INSPECTOR SHEARMANS CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9067, 30 May 1888, Page 6

INSPECTOR SHEARMANS CASE.

[BY TELEGRAPH.—PRESS ASSOCIATION.]

Wellington, Tuesday. Considerable discussion took place in the House to-day over the report of the Public Petitions Committee on the case of In-

spector Shearman, recently dismissed from the Government service. The report was to the effect that, having carefully gone over the evidence adduced, the committee had come to the conclusion that the petitioner had been dealt with by the Government in a fair and liberal spirit, and that ho had no further claim on the colony. Mr. Fish objected to the way in which these dismissals were being carried out, and said this particular case was being dealt with in a haphazard manner. Mr. Bruce, as a member of the Public Petitions Committee, defended tho action of the Government in Mr. Shearman's case, and pointed out that Mr. Shearman now retired with compensation to tho extent of £1000, and that if he had served ten years more he would only be entitled to about £1500. He claimed that the petitioner had been very fairly dealt with. Messrs. T. Thompson" (Auckland North) and Anderson corroborated Mr. Brace's remarks, and stated that having gone very fully into the whole circumstances of the case the committee could not come to any other conclusion. Mr.'Reeves (Inangahua) moved, "That the petition be referred back to the committee for further consideration." Mr. Fergus said it was a great pity that the House should discuss this matter at present, as an opportunity would very shortly be given of considering the whole of the retrenchment effected by the Government. He said that as far as this particular case was concerned the petitioner had been treated very fairly, and in the same manner as similar cases had been dealt with by the previous Government. The whole question could be dealt with when the committee moved for by the Premier was appointed. Mr. Reeves (St. Albans) supported the proposal to refer the petition back to the committee, as he thought this particular case required further investigation. After further discussion, Sir Harry Atkinson said the Government had foreseen the difficulties which would occur over these cases. He for one thought the case of some of those officers very hard, and he had given notice of a committee to inquire into their grievances, but through tne action of the honorable members opposite. he had been prevented from moving it. The Government thought this committee should be appointed, and it was for the House to determine whether further relief should be granted to those persons. He held it would be gross injustice for the House to refuse to deal with individual

cases. Mr. SeddoN pointed out that it was not altogether the fault of the Opposition that a sufficient number of members had not remained in the House to allow the Standing Orders to be suspended. Some blame was also due to the Government supporters, several of whom objected to the proposed Rules of Procedure. Mr. Moss eventually moved, " That consideration of the matter be postponed," upon which Mr. Reeves withdrew his amendment. Mr. Moss's amendment was then pub, and agreed to.