BESTOWAL OF HONOURS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18170, 16 August 1922, Page 11

BESTOWAL OF HONOURS.

A PEERAGE DECLINED.

DEBATE IN HOUSE OF LORDS.

REPLIES TO ALLEGATIONS. [FROM our own correspondent.]

LONDON. July' 7. Questions have been asked in the House of Lords as to the grounds upon which Sir Joseph H. Eobinson, the South African mining magnate, has been recommended to His Majesty for the grant of a peerage.

After an interval of a few days, the Lord Chancellor read the following letter, addressed by Sir Joseph to Mr. Lloyd George: "I have read with surprise the discussion in the House of Lords upon the proposed offer of a peerage to myself. I have not, as you know, in any way sought the suggested honour. It is cow some 60 years since I commenced as a pioneer the task of building up the industries of South Africa. I am now an old man, to whom honours and dignities are no longer of much concern. I should be sorry if any honour conferred upon me were the occasion for such ill-feeling as was manifested in the House of Lords yesterday, and while deeply appreciating the honour which has been suggested, I would wish, if I may, without discourtesy to yourself, and without impropriety, to beg His Most Gracious Majesty's permission to decline the proposal" The Lord Chancellor stated that the baronetcy conferred upon Sir Joseph Robinson in 1907 was given on the insistently repeated recommendation of General Botha, then Premier of South Africa. How Recommendations Are Made.

The question of the manner in which recommendations for honours are made.to the Sovereign was not, however, allowed to drop. Lord Lansdowne, while characterising Sir J. Robinson's letter as '" very proper and dignified," and as raising'him In the estimation of the House, declared that on the general question he could remember no case in which the prosecution I was so completely triumphant, and the defence so miserably inconclusive. It had, he said, created the impression that persons who were totally unfit for such an honour might find themselves seated side by side with the eminent soldiers, statesmen, and men of business who were raised to the peerage in recognition of their great services to the Empire. The Duke of Northumberland told--la detail the negotiations in which &j man who had recently been "in Downing Street" offered a certain honour to another at the price of £40,000, In another case, the Duke said with ample detail, a man found that £10,000 to £12,000 would buy a Knighthood, and £35,000 to £40,000 a Baronetcy. Whether or not the Government had anything to do with it, the public; believed they had. The Duke was very caustic, too, about jthe 49 honours granted to the press in the last iour years, "not including GIVLG.'s and inconsiderable trifles of that kind.*' " jjord Long said that within the last tix months ne had received communications from men intimating that they had received or had seen letters of the kind mentioned. Whatever had happened in the past with regard to matters of this kind did not bo much concern him. He was concerned with what Steps the Government were going to take. Party funds must exist, and they must be collected, but he believed they could be collected without bartering in exchange honours of any sort or kind. He> wag profoundly stirred when he heard that when this honour was suggested the matter was not referried .to the Oolonial Secretary, he could consult the Prime Minister off the Dominion concerned. He hoped the Government would produce j some scheme o£ their own, hut he felt sure that a practical proposal from any quarter lot tie House would receive the unanimous supw*rt of the country. This was a qiM9<tion of substance, and affected not only the House of Lords, but the honour and credit bf the whole country., • - Lord Vestey's Gas*. Lord Strachie referred! to the peerage conferred on Lord Vestey, and quoted from the Royal Commission on Income Tax. In his evidence before that body Lord Vestey admitted that he was domiciled in Buenos Aires and that he conducted his business from there instead of from London in order to escape heavy taxation. Lord Strachie said his complaint was that if the Government were aware of the fact he did not see why Lord Vestey should be recommended for a peerage. .-.•;•.. .j "I wish to. make a personal Btatement as to the reasons which caused me togo abroad," said Lord Vestey. "The firm in which I am interested has "built up *in the face of very strong American competition the largest English Iwisiness of its kind. Our principal competitors have always been large American meat companies, who have enormous capital, and yhb dominate the English market. It became a question of whether we should cell the business to the American companies or continue to struggle and build freezing works in the countries from which Great Britain imports foreign meat. We decided to adopt the latter course. With our new works adjacent to the American company's works in these foreign counttries, and - their selling organisations alongside ours in the principal markets of Great Britain, it was obvious that on thoso new foreign businesses it was impossible for us to compete if we were to the subjected to exceedingly heavy •'■> . taxation, which was not imposed upon the American companies on the meat - which they brought to this country from works adjacent to ours. Therefore, wfiile our English business, which is very large, has throughout remained domiciled in England, and paid English taxes, I was forced to become domiciled abroad.so, far as the foreign businesses were concerned. But that did not affect the English business. Before deciding to go abroad' I made every effort to try to arrange with the Government some basis which have enabled us to compete wi&.ihe Americans on equal terms.". Sir J. Robinson's Statement. Sir Joseph Robinson, when interviewed concerning his refusal bf the honour, said : "Enemies I mad* in South Africa some years ago instigated the attacks on the proposed conferment of a peerage on me. It amused me to read the remarks of those who pretended to speak with authority on South African sentiment and matters; I refer t0,,, the former Governor-General. They are wellmeaning gentlemen, but they do not-, understand South Africa. I wish.-1 had been privileged to answer some-;Of ; my attackers in the House of Lords; T do not. think much would have been left \ of them."" As regards Lord Harris' statement in the House of Lords that it feas stated in the public press-that I was a "Jfranjjdulerit (trustee/ |tihis is, absolutely untrue. Had a newspaper made such a statement I would certainly have taken action against it for libel. Judge Mason, of the Supreme Court, went so far as to say-'that there was no evidence to show'that there was any fraud in the transactions I had with the Randforitein Company, and Judge Wessels gave judgment in my favour on evary aspect of the case. The Court of Appeal.4jere (the Privy Council) without going, into .the question, simply dismissed the . account of what seemed to he political reasons, because, as I am now informed, the Privy Council will not hear appeal eases -from South Afriw.'WheUMW this is true or not, I o»nna fc say*j-