THE GOVERNMENT AND THE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND.

Clutha Leader, Volume XVII, Issue 835, 18 July 1890, Page 3

THE GOVERNMENT AND THE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND.

In the House of Representatives on Friday — Hon. Mr Mitchelson said the House would recollect that the member for Waitotara had on 2nd July made some grave charges against the Government, charges which, if true, would render \ the Government no longer worthy to occupy the Ministerial benches as their personal honor was concerned. The Government had offered to moot Mr Hutchison in every possible way in order to have a fair inquiry made into those charges, but he regretted to say they had not been able to come to any arrangement as yet. They had offered to have the charges inquired into by a committee, four of whom had been ap proved by Mr Ballance, and four were Government supporters. They were willing that the ninth man should be Mr Withy, but Mr Hutchison insisted ! on Mr Saunders as the odd man. The ' Government also offered, as an alternative, to refer the inquiry to a judge of the Supreme Court, to be chosen by Mr Hutchison, assisted by one member of the House, to be selected by the Government, and another member by Mr Hutchison, but this offer had also been refused. The Government therefore had done all they possibly could in the matter. He then moved that a select committee be appointed to ascertain whether all or any of the accusations against the Government, and especially against certain members thereof, made by Mr Hutchison, member for Waitotara. in a speech in the House on Wednesday, the 2nd inst., are in substance true or false, and to report their opinion thereon. The committee to consist of Messrs Ballance, Bryce, Firehett, Fulton, Hall, Larnach; M' Arthur, Ormond, and Seddon. Mr Kear moved that Mr Saunders,' name be" inserted in the motion instead of that, of Mr Ormond. Hon. Mr Ballance regretted that some agreement was. not arrived at, but he thought Mr Hutchison himself was just as anxious to have these charges ! investigated, by a committee of the House, or in some other way, as the ■ Government were (Mr Hutchison : More ; so). •. He thought the .Govern- , rnent should have accepted Mr Saunders, ' as suggested by Mr Hutchison, and he could not understand \yhy the Government ■would not agree to Mr Saunders , except that perhaps -he had more inde- . pehdence of charactei* 'than some other, hon. gentleman. Hehejdtha r t it would be a : most improper" 'thing.' to have a s' Supreme Co.urt Judge, jsitfcing on , tins s case, iand .he considered Mr Hutchison's objection in' this respect was quite' , proper. *All he Icbuld' say was ' this, • that his side of the House .was exceed- > ingly anxious to have, a .fairly "coh- • stituted tribunal... : „ ; :,. . . r Hon.. Mr Fergus pointed out that

tho whole tlrngNYould. afterwards, come before the House when the committee's report could be fully gone into. Mr Seddon objected to this matter being brought up in the middle of the Financial debate. Mr Hutchison- suggested that the eight members select the ninth. Hon. Mr Hislop said the question before the House was ' of greater importance than the existence of a Ministry ; it might equally effect the Opposition at a future time,/. The, leader of the Opposition and several members of that party had expressed the opinion that the course proposed by the Government was a fair and reasonable one, 'and the objection made; by M.r ; Hutchison was al together untenable. Mr Fishi-egretted that these charges had been made at all, aiid he' reciprocated Mr Hislop's hope that the matter would be discussed in an impartial spirit. Mr Walker -thought the committee proposed was not altogether a fair one, as no one could expect an impartial decision from gentlemen holding such a regard for the Government as the member for Selwyn. , Several members having spoken, a division was taken on Mr Kerr's amendment, which was lost by 37 t& 33. Hon. Mr Mitchelson regretted the time taken during the debate by the Opposition, as it had been assumed that , the committee, chosen by the Government were not impartial men. The Government had no desire to act unfairly in the matter, and he would move that Mr Fulton's name be struck out and Mr Withy's substituted. The motion as amended by Mr Withy's name being substituted was then put and carried on the voices.