei, and implied, that it was so bad that the Speaker was compelled to name him. That would appear in the journals of the House, and the inference would be that his conduct was of so dkorderly a character that the Speaker was compelled to name him, whcieasif the oiitrinal lesolution had stood, the question would have been, what word..! did he use to deserve the censure of the House ? He (Mr Ballance) held that the censuie conveyed in the amendment was much stronger than the -words conveyed in the original resolution, He denied that the conduct of the member for Christchurch North was disordeily (Oh !). although the words used might have been'unparliamentary. He objected to the distinction between his words and conduct that was. attempted to be made. Mr Downio Stewart : Might I ask the Piemicr what conduct he refers to on the part of the hon. member, Sir J. Vogel ? The 1 Vernier : The conduct to which I referred was the way in which Mr Speaker had to name Sir J. Vogcl. If the hon. gentleman does not know what 1 refer to, I am quite incompetent to tell him. (Opposition cheers.) Mr. Stewart said that the only offence could be improper conduct in using unparliamentary language. It was now pioposed to depart from the question of Parliamentary language, and censure the hon. member for his conduct. Yet no one -was prepared to say -wherein his conduct) was offensive to the House. As to conduct, outside Parliamentary language, he asked wherein the hon. member was censurable. Had he been guilty of disorderly conduct while public business was being transacted ? He (the speaker) invited members to look at the matter dispassionately, and to recollect that the Premier coukl not say where there was disorderly conduct. Mr Samuel did noc think, after careful consideration of the difference between "conduct" and "words," that the Hou.se should deal with the member fpr Christchurch North without having something definite before it. No member should vote on the question unless he was in the House when the words were used, and was perfectly certain what the exact words were. He suggested as a compromise that Mr Seddon's amendment be altered to read, "That the Hansard rcpoit of the words be proem ed and referred to the hon. member tor his comment ; to be thereon returned to the House so that the House may be able to deal fairly with him." The first objectionable expression used, viz., "manners," wus a very fine one, and seeing that the member for Christchurch North was excitable and irritable, and suffered from an infirmity to which reference had been made, too much should not be made of the matter and the stigma cast on Sir Julius Vogel without an opportunity being afforded him after consideration to make an explanation. Mr Fitzherbert pointed out that no conduct on Sir Julius Vogel's part would come under rule 138, under which he had been named. The correct procedure would have been for the objectionable words to have been taken down at the time by the clerk to the House, by order of the Speaker. By this oversight or want of knowledge of the Standing Orders on the part of the Premier he had got into a fix, and the House should not assist him to wriggle out of it. Mr Barron denied that there was any complication, and said the only question was, whether the House should support the Speaker in his ruling. It was clearly the duty of members to support the Speaker's ruling, and to pass sucli a resolution as would strengthen his hands, and at the same time not bear too heavily on the hon. member whose conduct was under review. Mr Scobie McKenzie said his sympathies were strongly with Sir J. Vogel, but all must admit that his language at one time was objectionable. He cited authorities to show it was not necessary to take down words objected to when the House was in debate. It was evident that Sir J. Vogel before retiring from the House last evening had apologised, and if such were the case, the apology should be accepted. With a view of settling the matter and without desiring to cast an unnecessary stigma on Vogel he asked all sections of the House to accept this amendment, "That this House, while regretting all the circumstances that culminated in the naming of the hon. member for Christchurch North, and the language which that hon. gentleman was betrayed into using, accept the apology that was tendered before his withdrawal." Mr W. P. Reeves said that on the previous evening he had taken a rough note of what occurred after the galleries were cleared, and Sir Julius Vogel undoubtedly did tender an apology before lea\ ing the House as he used these words, "If I exceeded the limits of moderate language I regret it." Ho asked whether by being "named" a severe penalty had not been inflicted on Sir J, Vogel and whether this penalty had not been infliotod by the Speaker without members having an opportunity of being heard. The Speaker, speaking to the point of

order, said i u I don't think that by naming ■a member it carries the censure of tlie -House. I named the member in order to give him an opportunity of retracting or explaining what took plaoej but having named him, the House must say whether the apology said to have been tendered is sufficient. If the hon. member is ready to repeat that apology, the House in always ready to receive it. I was in hopes that such an apology would have been made as the House could accept." Dr. Fitchett did not think Sir J. Vogel should be called on to repeat his apology, while Mr Bruce urged that the Speaker's ruling should be upheld. Sir G. Grey said he was absent from the Houso when the difficulties commenced on Tuesday, but he was present when Sir J. Vogel was ordered to retire. He heard the apology made, and spoke feelingly of kindnesses he had been shown at I'ae hands of hon. members, clearly showing that he wished to obliterate any language he had used. At this stage an hon. member asked whether the House would accept the assurance given that