MEMBERS’ TRAVELLING EXPENSES.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIX, Issue 11538, 26 March 1898, Page 4

MEMBERS’ TRAVELLING EXPENSES.

TVe are not surprised to find that very few of our Conservative contemporaries have joined in the attack that was made the other day upon certain public men in connection with the amounts they have drawn from the public purse for travelling allowances as members of the House of Representatives. The majority of the Opposition organs probably recognise that the attack, besides _ being in the worst possible taste, is just as applicable to Conservative as to Liberal members. As a matter of fact, the gentlemen who were selected for special criticism, with one exception, simply claimed for their actual expenses, to which they were fairly entitled. The exception was a member of the House who chose to travel by an expensive route instead of a cheap one, and who should, of course, have paid for his luxuries out of his own pocket. As for the rest, they did exactly what members are expected to do, and nothing but the poorest party spirit could have suggested that they should be singled out for public obloquy. If the author of this miserable proceeding had been really anxious to effect some reduction in the amounts paid for travelling allowances he would not have confined his comments to Liberal members of the House. He would have shown that Captain Russell, _ the wealthy leader of the Opposition, actually received more during the life of last Parliament for expenses than Mr Gr. W. Russell whom, he selected for special disapproval—and that during the last session of the previous Parliament the Hon W. Bolleston claimed half as much again aa was sufficient to satisfy his predecessor in the Riccarton seat. He might have mentioned, too, as a matter of public interest, if not for the credit of the members immediately concerned, that the only gentlemen living beyond Wellington who sat through the Parliament of 1893-96 without drawing a penny for expenses were three Liberals, Mr Carncross, Mr W.H. Montgomery and Mr Alfred Saunders. Again, he should have explained that Mr W. W. Collins, Mr Gr. J. Smith and Mr John Joyce, who were also pointed to as specially costly representatives, di'ew less than MrJames Allen, the Hon E. Mitchelson or Mr C. E. Button. We have no wish to imply that any of these gentlemen claimed more than he was fairly entitled to ; indeed, we refuse to believe that our politicians have vet fallen so low that they would deliberately pilfer from the public purse ; but we strongly protest against the half-truths that have been told in this matter by a small section of the Conservative Press for the purpose of disparaging the supporters of the present Government.