THE GOVERNMENT AND THE BANK.

Te Aroha News, Volume VIII, Issue 489, 16 July 1890, Page 5

THE GOVERNMENT AND THE BANK.

b <* [ MR HUTCHISON’S CHARGES. ! i Wellington, July 11. The Committee of Investigation was appointed as anticipated yesterday. The failure to arrive at an amicable arrangement between the Government and Mr Hutchison as to the constitution of the Committee proposed to bo appointed to investigate oertainaccusations made against the Government, and especially against certain members thereof, by the member for Waitotara, gave rise to an animated debate on the House assembling at 2.30 p.m. The Hon. Mr Mitchelson, in moving the motion as previously telegraphed, made a statement as to the reason which actuated the Government in pressing for prompt investigation of the charges referred to. He said that on Wednesday, the 2nd inst., the member for Waitotara made some very grave charges against the Government, stating that they had used the iinances of the colony in the interests of the Bank of New Zealand. Seeing that the honour of the Government was so closely allied to the honour of the country, they considered it necessary that a Committee should at once be appointed to investigate and report on the charges made by the hon. member. If these charges were true the Government were no longer worthy to occupy their seats ; and if the charges were false and unjust to the Government and to the country, they should be cleared of the impuation cast upon them. He was sorry they had been unable to agree with the member for Waitotara as to the constitution of the Committee. They gave him the alternative of accepting the Committee as it now stood, viz., Hons. Messrs Ballance and Bryce, Dr. Fitchett, Sir J. Hall, Hons. Larnacb, Macarthur, Ormond and Seddon ; or to submit names, including the name of Mr Withy, from which they invited Mr Hutchison to choose one to replace one of the five submitted by the Government. They also agieed to refer the whole of the charges to a Commission, consisting of a judge of the Supreme Court to be approved of by Mr Hutchison and two arbitrators, one chosen from each side of the House. The hon. member refused to accept either alternative. He (Mr. Mitchelson) thought no fairer tribunal could bo obtained in ( the interests of justice, and he was exceed- , ingly sorry Mr Hutchison had thought fit not to accept the last proposal. He thereford moved for the appointment of the ] Committee as previously noticed. j Mr Kerr (Motueka) said all that was do- 1 sired by oho member for Waitotara was to ( insert the name of Mr Saunders instead of , Mr Ormond. He thought the request was , quite fair, and he felt sure the Houso would < insist upon this concession being made. He , thought it was not fair to refer the matter to a Judge of the Supreme Court. He j therefore moved the omission of the name 1 of Mr Ormond. Mr W. F. Reeves seconded the motion.

The Hon. Mr Ballance said some correspondence had taken place between the Govornmont and the member for Waitotara, from which it appeared that tho facts of the case were slightly different from the facts as stated by the Hon. Mr Mitchelson, and he hoped Mr Hutchison would read that correspondence at a later stage. He understood that the Government insisted on having five of thoir strongest supporters on the Committee, while they gave the Opposition four members. The position taken up by the Opposition was that the fifth member should not be a partisan. He thought the Government ought to have acceded to Mr Saunders as fifth man, and urged that Mr Hutchison was fully justified in declining to allow a Judge of of the Supreme Court to be umpire in a political question. Hon. Mr Mitchelson: “This is nob a political question.” The lion. Mr Ballance replied that although there was an outside question of personal honour, there was also a political question ; and he felt sure that the decision, whichever way it wenfT, would give satisfaction to either one side or the other. He accepted the challenge of the Government to set up a committee within the House to try the question ; bub he urged again that Government should give way in permitting the appointment of Mr Saunders as ninth man.