Sir J. Vogel had tendered an apology on the previous night. Suvely it was not desired to humiliate by getting him to reiterate his apology ? Major Atkinson said that he did not desire to humilate Sir J. Vogel, but failedto hear the apology in the &arne way in which Mr Reeves and Sir G. Grey took it. He heard it: "If I have done so and so," clearly showing a want of submission to the chair. He Avished the matter satisfactorily settled, and would accept an explicit declaration from the friends of Sir J. Vogel that he regretted the language lie had used. It Avas only after being assured by some of Sir J. Vogel's friends that he would not consent to anything at all, that the Government had felt compelled to move the resolution now before the House. Several members of the Opposition hero left the House, with the evident intention of trying to get an apology from Sir J. Vogel, but it Avas evident on their return that there was no likelihood of an apology being forthcoming. After further discussion, in Avhich Messrs Ward, Fulton, and Lovestam spoke, Mr Seddon's amendment^ for procuring the Hansard report of Sir J. Vogel's words Avas lost on the voices. Mr Scobie McKenzie said that Avhen ho gave notice of his amendment at an early stage of the proceedings he understood that Sir Julius Vogel had made an apology for the Avords he had used. But from Avhat fell from the Speaker subsequently, he gathered that unless further action were taken the honour of the House would not be completely preserved. For that reason he wished to Avithdraw his amendment. Sir Maurice O'Rorkc wished it to be clearly understood that nothing that fell from the chair should sway members in any Avay Avhatever, He had merely laid the fad before the House, and left the House to deal Avith the case. Mr McKenzie did not Avish to imply that anything the Speaker had said Avas calculated to sway the House, but the remark he had made led him (Mr McKenzie) to doubt the completeness of the apology tendered last night. On that account lie did not intend to move his amendment. Mr Fish thereupon mo\ed, and Major Steward seconded, '• That this House, Avhile regretting all the ciicumstanceo that culminated in naming the hon. member for Chrislchurch North, and the language which that hon. gentleman used, accept the apology tendered before he left the chamber." On the vote being taken, the Hon. Mr Fisher's motion was carried by 45 to 32. MrKeeves (Inangalvna) said that in the interests of the House, in the interests of members and in the interests of. the country it Avas necessary that the Standing Srders should be conserved, and in every case the ruling of the Speaker should be respected. He contended,however, that in this case the Speaker's ruling Avas incorrect, and therefore moved Avifch regret, " That in the opinion of this House the' Speaker exceeded the poAvers he possesses in naming Sir Julius Vogel. because the 138 th standing order under Avhich j he acted Avas not applicable to the case." Mr Kerr seconded the motion. j Sir J. Hall and Dr. Fitchett asked Avhether the Speaker's ruling could be questioned without previous notice, and Sir Maurice ruled that it Avas quite competent to reA'ieAV his ruling Avithout notice. Mr Seddon, aylio spoke with great Avarmth, said that the late division Avas nothing more nor less than a party vote, and charged the Premier Avith using the majority at his back to do a great Avrong. The speaker then proceeded to say that because Sir J. Vogel Avas leader of the Opposition he had been hounded doAvn, and a Wellington newspaper had spoken of his residence as a cabino. He had that night been tried by a prejudiced jury, and justice had been denied him. The motion just carried had been hastily put, and the charge made had not been read over to the member alleged to have been guilty of misconduct. A member could be disfranchised at the dictation of a Speaker if the House Avere not to have an opportunity of deciding whether a refractory member should be expelled. In that case, a Speaker would not be acting in conformity Avith the Standing Order, but as a dictator, and no member would be safe if the position taken up was to be allowed as a precedent. In conclusion, Mr Seddon said, "I shall go home, sir, far easier in my conscience to-night than any member Avho voted for the motion of the Minister for Education. I shall in after time be able to look back on my vote and on the part I have taken in this debate with pleasure ; but I apprehend that in less than 24 hours those in a majority, when public opinion through the length and breadth of New Zealand is known, will have been deemed to have done wrong, and to have done wrong simply on party grounds and for no purpose. " Mr Fish said that common sense told him that the Speaker had not acted in strict accordance Avith the Standing Orders, and therefore, correctly speaking, the hon. member for Christchurch North had beon Avrongly arraigned. Sir Julius Vogel had not oeen treated as a generous man should have been. In vioav of the circumstances of the case, to his (Mr Fish's) mind the Speaker had acted Aviongly on the tAvo fir3t occasions on Avhich he checked Sir Julius Vogel, for he had not then used unparliamentary language. The vote that night, so far as the majority Avere concerned, Avas a party one, and many hpn. members had simply voted in the direction they had because of the intense hatred and iU-teeling they bore to Sir Julius Vogel. After the supper adjournment Mr Downie Stewart urged that Sir J. Vogel should be invited to explain what occurred yesterday after the galleries Avere cleared Avhich led Sir Maurice O'Rorke to remark that he was Av'iliing to give the member for Christchurch 1 North every opportunity to give such explanation as would be satisfactory to the House, or allow him to apologise through any other hon. member. Sir Geoi'ge Grey defended E. Thompson from the attacks persistently made on him. He approved of his conduct and believed he was actuated by the best motives, and sympathised with him in the trial Ke had to undergo in his first attempt to do his duty. Mr K. Thompson defended his action, and maintained that no man in the country should ocoupy so ijigh a position as not to

