THE New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) SATURDAY, JUNE 22, 1895. THE DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS.

New Zealand Times, Volume LVII, Issue 2543, 22 June 1895, Page 2

THE New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.)

SATURDAY, JUNE 22, 1895. THE DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS.

With which are incorporated the Wellington Independent, established J 845, and the New Zealander.

Its opening was remarkable for the very well reasoned, pithy speech of that rising young politician and proved Liberal Mr pi run i. As lie said himself, and as the Loader of the Opposition, who is always polite and generally considerate, confirmed, Mr Pirani has learned a good deal during his brief Parliamentary career. It is true that a man cannot help learning something from his association with so many fellow-legislators, provided that ho is earnest, studious and determined to study public questions. The evidence of compliance with the indispensable condition was the principal feature of Mr Pirani’s speech. Candid he was in many places, and so was Mr Maslin, who seconded the Address. But as Mr Reeves well said at the end of his speech, candour and independence of thought are the very things which improve the Liberal Party. It is a criticism which shows that all the party pull together and by that means increase the usefulness and efficiency of the party. The exhibition was a fine rejoinder to the “ Dumb Dogs ” criticism which played so large a part in the proceedings of the session of 1894. We may remark in passing that the forecasters of the session of 1895 have anticipated much trouble from what is called the “ Loft Wing” of the party. They had developed, it was said by these prophets, an independence of thought and action which would infallibly wreck the Ministerial combination before long. Of the said” Left Wing, the most advanced and irreconcilable section, the life and soul of secession, in fact, was supposed to be that which flew the blue flag of teototalism. But tbo mover and seconder of the Address were prominent members of that very section. That is one of the main features of the debate, which proves that, instead of disintegrating, the party is consolidating, It is said that prosperity requires a stronger head to endure than adversity. If that be so, the Liberal Party is responding satisfactorily to the best test of strength. The Ministers reference to the candid criticism of the mover and seconder was not an empty boast by any means. Before he sat down ho showed the Ministerial sincerity by frankly admitting the proved necessity for some change in the constitution of the Board constituted under the Advances to Settlers Act. Ifa ()id not forget to gently chastise those members of the party who had by rejecting the proposed constitution of the Board deprived it of the local experience' now admitted to bo necessary to its successful working. The candid criticism of last night is really an admission that the majority regrets it did not follow the Government lead. It is another proof of the break down of the “ Dumb Dogs ” theory. The Loader of the Opposition had not very much to say, and ho said it exceedingly well. His speech was in perfect taste and in the best humour. A mighty contrast it was in some respects to the bulk ,of the criticisms we have had during til® recess from various members of the party and from soma of its organs. On broad points of principle Captain Russell, of course, gave up nothing. On these points ho was sufficiently answered by Mr Beeves. The best tiling in Captain Bussell's speech was his determination to bo brief, and to reserve his energies for the useful work of the session. That entitles him to the respect of the country, and will gain it for him, for the country is not slow to recognise a sincere desire to do useful public work. The session cn tho whole may lie said to have begun remarkably w ell.

SIB GEORGE GREY. The brief debate on the motion for renewing Sir George Grey’s leave of absence ended in a unanimous vote on tho voices for granting the leave. The House has therefore determined that Sir George Grey is still a member. Sir Robert Stout’s motion, of which he has given notice, for referring the question' of Sir George Grey’s membership to a select committee, is a request to the House to stultify itself. We have had from that quarter motions for enquiring into black lists and white lists, and now wo have one for a Grey list. "Black, white and Grey;” that shadow of an ancient phrase is about all tho justification that can be urged for the motion. There is none in any Act of the Legislature. Some year? ego, indeed, the Legislature took tho decision of such questions out of the power of tfle House and appointed a special tribunal to settle them. This was done after the outrageous report presented by a committee on an •election petition against Sir George Grey's return for one of two constituenees, for both of which he had been elected. It is not a little curious that the House is now invited to reverse tho practice in tha case of Sir George Grey himself. It may bo said that there is no petition for declaring the seat vacant. That does not affect tho principle. But passing the point we come to tho Electoral Act, section 130, which is relied on. The section says that the seat of a member of the IJoifso of Representatives »hall|beoome vacant “ if for one whole session of tho General Assembly ho fails,without permission of tho House, to give his attendance in the House," Something was said about the session of 1893, but as Sir George’s case concerns only tbo twelfth Parliament, which was elected after the session of 1893, it is difficult to see what can bo gained by reference to that session. As the Premier pointed out, wo cannot go back beyond the election of tho present Parliament. Captain Russell quoted some leading cases to show that an elected representative not having taken his seat could not be entitled to claim to be a member. But those oases only show that the persons concerned could not make good their claims to bo present in the House as members. Sir George Grey is not claiming to be present as a member, ho is asking leave to be absent: wanting legal ratification of the physical fact of his absence. To como back to section 130 of the Electoral Act. The House during the session of 1894 gave permission to Sir George Grey to bo absent. Three or four times leave was given, and the lost time tha words used wore “ for tho remainder of the session.” Had tho seat become vacant during the recess, the Speaker, who gave tho leave of absence as the mouthpiece of tho House, would have had to notify the fact in tho Qatelle. But he did not do so. How can ho now be expected, as a member of the proposed committee of enquiry, to stultify his permission, and to condemn his subsequent neglect to declare tho seat vacant? As a matter of fact, no vacancy was declared because no leave was granted. Nothing mote intrinsically absurd can be imagined than the request to place him on such a committee of enquiry. The sam® objection applies to tho rest of the committee so far as the leave given in 1894 is concerned. Further, tha Payment of Members Act, which proscribes a different method for regulating attendances iu tho Legislative Council, especially makes tho House the judge in such matters. By that Act, the House has power to grant sick leave and leave on private affairs, and such absences count as attendances so far as pay la concerned. The significance of granting leave of absence is thus made all the more complete, if any further completeness is necessary. Sit George Grey has had leave for a wholesession, specifically granted, and .his position is unassaiiably protected by two Acts of the Legislature. The attack upon his position is perfectly farcical ! just as farcical as to pretend that ho has not complied with Die necessary conditions. If the contentions now raised were .to bo substantiated, the , precedent would be awkward. It would enable a Government to use its majority to expel from tho Honso every opponent who bod been granted leave by instalments for a whole session. It would bo a precedent in favour of tyranny-** pretty precedent to be proposed by a leading Liberal in Now Zealand. The precedent wonld also, os was pointed out during the debate yesterday, inflict expulsion on all sick members for the high crime and misdemeanour of hoping that they may get well enough to attend in their places before tho

end of the session. And of what use is it to proceed when it is perfectly certain that if expelled Sir George Grey would be immediately re-elected ? Wo repeat that the House, which prevented Sir George Grey's seat from becoming vacant last year, has settled the question of his membership this year by giving him leave of absence again. In the face of all the '.law and the feeling of tha House, an old 'colleague is insisting on dragging the question before a committee. He might have shown better feeling and it would have been better taste to have done so.