ANOTHER GOVERNMENT REVERSE.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 13610, 20 December 1909, Page 7

ANOTHER GOVERNMENT REVERSE.

THE CROWN SUITS ACT

ADVERSE AMENDMENT CARRIED

(special to "the press.") WELLINGTON, December 19The Government sustained another reverse in the House shortly before midnight on Saturday, when the question of tho grievance of the Farmers' Distributing Company against. the State Ccal Mine Department was revived in connection with the Estimates for this Department. It will b <» | remembered that the company named has frequently complained of damage to its premises and business in "Wellington through the dust from the State coal depot adjoining. Last night, when the vote came up, Mr Field moved a reduction of £1 » s an indication that the Crown Suits Act should bo waived, so as to allow the. Farmers' Distributing Company to seek redress through the Law Courts for its iirievanco. The Chairman of Committees (Mr Wilford) ruled that whilst the amendment was in order, it could not be discussed. Mr Massey. whilst not discussing the amendment, proceeded to read a copy of a letter wjiich hp said was practically a public document. The letter was dated October 10th, 1908, and was addressed by certain members of Parliament to the then Minister for Mines and Justice (the Hon. J. McGou-an). It asked that the Farmers' Distributing Company should be granted redress either by recourse to arbitration or by the vaivinjj of the Crown Suits Act. The present Minister for Mines (the Hon. R. McKensie), who was in charge of tho Estimates, remained silent until Mr Massey had reed the letter. The latter had got as far as "the letter is signed by,' , when Mr McKcnzie rose to a, point of order, and objected to the introduction of the letter. The Chairman said that he had already ruled that there could be no discussion on the amendment. Mr Maesey: "Well, I have read the letter and (pointing to the Minister for Mines) one of the signatures is that of the hon. member for Motueka, Mr K. McKenzie, who is now Minister for Mines." (Laughter.) The amendment was carried by 30 votes to 28. Tho division list was as follows: — For the amendment (30): Messrs James Allen, Anderson, Buchanan, Buick, Clark, Craigie, Dive, J. Duncan, Forbes, Fisher, Fraser, Guthrie, Hanan, Hardy, Herries, Hine, Hogg, Lang, Luke, Malcolm, Mender, Massey, Nosworthy, Okey, Pearce, Phillipps, Rhodes, Scott, G. M. Thomson, Wright. Against the amendment (28): Messrs Arnold, Buddo, Buxton, Carroll, Colvin, Ell, Fowlds, Glover. Graham, Hall, Hogan, Laurenson, Lawry, Macdonald, R. McKenzie, T. Mackenzie, Ngata., Parata, Poole, Reed, Ross, Seddon, Smith, Stallworthy, Te Rangihirca, Witty, Sir William Steward, and 1 Sir Joseph W«rd. Tho Prime Minister, who had already been baulked of his desire to get all the Estimates through before midnignt, received the result of tho division with evidences of tho greatest chagrin". This is the fourth time that the Government have been defeated , on adverse amendments during the past month, and on three of these occasions the amendments have been moved by Government supporters—twice by Mr Sidey in regard to local bodies' sinking funds, and now by Mr Field in. respect to the Crown Suits Act. On the other occasion the amendment was moved by Mr Messeyin regard 1 to the salary of the Hon. W T . P. Reeves, as financial adviser in London, tho item being struck out.