A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXVI, Issue 3262, 20 October 1897, Page 3

A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.

DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ABOUT PAIRS. THE NEW ZEALAND TtMBS MUCH IN EVIDENCE. Mr W. FI&A.3EB, member for Wakatipu, yesterday afternoon raided a question of privilege in the House of Representatives by directing the attention of the Hoaae to a snbleader and report in the Kew Zealand M msa of Saturday, 16th lost., having referenoo to a dispute which arose in the House on the previous night in respect to a question in regard to “ pairs.’ 1 He said both the subloader and the report were a breach of the privileges of that Hour o. The C'era read the cuh-’oador and report fromaojpyof The Tiaras produced. Mr FRASfcR said he intended to move that both wero breaches of the privileges of that House, a libel on the character of members, and a false report of the proceedings. There wa* no question that the article was a reflection on .members acting ia their capacity as representatives in that House. He would explain the facts : —lt had been stated by the Premier on Friday night that he had broken bis pair. As a matter of fact (as he had already explained, and had put on record in when approached on the subject by members from the opposite side, ho had said, “ Go to the Whips and arrange the matter.” Ho didn’t know, when Hr K. McKenzie asked him for a pair, that ho was going away. Mr Massey had given as his reason for refusing any more pairs that ho did not care to boo so few or the Opposition going into the lobbies, nine pairs having already been given. Tho name did not appear in Mr Massey’s book at all, and as hon members know no pair was complete until the names had been placed on both books. I hat Mr Mills bad it down in his book had nothing to do with him (Hr Fraser). Mr MILLS; I woaldnot write it down without authority. Mr FRASER did not ica.ro about that ; it had nothing to do with him. He would like to know how the reporter got the division list? It was the practice of reporters to got the list of pairs from the Whips. As a matter of fact, Mr Massey had not given tho reporters his lists; consequently they must have got them from Mr Mills, tho Government Whip. A feature of tho report in The Times was that not one word was about an explanation having been made in the House on Friday night about these pairs. Nothing in the report showed that a full explanation had been given and accepted. Mr Hills had said then that he stood corrected ia . view of these explanations. {“ Hear, hear,”! Was that not proof of the faLifcy of the report? He did not believe that The Times reporter deliberately withheld this infer* mation from his paper, bat he believed that the person who penned tho article suppressed tho whole thing. ( There was not one word about tho Whip 4 in the article. It referred ,to Mr Lethbridge and himself. Tho worst feature was the suppression from tho paper of the fact that ’"’a contradiction had been given to the statement that the pairs had boon broken. Tho original attack had been aggravated by a socalled apology or explanation Ho formally moved that the sub-leader and report as read by the Clerk of the House wore a breach of the privileges of that House. Mr LETHBRIDGE seconded the motion, and gave his version of the proceedings. He said Mr OTlegau did not speak to him. He offered to pair with Mr McKenzie, but Mr Massey, tho Opposition Whip, refused to take any more pairs. Mr MONTGOMERY said ho overheard the member for Wakatipu refuse to give a pair. Mr O’REGAN said ho had not approached any member, but simply the Whips, about the matter of pairing. He asked Mr Massey if he could get him a pair, and tho latter said. Oh, yes, I think so; I will see Mr Mills.” Later on he saw Mr Mills, who told him it would bo all right, aud ho went away believing that the whole thing had boon arranged. He was intensely surprised when he learned the pairs bad been broken. Mr McLEAN said he was in the library and hoard Mr O’Began asking for a pair about a quarter to 11. , Tho PREMIER was positive that the Senior Government Whip would not have entered in his book pairs that had not been made.. He had hoard some time before of an attempt that would bo made to put the Government in a tight place, and he asked the Senior Whip particularly to be careful and see that the absent members were paired. At a quarter to 12 ho asked Mr Mills if their men were paired and was answered iuthe affirmative. All other members, with the exoepfcion of Messrs O’Regan and McKenzie, wore within easy distance and could have been brought into the House in a few minutes. Neither the member for Bailor nor Motueka would have left the Chamber if they had_ not felt certain that they had • been paired. It was not possible to think that tho Government Whip had deceived Messrs O’Kegauand McKenzie and deceived him (the Premier), for that was what it meant. If tho Opposition Whip wished to deceive the Government Whip and steal a march upon the Government— •

An hon member: That ia a shame. The PREMIER; He said “it ” ho -did that ho would he as much to blame ae if he had deliberately misled tho House, The mistake had arisen because of the neglect on the part of the Whips to compare books. Mr HOLLAND pointed out that he was assured by both Whips that he was paired, whereas he had not been paired at all.

