PARLIAMENTARY NOTES.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12633, 21 October 1905, Page 8

PARLIAMENTARY NOTES.

THE STONEWALL

(From Our Special Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, October 20. After midnight the stonewall developed, Messrs Moss, Hairding, and Alison doing most of the building, the House looking on sulky and growing weary. Mr Fisher tried his prentice hand, too, but at first he was rusty, as a colt might be who didn't know whether he -was in saddle or harness. He picked up his work scon, however, and kept it up with the rest. About 2 a.m. the building of the wall was done by amendments clause 2, motions to report progress, appeals to Mr Speaker against the decisions of the chairman, calls of the •chairman's attention to the 6tate of the House. Mr Moss developed great shrewdness, Mr Harding extraordinary pertinacity, and Mr Alison a sustained iind of dignity. The latter, however, -\vas soon tired, and, after a comparativeJy ©arly retirement, the subsequent procedings interested him no more for many hours. • The thing the stonewallers made tihe most of was the effect they foresaw of the Bill upon the candidates at the coming elections. Everyone of them would, they averred, be -the victim of perjurers putting words in their mouths. _ At 2.30 Mr Herries, improving on this idea, moved an amendment to postpone tihe operation of the Bill till January of next year. It was -orjvfty of him as present appeared" in the vast increment of argument his amendment supplied these stone-wallers will. They dropped logic joyously until 5.30, then a compromise was arrived at by which both sides agreed to accept ■an amendment to the effect that the •statements aimed at by the Bill to be actionable must be defamatory and made in a public place as defined in the Police ■Offences Act. At this juncture Mr Taylor and Mr Bedford returned fresh Jrom sleep, and the former stamped on the argument with the loftiest volubility. The sting he declared to be in the tail. The statements must be deiamatory. Right! But they ought to he actionable also to be untrue. Where •was the provision for untruth? The ■compromise would enable persons who ■spoke defamatory truth to be. prosecuted -criminally. He danced on the agreement in this fashion long and deftly. The alight ended, day broke, and glowed. The stonewall went on. At 9 a.m., of there was no breakfast -adjournment, members going away in pairs and 3>atcbes to refresh. At 9 a.m. Mr Banme, "who was in the ohair, intimated that ho would draw the rein tighter, intimating that he would enforce rigorously the standing order against irrelevant «or tedious repetition. Any one so re-? peaking* would be ordered: down.- ". Mr Taylor very soon had a disastrous warniang, and Mr Bedford, transgressing, was ordered down at 9.45. Mr Harding sustained his comrade "of the stonewall by -asking for an appeal to Mr Speaker; The motion was put at once—it is comapulsory in such cases.—and earned, and -a message hurried off for the lord of ■decision. During the interval, which ■«emed long, the stonewall developed .^artfulness. "Three minutes have"elaps•«d," said the member for Kaipara, "and there is no Speaker. What will happen? 3s it not the same as a count out?" The •stonewall chuckled, howled "Same as a 'Count out." They averred there is;no machinery for getting back into cornputtee. The sitting was therefore dead. Jn the midst of this turmoil in came Mr Speaker, majestic in ful lrobes and -wig, fresh as paint. The artful point -engagedhis attention. At the outset he decided promptly that the standing •borders must be reasonably interpreted. On the main question there was much the stonewall showing a natural disposition to break %vay over fresh ;ground. Mr Speaker restra-ined with a firm 'hand. The questions were two— -<1) In matter of fact is there an appeal -to the Speaker? (2) Is tedious repetition forbidden? Mr Speaker had no difficulty in the matter of fact. There is no appeal, the decision of the chairman in control of the proceedings being jfinal. That officer having reported tedious repetition that was against the standing order, and the chairman's xeadig was correct. Stonewall asked advice. Mr Speaker declined to enter into suppositions oases and declared the -House in Committee. Mr Bedford got -on his feet, tediously repeated, and was ordered down. The member for Bruce came on at 10.30 and spoke, being followed by. Messrs Duthie, Herdman, -and Massey. The reinforcement greatly i'«"«ved the stonewall. Presently, about 11.30, the Herries amendment was played out after many charges, and defeated by a heavy majority. A motion "*<> report progress followed, and Mr sailed down the order paper, Bills more important than this one. The chairman watched'him ■close, putting a spoke in his wheel every now and again. McNabb relieved the Point of order reigned. Mr JMassey denounced the Bill with might ■sum mam and fiercely uncompromising •determination. Lunch hour arrived after all the arguments had been repeated 4i hundred times, but it was noticeable that no personality had been used and tio temper lost. Surely a marvellous -stonewall in this respect. In the matter of lunch the stonewall was hungry and tired and wanted to eat and rest. The majority was determined it should do neither. Then a strange thing happened. The rule is to ask for the voices and decide without division. Sonowall knew the majority didn't. Therefore, when the chair asked if the pleasure ©f the Committee was lunch, stonewall roared again with great vim. The majority, expecting the usual procedure, which is "On the contrary, no," reserved its fire. Consequence was apparent— -unanimity for lun6h. When the ohair so decided the rage of the majority was great, but it had to submit, and the House emptied till 2.30.