THE "LIBERAL"

Press, Volume L, Issue 14988, 8 June 1914, Page 8

THE "LIBERAL"

CHARACTERISTIC MIS? REPRESENTATIONS.

EXPOSED BY PRIME MINISTER

In the course of a leading article published on Saturday morning the local Opposition paper made some obvious misrepresentations of statements made by the Prime Minister in the couree .of his speech in Victoria square on Friday evening. To those the Prime Minister replied on Saturday morning in the course of an interview with a representative of ''The Press. ,, The first point to which attention was called was the following comment by the Liberal journal:— " . . Last night when he made quite a number of glaring misstatements. Under normal conditions he hardly would have said that he had supported the Advances to Settlers Act and the Old Ago Pensions . Act, the former 'in every clause.' " "I never snid anything of the sort," declared Mr Massey ou Saturday when this comment was brought under his notice. "What I was talking about," he continued, ''and what I said I had supported in even' clause was the Advances to Workers' Act. J never mentioned the two Acts specified, but was talking about the Advances to Workers, and I illustrated my pouit by reading the amendment which I had moved a year before the proposal was first brought down in the Governor's speech and submitted to Parliament." THE DISSOLUTION THREAT. Tho next point submitted to the Primo. Minister was the following comment:— "Of course Mr Massey *s deliberate repetition of tho astounding statement that the opposition to the repeal of the second ballot, without I placing some other system of election ' in its* place, was broken down by a threat of a dissolution was neither a petty slip nor an amazing blunder. .It was simply a distortion of tho facts for which thero can bo no excuse in the behaviour of the audience." "To prove that I did threaten the Opposition with a dissolution in terms which they could not fail to understand and which they did not fail to understand all that I need do is to mention the history of the time," said Mr Massey. "In tho House itself I declared that there is a way of cutting tho Gordian knot (of the Second Ballot stonewall) and when the time comes the Gordian knot will be cut cleanly. I; know exactly of what I am speak"ln. all the papers of the time mention was'made of the proposed solution. Tho whole country understood" what was meant by the cutting of the Gordian knot and every paper knew at the timo what was meant-as well. Further,- in tho 'Auckland Herald , of November 24th last and also : n some of tho southern papers of the samo date reference was made to the solution proposed. And to show best of all that 1 Sis Joseph Ward knew what was meant by the cutting of the Gordian knot I need only quote wliat Sir Joseph Ward himself said. This is what he said: — ~ . . ;

(With regard to the Prinyj Minister's etate'raent. that under certain » "circumstances he Vill cut tho Gordiah knot,' I -want to say that he has .no power to do it. That power is beyond him, and if that were done it would he F.uch a departure from constitutional prnctico that I do not think, any man in a responsible position would dare to do it. But if the Gordian knot is cut, we are ready for it, and we aro .not going to trade upon tho troubles of the community ,in the hope that wo are going to ce't any political advantage. Wo are above and beyond it.' " FINANCIAL INACCURACY. The next point to which, the I'rime Minister replied had reference to the following paragraph:— For -weeks pa«t he has been tolling, the electors throughout tho length and breadth of tho Dominion that when ho came into. office r.e found an accumulation of commitments to local bodies amounting to £775,000 and only £17.000 in tho < Treasury to meet them with. Even if the facts had been as he iterated •and reiterated them they would have cast no reflection upon his predecessor in office. The commitments were "simply loans which ■ had been promised and which may not have been required for months. . The amount lying in the Treasury against tnem could have been supplemented by loan money at any time. The story, such" as it was, rested on ■ tho fact that Sir Joseph "Ward had postponed raising a loan while the fate of his- Government was uncertain. ■ But' Mr'Mossey in order to impress people who did not understand the position overstated the commitments by £63,000 arid understated tho money available by £80,000. The facts were distorted to tho extent of £143,000, and yet Mr Massey quoted the correct figures last right without making a word of apology to iv's opponents. \ ■

The writer of the article evidently failed to notice tiiat the Prime Alinister on Friday evening was quoting from different figures to those used before. Hβ quoted on Friday from the Budget of lasf, year showing the position of the* Advances Department as at Juue 30th, 1912, and at June 30th, 1913. The official document that to had quoted from in previous speeches was the statement from Mr O. F, C. Campbell,., of'the Treasury Department, showing the state of the funds of tho Guaranteed Advances Office as at August 31st, 1912, or two months later. In this document Mr Campbell certified that the amount of tunds available for advances to local authorities was only £l/,110, as against commitments amounting to £770,000, "The figures used last_*vening," declared Mr Massey finally, "were for June 30th, 1912, and what I had used before were for August 30th of the same year. The difference, it will be seen, is one of two months, and it is shown that at the latter date' the total fund of £96,783, which existed in June, had dwindled to £17.000 odd If our opponents," he added, '.'would only be accurate in flio little points, it would greatly simplify matters "