THE HINE CHARGES.

North Otago Times, 1 December 1910, Page 4

THE HINE CHARGES.

' i'cr I'rces Association. \ • Wellington,. Nov.- 29. . Mr Mfiseey . said fctiat at tha time.i Mr..'Hma' formulated- his charges many peoplj conyidsred tha menwor for Stratford ;ill-advised,\ but tea people must now see taat Mr H«w. was li'lly justilid.'He referred to ih® recommendation of the oommittej 'in favor, of ie=<i3lation . pievent-. in» memters from' taking payment for services rendered- in connection I with Parliamentary duties. Vhat showed that there M been wiongdolug, The legislation was more necessary in the Dominion tbim in Britain. In the latter country inanjCpra' 'duty was purely legislative but In the Dominion many intaresta occupied the attention of mente'3 ofParliament, The ."findings of , the committee Were to.to mind not otitis factory, The most extraordinary one was that in reference to the letter of Mr Symes to Mr M'Ulug•gaig«.' Th& cpmanittee found tli«'L the charge of threatening was* notesial)-' lished. Mr Massey read the tetter, and said that 97 people out of 100 [would conclude therefrom that Mr Symes desired the directors of. the Paper to understand that unljss they supported him at the' election he would use his influence in preventing the paper from receiving Government advertisements. The letter constituted a threat, and Mr Symes would probably have been punished for it at the time had it not been for the generosity of Mb opponents. Mr Massey wait on to refer to; the Stratford election af 1905, and the steps taken to consider the advisableness' of upsetting the poll. A legal opinion was taken from Mr H. D. Bell, who faM that the letter was a threat inasmuch as it tended to affect the votes of the electors at the time mentioned. Mr Symes went on the platform and challenged his opponents to produce the correspondence, which was done. The statement that the letter was confidential was as near an untruth as it was for a statement to be. The letter was not marked private or confidential. The report of the committee on this particular, charge was too silly for words.

Turning to the charge against the (•avernment in re Flaxbourne, Mr Massey said there was a strong l conflict oi evidence between Mr Griffin land Mr Wilson with regard to the length of time occupied by the latter durin? his visit to Fl&sbourne. It was qiuite impossible for Mr Wilson to do the work' in the time at his disposal. He animadverted' on the work of the Land Purchase Board, ind instanced the acquisition of the Nainai block, which had '-not been usefl, for the purpose for which it was acqjuired, Referring to the Teaman block Mr Massey traced the history of the land and the disputes for. its ownership between the Tainui and Ngatatihinga tribes, which finally resulted in the latter Icing adjudged the owner. He reviewed the evidence relating to Mr Kaibau's share in the sale of 13,000 acres to the Crown. The whole of the transactions made one of the most dishonest incidents in the public life of the colony. Sir J. G. Ward said the origin of the Hine charges was an allegation of corruption jm:l tammanyism on the Part of 'the government. He had come to the conclusion that Mr Hine had refused to divulge the names because none of the charges implicated (he present Government. Reflections had teen made against the Seddon administration. Referring to the Flaxbourne case, Sir J. G. Ward said it had teen alleged that" Mr Macdonald had tak«n a commission in connection therewith. Those making tli3 allegations did not stop there; they proceeded to attack a man who was in his grave. Not one o$ the charges was against the present Government, and nothing . was proved against it, If anything wrong had been found in connection with the sale of various estates, upon whom would the aspersion fall ? Upon the administration concerned.. That was the constitutional position.

Mr .Massey: That's a'new, doctrine.

Sir J. G. Ward J It is not a new doctrine. Continuing, the Prime Minister referred to the fact that although tha order of reference allowed Mr Hine to bring any charges against the present Government all those preferred concerned the Seddon Adrr jristtati'Ob. He road a telegram from Mr R.v-P. Grenville, district surveyor, contradicting Mr Griffin's evidence in regard to Mr ffil-. son's survey of the Flaxbourne property, also a letter from Mr R. M'Oallum, of Blenheim, confirming Mr Wilson's statements as .to the letter's visit to Flaxbourne. Replying to an interjection i 'by Mr Massey, who said Sir J. G. Ward was sheltering. himself behind a' dead man, Sir J, G, Ward referred to the charges against Mr.Seddon'sGovernment as cowardly and contemptible. Turning to Mr Symes' letter he said this was >a confidential one. The writer stated that Mr M'OlUggaige was at liberty to use it privately, the Mea'tfeingM'that-iti couldjM? shown to the directors and the editor of the Stratford Post. There was; no question- that- tba letter' was private and confidential.

