MR. HUGHES'S GIFT

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 96, 23 April 1921, Page 5

MR. HUGHES'S GIFT

HAS HE FORFEITED HIS

SEAT?

MATTER BEFORE PARLIAMENT

PRIME MINISTER'S CHALLENGE.

<0MTI» PRBBS ASSOCIATION.—COPTRIBHT.)

(AtSTRALUN • NEW ZMUNB CABLI ASIOGIATKN.) MELBOURNE, 22nd April.

In the House of Representatives, Mr. Brennan moved the adjournment to discuss the position of the Prime Minister in relation to the acceptance of the gift of £25,000. Mr. Brennan contended that Mr. Hughes had forfeited his seat aocorddng tQ the section of, the Electoral Act which prohibited the acceptiwpe of a fee or honorarium by a mem her of Parliament.

Mr. Hughes, in reply, denied this, and challenged Mr, Brennan to take the case to the place wjiere it could be fijia^y determined.

[Tlie gift was made to Mr. Hughes last year. Oil 7th Decembers, nipssage from Melbourne to. Sydney SflP stated :-^lt has been ascertained that several members of the Vj^oruw Labour party, acting in conjnnctjpti with certain members of the Federa.l Parliamentary liabo.ur Party, have obtained legal 3jJvice on the question of whether the acceptance, by Mr. Ifughes, Prime Minister, of the gift, of 4!25 t 00t) from tlje peppje of Australia, his affected his eligibility to ait in Parliament. A legal authority consulted, it is understood, has given an opinion which may lead to a certain course of action being taken, The clause of the Constitution which it is thought may apply to Mr. Huehes's case is aubc]ause 3 of clause 45—" Vacancy: happening to disqualify," part 4 of the Constitution Act, 1900, and is as follows :—" If a senator or member of the House pf Representatives take or agrees to take, any fee or honorarium for services Tendered to Hjp Cpmmo&weglt]i pr for services rendered in Parliament to a,ny person or State, his seat will thereupon become Vacant." The Hou.se. of Representatives has to «secida apy question raised in a matter of this kind. Inquiries made jn Federal circles elicjte4 *he reply that no definite opinion cou]d be formed as to whether Mr. Huijhe? bad infringed tlie Cfinstitutipn vn,ttf the exact terms of the gift were.'ascertained. It was pointed out that the wprds pp. the cheque were "On account of services rendered during the war and at the Peace Conference." This, it was held, was vague, and had no specific reference to the State. At the same time the outcome will be awaited with interest']