HOPES DEFERRED.

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 292, 10 December 1929, Page 6

HOPES DEFERRED.

The decision of the Government not to act on the recommendation of a Petitions Committee that J. J. Meikle should be granted a pension, is interesting not only because it is another stage in New Zealand's case of Jarndyco v. Jarndyce, but for the fresh illustration it provides of the general futility of petitioning . Parliament. The , mass of documents in the Meikle case must-now' l)e almost as vast as those in the suit created by the genius of . Dickens or. those connected with the Tichborne claimant. It is true that Meikle received some compensation years ago, but in view of all, the circumstances, and especially the long fight that Meikle had to sustain to get this measure, of justice, the Government would be acting, fairly .if it made Meikle a small allowance for the rest of-his'days. - The Government, however, is quite independent of the Petitions Committees in these cases, and everyone who follows the doings of the House at all closely is struck by the smallriess .of the result that-flows from '.the committees' labours; Members spend l valuable time in considering, petitions, and now and then make favourable recommendations.- In the Meikle ease the committee went the; unusual length of specifying the amount that in its'opinion should be paid to the petitioner! Sometimes these reports are debated .at length in the House. Rarely, however, are they acted upon by the Government. Some petitioners, like Meikle, put-their . ease forward year after year, receive ■ favourable reports, and that is the end of their hopes. That so much of the Petitions Committees' work goes for nought is a perennial subject of complaint, but the passing of the years appears to bring no improvement.