Mr MASSEY said Mr Holland had come to him in the afternoon, and ho told him he would try and get him a pair. That was a matter for tho Government Whip, not for him.

The PREMIER said if Ministers brought np as matters of privilege all the attacks made upon them and their families by the press the House would be occupied by them every day of tho week. As far as this report was concerned it was a correct one. (“ It is false.’) The hon member complained that the paper had left something out. Did he propose to bring papers. np for breach of privilege which left, things oat j or to insist that tho House should undertake the supervision of everything that wont into tho papers? In his opinion this opportunity had been taken by tho Opposition to give a lift to the New Zealand Times, which had ceased to support the Government and had become' independent. It appeared from the explanations of the Whips that there had been a mistake, and tho statement of The Tikes that the pairs had been broken wai quite correct. . Mr MASSEY said that Mr O’Regan had asked Jiim to provide a pair for him, as he was going away to the Coast. He told him that he might possibly bo able to place Mr Lethbridge’s name against his, bathe never say him again till after the division. He had absolutely refused to pair MrMoKonzie. No blame was to be attached to anybody save Mr Mills and himself. It was evident that his memory had been|defeotiv«, asjwell as that of Mr Mills. ’

Mr MILLS explained the details of the transaction at length. The Hon J. McKHNZIE said ho was libelled every day, and he never asked the House to take his part. Mr SCOBXE MACKENZIE insisted that two members of the House had been improperly attacked and should be protected. Mr HOGG said tho attitude taken np by the Opposition in regard to this matter was ridiculous, seeing that they hired writers to malign members of that House. Mr RICHARDSON said the Whips were responsible for ihe misnnderstandings which had occurred.

Captain BUSSELL said a misconception had occurred between the Whips, hot this did not justify the attacks which bad been made on members of that House,

Mr P IRANI having epokenin support of the motion, , Mr ERASER replied* and stated that it was not his intention to proceed any farther in the matter, the motion was carried on the voices.

THE WHIPS AT IT. The following ooirefpondonce yesterday passed between the Whips : “ W.F. Massey, Ksq , Senior Opposition Whip.—Dear air,—ln reply to jour letter of the 18th inst., as yon dory that there was any lapse of memory on your part with regard to giving mo pairs for Mr B. McKenzie and Mr O’Began on Friday night last, it now becomes a question on your part of truth or falsehood, because yon say, ‘ Neither directly nor indirectly did I authorise you or anyone' else to pair Mr Fraser or Mr Lethbridge with Mr McKenzie or Mr O’Kegan.’ Will yon, therefore, kindly reply to the following questions: Did Mr O Began or Mr McKenzie ask you to find them pairs last Friday, and did you not promise to find them pairs without any reservation P‘ Did I not ass yon for pairs for them later on in the day, and tell you that Mr McKenzie said that Mr Fracer was willing to give him a pair if yon agreed? Did you not tell ms that they had asked yon for pairs and that you had promised to fiz them up ?. Did I not corns to you several times that evening asking you to fix up the pairs, so that they could leave the House and get their luggage ready to leave by the oteamor at midnight f Did you not repeatedly ask me to let the matter stand over, and at last,when I pressed you, finally agree to pair them so that they could get away not later than a quarter to 12 o’clock? Did I not come to you at that time with my pair hook and sot ‘I have Fraser’s name down; ngainst McKenzie, who shall I put against ' O’Began ?’ and did yon not Isay ‘Put Lethbridge,: and without any reservation ? Did I not come' into the Chamber when thebell was ringing for the division and ask yon to send but those gentlemen whose pairs von had given me P Did you not admit next day to mo in the presence of other hon members that you. had given tho pairs mined, but that you intended they were not to take effect until after the division ? Ts it reasonable to think for one moment 1 should allow two members to leave the House: unpaired .when an important division was imminent?—Waiting your reply, yonrs faithfully, C. H. Milts,Senior Government Whip.” : Mr Massey’s reply was as follows “C. Mills, Esq., Senior Government Whip.—Dear Sir,—Tour la tter of this date to hand. I do not think that it is necessaiy to answer your questions categorically. When I wrote to you yesterday, I, of course, • referred to the disputed division' on Friday evening, and to that only. It is quite correct that I was willing to give Messrs McKenzie and O’Eegan-pairs for the time that they might bs away, but not until after the division on the amendment. I refused a number of pairs on that evening because T had already nine pairs recorded, and I again say that I never authorised you to pair Messrs Fraser ‘or Lethbridge with Mr McKenzie or Mr O’Began for the division on Friday evening.—l have tho honour to remain, &0., W. F. Mabset.”