THE HUTCHISON CHARGES

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3586, 13 August 1890, Page 2

THE HUTCHISON CHARGES

Discussion ia tko HousoAt yesterday's Bitting of the House tho Minister of Education moved that the manuscript report and proof of tlm speech of tho lion, membor for Waitotiira, mnde on the 2nd July, 1890, containing accusations against the Government, be referred to the Reporting Debutes Commission for comparison with the Hansard report. Tho only precedent to know of for this odui'6B, lie Baid, was in 1877, when a similar course was taken with respect to Mr Ormond's Bpecch in which charges were mule against Sir George Grey. Ho did not feel it at all incumbent on bim to make any long rcmarkß on tho motion, seeing that Mr Hutohison's charges weronot less grave than those of Mr Ormond agaicst the Government. Ashe had previously stated, it.wasa mattsrof notoriety that tli'e proof had boon altered so that tho report did not actually represent what was said, He was informed on nil hands that the report was not a correct one, ■ He pointed out that the " Dargiville Committee" also had tho reporters' proof produced, To know whether Hansard was a correct report was, of course, a matter of privilege," ■

Mr Ballance Wished to know whether this was one of the " three courses." If bo, the action ot the Government was not calculated to lemove tho impression that had been formed regarding these charges. They should have complained of the inaccuracy in the first place; but, as a matter of fact, they accepted tho report, and took up their position before, the Committee on it. He asked whether members would say they were always correctly reported; some parts of a speech would bo entirely correct, and in other parts of the same report the speaker 'Would find his meaning completely reversed. Would any member forego the right of correcting the reports? What was tho idea of this proposal ? Was it to take an action lor libel ? If so, lie would facilitate it by all means in his power, and so as to enable Ministers to clear themselves of the charges.

Mr I'isher reminded the House that mistaks occurred among the best shorthand writers in the world, and that the chief reporter had a rule that the first proof of a member's speech should not, in justice to the speaker, be allowed to go out of the Hansard room, Mr Yerrall said that when he was speaking the other evening, he was reported as Baying " he had escaped from a sawmill ;"and when he si>oke of Thorold Rogers, it was reported as " poor old Rogers,"

Mr Izard failed to see what good tbe motion would do, and lie thought it would bo wise to' reject it, leaving the Government to. come to the House boldly and say what they proposed to do. ' . Mr Taylor considered this proposal simply a waste of time, and asked whether the Government intended to proceed against Mr Hutchison when they got- the report. It was well-known that many members had to re write their speeches, and it was very proper that they should have the privilege of correcting thorn, Sir George Grey confessed to having looked with a great deal of ouriosity for tbe result of the enquiry , to be made by the Committee recently appointed to report on MrHutchii son's charges. Having reviewed the 1 history of the Committee, and censured the Government for the share they had in the dissolution of , the Committee, Sir George said he could not understand what was : meant by this motion, and be thought the Minister ought to have explained why it was necessary. Mr Hutohißon had been very unfairly treated in the matter,. for it would be nude out as though he was unable to prove his charges, like a noxious animal he was to be run to earth, and then all the curs in the country would be set on him, (Liughter), Sir George Grey, in conclusion, moved as an amendment," That before the House dooides as to whether the manuscript report' and proof of Ihe speech by the hon. momberfor Waitotara, made ou the 2nd of July, 1890, be referred to the Reporting Debates Committeo for comparison, a Select Committee shall be appointed to report if it is desirable that members who may he under such obligations to financial institutions doing the Government business as may embarrass their independence, should occupy the Ministerial benches 1 Mr Scobie Mackenzie said Sir I George Grey's amendment simply meant another instalment of delay, seeing that it proposed to set up another political committee. Tie hon, member, acting with the best intentions, was being used as a oatspaw by members who, lacking his purity, bad more ouhning than he had,. Sir George Grey's sympathy was.with tbo man who made the charges, even though it might turn out, as he believed it would that those charges were the very vilest of slanders, ("Oh," and tbeers,) Mr Mackenzie proceeded to taunt Sir George Grey with never having told the colony before that the Bank influenced the Provincial loan consolidation loans 15 or 10 years ago. In refraining from doing so the hon. membenailed in his duty to the Queen, whom he represented, to the colony, and tolnmßelf. Why had not he hon member made it public before ? Was he like Mr Hutchison —afraid to make oharges outside the House which he oould make in it, sheltered behind tbehedge of politics 1 Was he,like Mr Hutchison, utterly destitute of. political courage ? The Speaker considered the last remark unparliamentary. Mr Mackenzie withdrew it, and went on to contend that the amendment was an effort to prevent the Government proceeding in law courts as they had been prevented in the Committee. He; asked whether, if such oharges as these could pass the chair, he could not, for instanoe, make all sons of charges against a member, then apply for a committee, and when the committee was set up, say " I've got no evidence, but if you will allow me to ransaok the whole of the accounts, books, audmemo randa, who knows, I may fiud something!" He asked why Mr Hutchison had not proved his charges or opened the 'case ?

Mr W. P. Beeves said the speech of Mr Mackenzie was" a declamatory treat given as by a rhetorical partizan drank with personal feeling and party passion." ' •

Mr Hutohison said he claimed that no investigation which could take place would show, that he had dono more than alto the proof so as to make it a perfectly correct report of what lie had said. He rosejiowto mni'o a proposal to the Government, namely, that the prosont motion should be withdrawn, he agreeing to refer the proof, etc, to the lieportiug Debates Committee to say whether or not the oapfd teport sub'

stautially'the speech lie'deliverccl in the House. (Cheers). ■ • • ( After a deal of furtbevs disoussion a division was taken, with the result , that tho motion wtiß oarried by 88 to 128. . - • x