The Northern Advocate TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1913. RECKLESS SPEECH.

Northern Advocate, 7 October 1913, Page 4

The Northern Advocate TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1913. RECKLESS SPEECH.

In the course of a speech the other day at Palmerston North a certain amount of capital was made out of the fact that a particular firm of lawyers, of which the principal subsequently became a member of the Ward Government, had received prior to this a very considerable sum from the State as fees for professional services to the Crown. The speaker'in this case, Mr Harris, who represents Waitemata, having quoted his figures committed himself to certain observations about "graft"

and "corruption," the insinuation being apparently that a previous Ministry had merely because of political considerations "rewarded" the aforesaid lawyers with briefs and fees. Of course this kind of thing may carry a certain appeal to particular sections of the community but it seems to us a rather unworthy sort of business. Mr Harris has, naturally enough, been roundly taken to task for his recklessness and, few people, we take it, would be prepared to dissent from the argument that he richly deserves the censure levelled against him. To suggest that because a professionar man is a supporter of a Ministry he should therefore be debarred from employment by the Crown —that payments to him for services, which may perhaps have been of the highest value to the State must be viewed as evidence of something unclean—is an offence to commonsense. If Mr Harris or anyone else who wishes to browse on a diet of scandal could show in a case like this either that [the fees paid represented extortion or that no services were rendered for the money paid then they would have on hand something worth talking about. But to associate "graft" and "corruption" with mere political fellowship is' futile and mischievous. [Indeed the country has grown rather tired of party recrimination on these [lines and feels that the tone of public life would be very much improved if there was less of it. There are some men from whom we never hear anything of the sort —but there are others from whom we never hear anything else, and, sad to relate no party can be charged with having any particular monopoly of these individuals. But from whatever side it comes reckless, extravagant speech is an evil thing and particularly is it so when the administration of a public trust is concerned. Surely men can differ on questions of principle and expediency and defend their respective positions without feeling obliged to show, by fair means or foul, that the other fellow is a rascal!