BELLAMY'S— 'OSGOOD'S CASE.'

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume III, Issue 254, 26 October 1868, Page 2

BELLAMY'S— 'OSGOOD'S CASE.'

'Osgood's case' has appeared so often in our Parliamentary digest, that we have waded through Hansard in order to try and give our readers an idea of this affair, upon which so much legislative time and ability have been consumed. Osgood it seems was appointed caterer for honorable members of both Houses at Bellamy's, but his management of that important branch of* legislation and administration being unsatisfactory to all whom it concerned, a Commission was appointed, upon whose report 'Osgood abdicated and Donecker reigned in his stead;' but Osgood claimed compensation on account of certain wine3 of a better class than lhat which could be procured in Wellington ordered by him, in expectation that he would be again appoiuted.

The Hou. Dr Buchanau said he believed that 'to the Speakers of the two Houses it belonged to give the license to the persons appoiuted, but a difference of opiuion existed between the Premier aud Sir David Monro on the matter. Each one seemed to make all the appointments save this one, which they appeared to think infra dig., and which each was desirous of handing over to the other.'

The Hon. Col. Russell objected to the proposition to deduct a certain amount from the honorarium of members. If blame attached lo any one, it must be shared between Miuisters and Speakers of both Houses, and the Clerk of the Assembly, none of whom would have to contribute to the paymeut; but not only these would fail to contribute to the payment. The matter went even further, and not only did the Speakers, Ministers, and Clerk fail to contribute, but there were several others who derived advantages from Bellamy's upon whom the tax would not fall; while it would fall upon mauy who derived no advautage from Bellamy's. Among those who derived an advantage, and who would not pay, were those members who had goDe away without paying having no doubt drawn the full amount of their honorarium; those members wha had not appeared at the Assembly at all, and the Wellington members, who received no honorarium. The list might be prolonged considerably, until it would be found that the tax would fall on only half the members, amongst whom would.be found himself, who had never put his foot insid-e Bellamy's.

One honorable member said that Osgood should have made his claim in the ordinary courts of justice, whereon up jumps the Hon. Mr Domett aud says that the costs iu such a case would be £ 1 00, and 'the result would be that the public would have to pay £300 instead of £200.

The Honorable Mr Stokes thought that 'Mr Osgood might have a " vested interest" to the extent of £200 a year, unless some steps were taken to prevent a repetition of what had already occurred.'

The public will thus see how the time of their paid legislators is frittered away, and will heartily agree with the Hon. Col. Kenny who said ifc would be better to have the question settled at once. It was a most unseemly subject to introduce into the legislature. The Hon. Dr Buchanan's hit about the greedy love of patronage displayed on every occasion by both Sir David Monro aud Mr Stafford will be fully understood and duly appi-eciated by the public of Nelson.

The £200 has been deducted from lhe pay of the members of both Houses.