PRICE OF HONORS.

Taranaki Daily News, 19 July 1922, Page 5

PRICE OF HONORS.

CAX THEY BE BOUGHXJ THE SYSTEM ATTACKED. SBXSATIONAL CHAKGES. DEMAND FOR INQUIRY. Sensational charges were made in the House of Commons and in the House of Lords when the system of granting honors was severely criticised. One recipient recently elevated to the peerage was charged with trading with the enemy, while a letter was quoted purporting to contain an offer of a knighthood for £12.000 and a baron- * •tcy for £35,000. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Received July 18, 5.5 pan. London, July 17. There was a full attendance in the House of Commons for the debate concerning the system of granting honors. Three hundred members of the House of Commons had signed a motion requiring the Government to appoint a committee of seven MJP.’s to join with a committee from the House of Lords to consider the present method of submitting names of persons for honors for consideration of the King and to report charges desirable in order to secure that such honors shall only be given as a reward for public services. The Government issued an urgent Whip, fearing many Coalitionists would abstain from attending. Mr. Austen Chamberlain was cheered on returning to the House rfter his illness. Commander O. S. Locker-Lampson (Coalition-Unionist), moving the resolution, said public confidence had been gravely shaken over recent events. The scandal had reached such dimensions that a full enquiry was demanded. ROYAL COMMISSION SUGGESTED. Mr. Lloyd George stated there had been a considerable increase in honors during the las: 40 years, due to the increase in population and the wealth of population, abo to the setting up of a new order which I democratised honors. Attempts to undermine public confidence had succeeded, and therefore it was desirable that there should be an enquiry. The list of honors during the last six years had been exceptionally heavy on account of the war, but only four names had been questioned. The Premier said it would be an outrage if the enquiry were confined to the last five yean, with a view to attacking the present Government. Purely political honors during the last six years showed a mailer percentage than at any previous time in the history of the country. Contribution to party funds was emphatically not the chief or the decisive consideration in the bestowal of honors. If the House . desired to terminate the political list, let j it do so deliberately, but if it did it would leave a gap and discontinue a system which j had been sanctioned by the noblest and j purest. If the system were abolished the dan- : ger was that political organisation would ' lapse, and the alternative was political chaos Some of Germany's worst blunders were due to want of political organisation. Germany’s sudden collapse in 1918 was largely due to that fact. The Government was prepared to appoint a Royal Commission to assist the Prime Minister in making

LIBERALS WELCOME ENQUIRY. Mr. H. H. Asquith (Leader of the Liberal Party) recalled that while Prime Minister he performed the thankless task In 1 submitting nine birthday lists, which In- ' eluded many political opponents, and no , exception was taken to a single name on ' the score of unworthiness. It was obligatory on a person who took politics seriously to subscribe to the list of his power to the party funds. The walls of Jericho did not fall before an orchestral blast, even | with a choral accompaniment; they had to be sapped and mined, and sapping and mining under conditions of modern strategy was a laborious and costly operation. He did not associate himself with the vulgar clap-trap against party funds, which were essential to political warfare. He welcomed an enquiry and did not care how far it went back. Mr. J. R. Clynes (Leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party) said that if government by the party system depended upon such traffic, then the system had better go. The Prime Minister had not satisfactorily answered the question whether cheques were required to secure honors. To use the functions of government in order to fill the coffers of the party was to degrade politics and besmirch the Parliamentary Brigadier-General H. Page Croft (National Party) asked whether there was a single newspaper which supported the Government consistently for a year whose editor or proprietor had not been honored, while Mr Ronald McNeill (Coalition-Union ist) spoke criticising Lord Waring’s peerage. LORD FORRES’ CASE. The latter shouted from the distinguished strangers’ gallery: '‘That is false.” An attendant remonstrated with him. Interviewed later, Lord Waring expressed regret for violating the rules of the House, but declared he gave way to his feelings. He intended to make a statement in the House of Lords. Mr. McNeill, referring to the case of Lord Forres, formerly Sir Archibald Williamson, a member of the House of Commons, said he had been informed that Lord Forres’ firm, Messrs. Balfour, Williamson and Company, was ao notorious for trading with the enemy in Buenos Ayres and Valparaiso that the Foreign Office drafted 24 accusations, which the Consul-General confirmed. Mr. McNeill caused a sensation in the House by saying the Foreign Office document was quoted in a letter written by Lord Forres to his Chilean branch, stating it was unnecessary to pay undue attention to the regulations against trading with the enemy, as he was in a position to see they did not get into trouble. Mr. J. A. Marriott (Coalition-Unionist) moved to amend Commander Locker-Lamp-son's motion in favor of a Royal Commission, instead of a Select Committee. Mr. Chamberlain, replying, said it would be a bad day for the country if they excluded from honors all who rendered services to their party in any capacity, provided they personally and publicly were worthy. The Government could not accept the amendment. The motion was talked out. It is understood that although the motion was indecisive a Royal Commission will be ap pointed. HONORS FOR SALE. A similar honors debate took place n the House of Lords, on a motion by Lord lafiabuzy to appoint a committee of seven

lords to consider the methods of submitting names for the King’s consideration. Lord Birkenhead refused to accept this, saying a Royal Commission should be ap pointed by the King to advise on the procedure to be adopted in future and to assist the Prime Minister in making recommendations. Lord Salisbury withdrew his motion, Lord Birkenhead agreeing to this course. The Duke of Northumberland quoted several instances of persons receiving an offer of honors for the payment of money. One letter stated: “I am authorised to offer you a knighthood or a baronetcy—not of the British Empire order; no nonsense of that kind—but the real thing. A knighthood will be £12,000, and a baronetcy £35.000.’’ —Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.