Referring, tcf the findings of the committee, Sit J. G. Ward declared that the only one which Mr" Massey said was of value bad teen moved by himself (Sir 1 J, G, 'Ward), I Throughout the whole of the proceedings no officers d! Government 1 departments fed'citron (evidence without being'examined (by him as to whether they knew of ' 'any impropriety on the part of the Government, ahd in every instance these men, who were on oath had replied in the negative. The whole of the estates admired compulsortly tad .been purchased at £502,000 less than had 'been demanded by the owners. Sir J. G. Ward oaioted from the evidence to. show that Mr Mev.rs bf,d said that the Flxtarne charge was laid against the Government of the day, The Prime Minister went on to, deal with the 'purchase of the.'Te Akau block, and said the evidence showed that the Government wa3not guilty of 'any impropriety in connection therewith, nor could it be held

responsible for the action of a privflt„ member. In regard to the J'laxbourno Estate, Mr Seddon had succeeded in gutting' the esbato fc. £IBI,OOO, a s against £336,000 .claimed by the owners He would ask the House to pa&3 a resolution- dealing with Mr Kaihau's acceptanoe of payment for presenting petitions l to the House, the hoiioi and dignity of which mast 'L« maintained The charges of tammaiiyism had not Ll;'n proved, ltor did corruption of 'the 4itd exist in the Dominion that- was tojleioind in other countries .. Wellington, Nov. 30. In the House, after the ■ telegraph office ch std, Mr Allen'moved as an [ amendment that the report of. the i Committee te agreed to except in so far;as ut, referred to the Te'Akau and l riaxbourne Estates and the letter , from Symss to M'Ol Hd hell I that the letter constituted athrear, and. contended that: there -was un.questionaoie - evidence that Kaihau had taken £2OOO for conducting a sale, to the Crown, £SOO of which went to pay costs of eounsel, In his opinion the Te AlJau ,sale was not a clean transaction. 'ln'the /. Flaxbourne case there was no evidence to show /that Mr Maedcwald got a Bhare of the £165 paid to Wilson, but the latter's .evidence was 'far froni : satisfactory. '.' • Mr Millar said Bome : Opposition members had got into the-House by means of a purloined, letter, which was as ugly an instanoe as he could remember in public life. It was admitted by Mr Hine's Counsel thiat there was no charge against tbe present Government, and the evidence showed that its administration was untainted by Tammanyism. He replied to. Mr Allen's reriarks re Kalhau. The latter had . worked for his tribe in various Courts, and it was for that he received payment." Mr Hine could not get a complete verdict from either tbe House oi- the country.

Mr T. E. Taylor deprecated the idea that a 'dead man's name should not be mentioned. He accused Mr Massey of slandering the House by saying that members were becoming lax in their ideas of parliamentary duty. As to Symes, he had no doubt he was prepared to do ai corrupt action, hut could not get. the necessary partner. should be Called on to resi^fn. ; Mr Taylor asked if some member of the Executive bad not bcuefited by- the Te Akau transaction. The net result of, the charges wa3 to show that no legislative assembly was| cleaner than ours. Mr Massey critici'sod 'Mr Millar's, speech, and challenged the accuracy of the figureß in the values of estates taken by the Government. At 4.7 the 'debate was adjourned till 2.30.

The debate on the report of the Hinj Committee was resumed,

Sir Joseph Ward, replying to the speech of Mr Massey at the previous sitting went ii to details relating to his resignation from the Ministry and House. He bad, in to light of after events, narvelled at his moderation in 'defending himself from the cowardly, secret and malicious attacks made upon him in connection with his private business afiairs. Referring to the 'liquidation of the Ward Association and the charges made tgainst him iu connection therewith, lie never had an opportunity of being heard-in his own defence. Out of 6000" farmers doing business with his firm not one had lost a shilling on his current account, which was a record ia the history of liquidation. The whole of the creditors of the Ward Association had been paid 20s in the £. Referring to the Bankj of New Zealand and its difficulties,-' Sir Joseph Ward said -lie" tad taken pari' with'Mr Soddon in attempting ; to put the bank on a soiinid, basis at a time when it could not -have paid a shilling on its notes then, currentv He was the only man doing business with blie -bank who -did not get ttfo years, to readjust his position. There, was not ii single: man "with whom lie' hail -business relations who had withdrawn his business from him. The pamphletcirculated" against him. was distributed, freely from door to., door.. He asked the members for; Bruce arid what they would thmk[.'of ihjim (the (Premier) if iJie got any paper relating to these members'- dead mothers and took the opportunity of' drawing people's attention to it while travelling in trains He would deserve! to be called a blackguard and skunk. Would Mr Allen deny he had acted as -described in connection wiith the pamphlet? Similar treatment to what he had received -had besn meted out to Mr Eallance and Mr Seddon. He had never known of a .similar persecution in connection with British public men. He contradicted the suggestion that, he was hankering after the High Commissionerehip or any other, position outside New Zealand. He had sought legal advice in regard to the pamphlet, and discovered that a man in his position •had ncy redress. As Sir Joseph sat down the Government supporters rose anil cheered, many shouting "Hip, hip, hurrah !"