be amenable to criticism, and that the question having been se^en day? on the order paper without being challenged, it was unfair to attack him respecting it now. Mr Moss bore testimony to the fact that Sir G. M. OHorke in his decisions had always acted with most perfect and rigid impartiality. Mr Grimmond suggested that all reference to the subject under consideration should be expunged from the records of the House. Mr^Seddon, as the amendment was being put, inquired whether an intimation had been conveyed to the Speaker that Sir J. Vogel desired to make an explanation or apology, and was replied to in the negative. Mr Reeves's amendment was rejected on the voices, and on division the Government motion, " That this House regrets that the member for Christchurch North should, by his conduct, have rendered it necessary for the Speaker to name him," was carried by43t025. Sir J. Vogel was then sent for, and entered the chamber amidst hearty cheers from the Opposition. He said that he wished to put himself in order by mo\ing the adjournment of the House, bub as it was so late, and he felt very fatigued, he should desire to postpone it till to-morrow, if there was no objection to that course. Major Atkinson said he had no objection whatever. He would like to meet the views of the hon. gentleman. Sir J. Vogel (after consideration) said ho would proceed at once. He said that a question of a personally offensive character having been put on the paper by an hon. member, he felt an irritation not unnatural, because for three years he had been very must persecuted in the House, and had not received the same consideration as other members. When he commenced he. had no idea of entering upon this, and very much regicttecl having gone into what he was willing to withdraw. His remarks were not suitable at the time at which they were made. The remarks attributed to him, however, were not altogether correctly reported in the newspapers. If the words had been taken down at the time he uttered them, he was convinced there would not be a dozen members in the House who would have taken objection to them. Then something very like a squabble ensued betwoen himself and the Speaker, and he need scarcely say that if he was wanting in respect to the Speaker it was entirely due to temporary irritation. He thought, however, the action of the the Speaker in asking the Premier to move a resolution in the matter was unconstitutional. Comparing the present resolution with the one at iirst proposed by the Government, it was so mild in character and so doubtful in its interpretation that he felt he had very little cause to complain of it. He thought the proposal to name him was in order to get the Speaker out of a difficulty. The Speaker's action, to his mind, was a mistaken one, as he should have asked for the words to be taken down at the time they were uttered. He had also ruled under the wrong 1 standing order, as clause 138 could not pos=ibly apply to his action, and there was nothing in that clause to justify the Speaker's action. He should merely nay that, in the opinion of the House, it wao more desirable to protect the Speaker in the mistake he had made than to preserve the strict interpretation of the standing orders. He had been asked to make several compromises, and he considered he had been unjustly treated, having been turned out of the Houf-e by the Speaker. He had been legally advised thathehad been turned out, although ib was nob necessary bo resist it by force, and he held the Speaker responsible for that action. He considered that he had been treated in a most injurious manner, and to make matters worse, the Premier had stated that he (Sir J. Vogel) had made chai'ges against members generally. It seemed to him that he could not allow the matter to drop. At present the Standing Orders required that when the words of any member were thus objected to they should be taken down without delay. He did not grudge tho Speaker any satisfaction he might feel at this resolution having been pasted, but- he should take the opinion of the House to challenge the ruling of the Speaker on live or six points. He would consult the Speaker on that matter, and meet his convenience on it. Tho first point was whether the woids, "want of knowledge of the world, men, and manners," were disorderly expressions. The next point was whether "unaccustomed to tho usages of good society " was a disorderly expression. Ho should move a resolution to amend Standing Order 393, so that the Speaker should not have the power to clear the galleries without a vote or a debate previously taking place on the propriety of doing so. The fourth point was a resolution to the effect that it was irregular to allow a motion to be put regarding words used by a member unless they are first taken down in accordance with the Standing Orders. The fifth was that the Speaker had exceeded his powers in naming him yesterday. The sixth was that the Speaker had exceeded his powers in ordering him to leave the House. He hoped that he had not said, anything which the Speaker would construe into personal disrespect, but he should like to know whether he would permit him to challenge the Speaker's ruling on the points he had named. In doing so he should endeavour to consult to the utmost of his power the Speaker's feelings. He wished bo state that the expressions of sympathy which he had received not only from members on one side of the House, but from the other side, at the gross insult he had been subjected to, showed him that party feelings were put aside in this matter. He then moved the adjournment of the House, which was agreed to, and the House rose at 12.30 a.m.