TO BE DISCUSSED AGAIN.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18182, 19 September 1924, Page 8

TO BE DISCUSSED AGAIN.

WOOLSTON TANNERIES' PETITION. COUNSEL'S OPINION. (SPECIAL TO ''THE WELLINGTON, September IS. In tho House of Representatives this i-.fternoon reference was made to the "Woolston Tanneries' petition. Mr ilassey said the House could either go on witli tho discussion on answers to questions or resume the interrupted debate on the petition of the Wookton Tanneries Company. Mr Wilford suggested that the discussion should bo taken when the Committee reported on tho second petition. Mr Massey said that in connexion with this petition evidence would bo submitted that was not submitted on the last occasion, and ho thought ihere would l»e a good deal of discussion. There were two sides to tho question, and onlv one side had been put so far. Mr Wilford: That is what we complain of. . . Mr Massey: I am not referring the Joint Committee's report. lam referrincr to the other Committee. It was agreed that the discussion on both petitions should bo taken at the seme time. Mr M. Myers, K.C., who is representing tho petitioners referring to the changed order of reference stated that the company had never alleged "wrongful or unauthorised action." Had it don© so tho Supreme Court would have been open to it. The wording of the reference was such as to make the result a, foregone conclusion against the company. The Government refused to submit to the company the names of the Committee for approval or criticism, but the company was assured that a fair Committee would bo selected. _lt was said that in order to avoid having a Committee who might prejudge the matter in favour of the company, no Canterbury members would be placed on it, and furthermore no members of last year's M to Z Public Petitions Committee would be selected. Nevertheless, when the appointment of the Committee was mo.ved in the House, there appeared in the personnel the names of two members of last year's M to Z Committee who appeared, so far as could be gathered from their questions and observations and general attitude, to be strongly hostile to the petition. One name was subsequently removed, hut the member remained on the Joint Committee.