Mr Massey said if Sir Joseph Ward could prove thati he : (Mr Massey) baa anything to do with the production of the pamphlet he was prepared to tender his resignation to the Speaker and retire from, politics, if Sir Joseph Ward 'believed that any member of the Opposition was responsible for the.pamphlet then he ought to;state the namelof the memher. '

Mr Allen said it was true, he had rectived a copy of the pamphlet and showed it to one ol Sir Joseph Ward's supporters in the train. He had not read it through, and did not] know that it contained references to 'Sir Joseph Ward's mother and wife.

Mr Hcrdman said he had; asked Mr M'assey if any member,of the Opposition had anything to do with ' the issue of the scurrilous pamphlet-, which was cowardly awd contemptible, and the Leader of the Opposition had assured him that.lt' was; not so as no member, of the Opposition" would indulge in such a m6de of attack. Mr Herhman contended th'at the evidence showed that Tatnmanyism did exist.

Mr Allen's 'amendment that the report be adopted with the exception of the portions referring to tire Te Akau Blotte, I'laxbournft Estate aid the letter from Mr Symes to jMr M-'Cluggage, was then put and rejected by 46 to 20. ;

.The House resumed at 7.30. V The debate on.the Hine Committee report.was resumed. , , :V" Mr Herries gave an unqualified "denial to the statement that he had . circulated the pamphlet on Sir Joseph Ward's life. He toped ' he. stoodhigh-enbugh in the estimat-io® of the House to be credited with -being ahove that Mof thing, He ■did not believe in .flrigfgihg tip the faults of Ws fellow members, tat; he : considered it necessary to make someremarks re the. Te Akau Block purchase. He-gave a detailed history of the - case from' the beginning., ;He had always looked upon the Te Ak-an : transaction as a peculiar one, an-i it was not creditable to the Government.- ■■ :■• . .Mr Kaihau 6aid, concerning. Mr , Hine's charges, he had heard that persons had. been, paid to say he ,ha:d received money, for work dona-by. him as 'a member. He had nothing to • do- with- Horomona WatariniM's petition; until it. was : thrown - out.by : '.the House}: ,'Thpre.-was something- I be? hind these charges, which did, .not appear . pri the, surface..- , Kaihn H-autare paid, him £lO for;'the . work done outsider Parliament only. vile/. maintained: that, the Committee hid ■ ■teen unable to .find-.h-im gJ'ilty- on l any; of the charges brought h'm. ( If'othei'-members xEttesHouse could.;;/

the Houbs, why Bbould tie not at 1 tend to his in a similar- manner ? He did not know liow) what 'he was 1 guilty of. Thti Te Akau matter was I I simply between Maoris and Maoris, i He .lfnew , tbe \chai'g2B, were' not really ! levelled against him. The House ought to uphold the name of the Premier of this oi any other coi.ntry. ; Mr Rangl\'fe : ;Hiro:said; tho. charge affected the Maori raw, and it was levelled against one of their four -representatives, The Maori could not be expected'rto ■: understand .pakehfl; ways, r The / Maori system of' ethics : and th« European l system totally Mr 'Kat!iau hart broken no law in the' statute- ;book, and there'': was-no,:law .to condemn him., Mr Massey: ha'd; received a preseuta-; tion from hlB; constituents of: a thousand' pounds: To .. tbe v.'-Maori-miivd this was quite 1 the same tbtog ai happened an the Kaihau 6ase. Mr Hin(( said,-.with; reference: to to. Mr, Taylor's (Qhristchurch) remarks that, he . (Mr .Hih£) had mixed more with cattle than men, it all men were liko Mr Taylor .he woulu sooner mix with cattle. No one in the House cr the whole country had anything to' do with, the charges he •had laid.f With , reference to: the deed man ( the thought .of Mr Seddon had never, entered v his mind. His charges were levelled. at the ■ ad-, ministration, and he believed they were true.. -:: .

Mr Myers said that Mr Hfoeh-ad signally failed to prove Ibis cbarg3s ag'aiiust .the Government There'was nothing .in tho evidence to show that the 'Government was implicated in the' cases, and thel \ committee could have come to no other concluaicn than it 'did.

The was continued toy Messrs • ..M'lj.aren,...... Malcolm, Fisher and • Laurenson, ' ':"

,Sir Joseph.: Ward moved to the effect that Mr ifaihau had been guilty of impropriety in accepting payment fbr services connected with Parliament. •' ' -

The motion_was .carried, Mr Kaihau, was then summoned before the House to receive a reprimand. The Hor.se rose.