THE Grey River Argus PUBLISHED DAILY. TUESDAY, MARCH 17, 1874.

Grey River Argus, Volume XIV, Issue 1752, 17 March 1874, Page 2

THE Grey River Argus PUBLISHED DAILY. TUESDAY, M ARCH 17, 1874.

There seems to have been somewhat of a scene in the Provincial Council on Saturday, Mr Seddon having laised something in the nature of a question of privilege, with respect to some comments which had appeared in the West Coast Times upon the proceedings of the Council. To understand the matter thoroughly, it should be observed that Mr Seddon defeated Mr • Barffin the contest for one of the seats, for the Arahura district, and that it is Mr Barff, one of the staff of the West Coast Times, who usually reports the t proceedings of the Conncil for that paper. It can thus be understood that the defeated candidate was not likely to take altogather a coleur de-rose view of his-succesi-ful antagonist's actions. would*' have been impossible for him to have done so, even had he stood to Mr Seddon in the relation that Jonathan stood to

David. For from what we have been able to gather as to the nature of Mr Seddon'n proceedings in the Council, silence with regard to them would have been the fittest way of reporting. When vanity and presumption are allied to ignorance, it is a chanty and not an offence on the part of a reporter to pass by without notice many of tho things said and done, although a " word in season," even from the public press may do good. Mr Seddon drew the attention of the Council on Saturday to something that had appeared in the West Coast Times, which he said was a misrepresentation, and having called the attention of the Speaker to the fact that strangers were present he thus secured a discussion inside closed .doors. What took place during the solemn interval we are of course unable to say, but it seems that the Council forced Mr Seddon to explain himself openly when the public were re-admitted, and to describe the grievance of which he had complained. Mr Seddon, as reported by the Bcgister, did so, and the gravamen of the charge ho had to make was that the West Coast Times had compared some of the members of the Council to "costermongers" — which was not true, the journal having simply said that the conduct af some of the members would have disgraced costermongers, and we have no doubt the writer was correct in his opinion. What took | place in the Council is thus reported : —

Mr Mitchell would request that Mr Seddon be called upon to give an explanation of the grievance, and was followed by several members in support. Mr Seddon said he would avail himself of the privilege of the Standing Orders, and decline explaining why he had requested the doors to be closed to the public. Mr Dungan would say that, in his opinion, and he hoped in the opinion of the hon. members present, the conduct of the hon. member for the Arahura (Mr Seddon) was most unbecoming, and further, he thought very unmanly. If the hon. member had a grievance against the Press, he (Mr Dungan) tt ought he should state it publicly. In his opinion this was not the wa> public business should be carried on. The Press might say what it liked of him (Mr Dungan) but he would leave his conduct to be judged by his constituents. \ Mr Seddon said, after what the member for Paroa (Mr Dungan) had stated, he would accede to the wishes of the Council. He said that repeated attacks of an offensive nature had been made on the conduct of hon. members of that House by the West Coast Times : The proceedings of that Council had been ridiculed, although his (Mr Seddon's) name appeared in the paragraph to which he would allude, yet he did not feel annoyed at that, as he knew the source from which it had emanated. In the latter end of the paragraph the members were compared to costermongets, and other offensive allusions were made. His object in taking the course he had done, was foi the purpose of obtaining the opinion of the Council as to whether or not the opinion was a fair criticism of the proceedings in that Council. He was but young in parliamentary usages himself, but he really considered that the remarks made by that journal v ere quite beyond the bounds of fair criticism. Anything that had been said about him he did not care for, but when other hon. members were assailed he felt bound to stand up for the dignity of that House. He would move that the paragraph be read. The Clerk of the Council read the paragraph handed in by Mr Seddon. Mr Robin on said the remarks made in the paragraph contained a great deal of truth. Mr Lahman did not think the remarks made were so very bad as the hon. member for the Arahura wished to make them appear, and they did not compare : that House to custermongers, in fact, it was simply implied that the conduct of some members of the Council would not be tolerated amongst costermongers, and he, to some extent, thought that; the. remarks were not misapplied. They did not, in his opinion, aftect the dignity of the House. His Honor said he thought no further notice should be taken of the matter If hon. members were to take umbrage at all that was said in the local papers they would never be out of hot water. The question of privilege had been found a difficult one even in the House of Assembly, and he considered it would be better not to take any notice of the criticisms in the newspapers. No doubt there had been some irregularities that had laid them open to censure, but he had always considered in these cases that the easiest course was to pass them over without notice. Mr M'Gaffin said he was of opinion it would be advisable that some of the hon. members should inwardly digest the remarks that had been made in the public Press relating to their conduct, and not use such unseemly language for the future. The matter then dropped.