ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

North Otago Times, Volume CV, Issue 13932, 14 July 1917, Page 3

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

J CONTINUATION OF DEBATE. SPEECH BY HON. G. IV, RUSSELL BITTER ATTACK ON SIR JOHN PINDLAY.

(Per Press Association,)

WELLINGTON, July 13. In the House this evening, the debate on the Address-in-Reply was continued by the Hon. G. W. Russoll. He traced tlio evolution and history of, the Imperial Conferences, and said that in view of the fact that the white population of the Overseas Dominions would soon exceed that of Great Britain, it was not difficult to foresee the time when there must be Home Rule all round. This opened up the possibility of one or two things. Either the High Commissioner must represent us in the Imperial Cabinet, or there must be a Resident Minister representing New Zealand in

London. Personally, lie favoured the latter idea, because it was not befitting that a paid officer should perform such fateful duties. This representation

meant responsibility. He did not believe we should ever permit an outside body to impose taxation on us, but we must recognise that we must do our share towards the upkeep of the military and naval defence of the Empire. For the development of our resources, State socialism must- be utilised to en-

able us to faithfully fulfil (ho part | destined for us in the Empire. New conditions required a readjustment of our taxation. Wealth must lie made to shoulder responsibilities as never done before. Our land ■ values had been mounting steadily, and rapidly, In view of these great increases, and the rise in the price of products, there should lie no difficulty in adjusting our fiscal and taxation policy, and we can look forward with confidence to any proposals brought down to meet, not only our war expenditure, but to make provision for our soldier.'; and dependants, and when the time arrives, the Minister of Defence would present to the House Cabinet's proposals to these ends. He harboured no doubt that they would prove most acceptable to all sides. He eluded Sir John Findlay with.not fulfilling his election pledges, by his shrieking criticism of the National Government, but there was not one word calculated to help the Government win this war. The gentleman had all the abilities of a great rhetorician, but when the speech was carefully analysed, it was found to contain nothing helpful, and everything that ought to be there was not there. He read an enlogism on the National Cabinet, delivered by Sir John Findlay when lie was candidate for Hawkc.'s Bay, and compared what lie then described as the "magnificent" work of the Cabinet, with the fault-finding criticism of last night. Sir John Findlay had asked for votes on account of what the National Cabinet had done to reduce the cost 'of living, but what a great gulf there was between the speech in Hastings and that of last evening, Not one word of credit was given for what the Board of Trade had accomplished in that direction, The lion, gentleman complained that we now had a Government by Order-iii-Council but there was one set of regulations he did not refer to, namely, the regulations designed to suppress sedition. The' speaker detailed the recent seditious agitation designed to harass the Government, and denounced the action of Sir John Findlay in going, in his professional capacity, to aid one of the men charged with seditious eoiyluct. The lion, gentleman could not shed his skin as a member of Parliament and public man, and he yet would have to answer to his constituents for his unsatisfactory conduct in this connection, Concerning Sir John Findlay's criticism of land legislation, he was pushed into this position that everything lie said reflected on the Government of which ho was formerly a member, and not against the National Cabinet. He criticised Sir John Findlay's declaration in favour of six o'clock closing, as inconsistent with his election pledges, and he was proceeding to deal with this question when rung down by the time limit.

Sir John Findlay, in a personal explanation, denied that, his speech last night in any way varied from his election speeches.

Mr Anstey followed. Discussing the question of reinforcements he considered the time had arrived when the House should carefully consider what the country coillil do in this connection. He complained that Parliament had been ignored in deciding important questions in connection with the war. This should not continue. The House should at once determine what proportion we should scud of men, equipment and produce,

After the supper adjournment-, the debate was resumed by Mr Hudson, who discussed the fruit industry, and the fanners' income tax, which worked smoothly, only because of the tact dismayed by the Commissioner, The Minister of Agriculture was justified in keeping down'the prices of butter, but the method of doing so was bad, The butter-fat levy meant that the poor man wis taxed in order to give the rich' man cheap butter.' lie favoured 'a general increase in the income tax, as the fairest means of raising the necessary war revenue, He criticised the administration of the railways, and advocated a loan for public works. ' Continuing, Mr Hudson complained that the sons of aliens were allowed to | remain at homo, and help their parents to work their farms while Britishers' sons were taken away and sont into the firing line. Surely, lie said, the sons of aliens could be put to some profitable work for the State, which would not give-theiii finch an unfair advantage over the young men of' Kritiuli parenlage. The adjonfmiH'iil of.'lho debate was moved by Mr J. Craigie, • 'v , The House rose, at 1042 pin till % ,10