EXHIBITION DISCORD

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18320, 9 February 1923, Page 7

EXHIBITION DISCORD

EXECUTIVE AND REPORT.

ADOPTION IN QUESTION.

DEFENCE OF' MANAGER.

By Telegraph— Association—Copyright. (.Received 5 p.m.) A. and N.Z. LONDON, Feb. 7. At a meeting of the executive council of the Empire Exhibition to-day a resolution was adopted defending Mr. Wintour, general manager, from the aspersions contained in Sir W. Joynson Hicks' report.

It is understood that unless the executive council substantially accepts Sir W. Joynson. Hicks' report, which the Duke of Devonshire, Viscount Peel, and Sir P. Greame endorse, the Government will withdraw support from the exhibition. It is further understood that the Duke of Devonshire has written to the executive council of the exhibition urging the adoption of Sir W. Joynson Hicks' report.

The -Duke, in his letter, declares that' he is in full accord with Sir W. Joynson Hicks' report, and associates himself with the finding that the council is too unwieldly and that a standing committee with executive powers should be formed. It is understood that the proposal for an executive committee will be accepted.

It is reported that Sir W. Joynson Hicks consulted the Duke of Devonshire before drafting his report, and that the latter concurred in the proposal that Sir James Stevenson, commercial adviser to the Colonial Office, should succeed him in the honorary chairmanship of the executive council, also that Sir Travers Clarke should be deputy chairman with an adequate salary, which means probably £10,000. since Mr. Wintour receives £7000.

The executive council has appointed a sub-committee, consisting of Sir James Allen, High Commissioner for New Zealand, Sir Edward Penton. and Mr. P. J. Hannon, M.P., to report upon the acceptance or rejection of Sir W. Joynson Hicks' proposals. It is believed that Mr. Wintour commands the support of., the majority of the executive council in resisting Sir W. Joynson Hicks' proposals.

Sir James Allen informed the Australian and New Zealand Press Association that he was going into the whole matter with an open mind. He was not associated with either faction.

In a previous interview Sir James Allen said he thought that Sir W. Joynson Hicks' report was satisfactory within the terms of reference, but he regretted that the reference was not wider, because the limitation excluded many important questions. His principal objection was to the recommendation that representation of the Dominions on the proposed new executive committee" be limited to one High Commissioner nominated by his fellow commissioners. In view of the fact that the Dominions provided three-fourths of the funds, he thought they should have two representatives.

Sir Joseph Cook, High Commissioner for Australia, in an interview, stated that t■■ . ■ Sir W. Joynson Hicks.' report was generally satisfactory, inasmuch as it cleared the air .of disturbing runfours. The situation was now quite good. He was glad that the Foods and Materials Committee, of which he was chairman, had not been superseded by the new executive committee. - ■ ■'• - ■ '' : ;