Tho Hon. Mr Fergus said Mr Hutchison had challenged the Government to put the whole matter before the member for Waipa for investigation, and the Government accepted this challenge. Mr Hutchison, interrupting, said he had never expressed his willingness to refer the whole of his charges to either the member for Waipa or to tho member for Lincoln. The Hon. Mr Fergus went on to state that the Government accepted every name proposed by the other side of the House. They then selected four Government supporters, aud oflered to agree to Mr Withy, as one who was net a decided supporter of the Government as the ninth man. The Opposition, however, declined bo accept this proposition, and asked unreasonably to select the ninth member themselves. The Government were still willing to leave out any of the nine names, but with all respect to the hon. member for Lincoln, they must decline to accept him in that position Mr Seddon pointed out that the appointment of the Committee would not bo satisfactory to the colony if it did nob give satisfaction in the House, and urged that the proposal to set up such a committee was decidedly wrong. He denied that all the namessubmitted by the Opposition had been accepted, and said that as a matter of fact there had been substitutions on both sides. It was the Government and the members of the Government that were impeached, and he asked was it the accused that had right to select the tribunal. The Government, pn limiting selection of he ninth member of the Committee to certain names, caused reflection to be cast on themselves. He. also asked why the Government had not allowed the Financial debate to go on and conclude bafore introducing so largo and serious a matter of this character. He readthecorrespondence between the Government and Mr Hutchison, which showed that it had been carried on in a fair and amicable spit it, and he urged that the Government were doing wrong in insjsting on the selection of a majority on the Committee. As an alternative, he suggested that eight members of the Committee, representing both sides,'should elect the niqth.

The Hon. Mr Hislop expressed regret that such a speech had been made by Mr Seddon, as it must inevitably lead to the conclusion that he, as one of the proposed Committee, could nob come to bho consideration of the question except as a partisan. The honour of not only the Government but of the whole House was at stake, and the Government had brought the matter on with the least poseible delay in response to the request made by Mr Hutchison. He pointed out in reply to Mr Seddon that the prosecutor had only a limited right of challenge, and that the accused had an equal right. It was nob for the member for Waitotara to decide who should be the tribunal. In accordance with Parliamentary use Government had allowed tho Opposition to choose four members of the Committee, and in the selection of the fifth member of Committee, to be chosen by the Government, they had offered to accept a non-partisan man such as Mr Withy or Mr Cadman ; and other members had also been asked, bub declined to act. The leador of the Opposition said there was no objection to Mr Withy, b u t Mr Hutchison declined to agree to his inclusion on the ground that Mr Withy came from Auckland, where the influence of the Bank of New Zealand was very strong. The Hon. Mr Hislop also pointed out that the proceedings of the Committee would be published, and that it was improbable that anj' member of that Committee would be a party to cloak over the conduct of tho Government.

Colonel Fraser thought the matter should be loft to a committee constituted of four members from each side of the House. If the Government insisted on the appointment of tho Committee as at present proposed, no doubt they could carry that motion ; but he felt that the decision of such a Committee would nob be accepted as satisfactory by the country, and would not clear the Government.

Mr Fish said it was to bo regretted that these charges had been made at all; bub having been made, it was the duty of the House to have them investigated aside from party considerations. The Committee proposed by the Government could not be regarded as representing as far as possible non-party men. The five gentlemen proposed by the Government would, under ordinary circumstances, vote for the Government, and although he was not prepared to say that they would vote in the same way when a question of the honour of tho Government was involved, yet he did urge that there should have been selected by the Government gentlemen who were nob such strong partisans. Under circumstances that might arise the ninth man should bo thoroughly impartial and with sufficient backbone to give effect to the verdict arrived at. Mr Fish, however, approved etrongly of the reference of the whole matter to a judge of the Supreme Court. Dr. Fitchett thought it was regrettable that such debate had been entered upon at all, and suggested the desirability of its going no further. It did not allay party feeling, he pointed out, to have insiuuabions bandied from one side of the House to the other.

Mr Perceval, also urged the postponement of the discussion and the settlement of the Committee outside of the House. Mr Izard moved that the debate be adjourned. He thought discussion would not do any good and might do a great deal of harm.

On the question for the adjournment of the debate going to a division, tho motion was lost by 37 bo 27, but the majority would have been 38 against 26 but for Mr Scobie McKenzie having been forced to vote against his convictions in consequence of having been paired, and so having voted in the opposite lobby to that into wliich he would otherwise have gone. After some further discussion, a division was taken, with the result that the amendment was lost by 37 against 23, the original motion being carried. Tho Hon. Mr Mitchelson expressed regret at the tone taken by the Opposition. The Committee appointed, lie contended, were strictly impartial men. Ho now pro-

posed to substitute the name of Mr Withy for that of Mr Fulton, and this was agreed to on the voices.