Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE OPPOSITION VIEW.

MINISTERS' WANT OF FRANKNESS. •

': (Receive June 21. 1 a.m.) ! LONDON, June 2Q. Mr Bonar Law opposed Sir W. R, Adkins's amendment, but offeree! to accept the following: . ''This Hcrase, having heard Sir Itufus Isaacs's and Mr Lloyd Georges statements, acquits them—(here follows the last part of Sir W. IL AdMns's amendment)—but regrets their transactions in American Marconis and want of frankness m thear communications to the House. He disclaimed vir.dictiveness, hut the Ministers' exnl an actions were, inadequate. The* Opposition complained that the two Ministers had done things which in their position they ought not to have done, and that they were lacking in moral courage "in withholding the facts from the House. They ought not to have touched American Marconis. The great public sorrow arising from the Titanic disaster was utilised to fill the pockets of the men who were floating the company. AVhat would men who bought pharos at a bout £4 and found them now worth less than Mr\Lloyd George paid for them think when they find that perhaps Mr Lloyd George mode a profit out of their folly in dealing with the shares? —(Opposition cheers, and cries .of dissent.) Had Mr Lloyd George reflected upon the possibilities at the time, the present debate wotild not; have arisen. _ Sir Edward Grey said that Mr Bonar Law put a harsh' construction upon the transaction. The phrase "want of frankness" was capable or being construed with impxiting a dishonorable motive. If so construpd it woxild entail the resignation of the two Ministers, find the closing of their political careers. The House ought to pass no motion which could be regarded as a vote of censure. The two Ministers tph<l'o no xise of official information, and their expressions of recrret wore rimple and sufficient to cover tho who]' n case, and ought to be 'accepter! frankly and openly ■without qualification. — (Ministerial x'beors.) ,„

[BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH —COPYRIGHT.]

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MEX19130621.2.22.1.4

Bibliographic details

Marlborough Express, Volume XLVII, Issue 145, 21 June 1913, Page 5

Word Count
319

THE OPPOSITION VIEW. Marlborough Express, Volume XLVII, Issue 145, 21 June 1913, Page 5

THE OPPOSITION VIEW. Marlborough Express, Volume XLVII, Issue 145, 21 June 1913, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert