CLERGYMAN’S OUTBURST

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 19 November 1927, Page 5

CLERGYMAN’S OUTBURST

ALLEGED BREACH OF PRIVILEGE

WIIAT WILL PARLIAMENT DO?

REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE

(BY TELEGRAPH—SPECIAL TO “THE STAR.”) WELLINGTON, Nov. 18.

There was an evident tendency to forget the matter as soon as possible, when the select committee appointed to consider air alleged breach of privilege by the Rev. E. D. Patchett, reported the result of its deliberations to the House of Representatives this afternoon. The lion. E. P. Lee read the rejyort, which showed that the committee had called before them the publisher of the “Evening Post,” in which the condemnatory paragraph appeared, and had .also heard the editor, who had explained that the report was supplied by the Rev. F. B. Lafvrence, who was the official reporter of the Methodist Conference and who was not an accredited reporter of the newspaper. The statement was published in good faith, and there was no intention to offend against tin- privileges of Parliament. The Rev. E. D. Patchett had appeared before the committee and had claimed that the report was of so bald a nature that it did not adequately convey his meaning, as it did not give the context. He spoke from notes which were at the disposal of the committee, which considered that they did not differ materially from the published statement. The reverend gentleman had since written to the committee requesting that he be completely exonerated from {censure, and that all imputations made against him in the House as a minister of religion be withdrawn, or as an alternative, that he be permitted to make his defence before the. bar of the House. The last statement was greeted with laughter from members. Mr Lee added that the committee had left it t: the House to decide whether a breach of privilege had been committed, and he merely moved that the report be received. Mr .IT. E. Holland, Leader of the Opposition, suggested that a good deal of time had been unnecessarily wasted over the matter. Undoubtedly the references came within scope of privilege, but the same thing was being said every day by people about members of Par. liamont. It would, however, be unwise to curb the utterances of even such irresponsible persons as the Rev. Mr Patchett. The House should go no further (Hear, hear). Mr 11. Atmore said that the previous speaker had voiced the opinions of those who believed that the prestige of Parliament should be maintained. Ihe reverend gentleman’s utterances were unfair and irresponsible. This would be particularly realised by those who knew of the .services rendered by the .chairman of the committee which heard the evidence on petitions relating to the Religious Exercises in Schools Bill “The very extravagance of the reverend gentleman’s language shows that lie had lost his head,” commented Mr T. M. Wilford. “'Having lost his head, he became a silly man. instead of a sensible man.” The committee’s report was adopted and action was postponed until next sitting day.