HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXX, Issue 3784, 5 July 1899, Page 3

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

TUESDAY, 4th JULY. The Speaker took the chair at -oJ P ' m ' NEW BILL. The Wellington Suburbs Electric Lighting Act Amendment Bill was introduced by Mr Wilson and read a first lime. THE POLICE COMMISSION. Mr TAYLOR (Christchurch) asked the Premier without notice whether the Government intended to bring down proposals this session to establish a police pension fund, and whether it was intended to give the House an opportunity of resuming the debate adjourned from last session on the report of the Police Commission. The PREMIER said if notice was given of tho question ho would deal " W. ROLLESTON (Riccarton) scarcely thought a question of that importance should be dealt with in that manner. They had a right to know what was the position of tho House in regard to that Commission. It was a Parliamentary scandal that the actions of the House should be intercepted, as was the case last year, by a proposal .to refer the report of the Commission to the Public Accounts Committee—a committee dominated by the supporters of tho Government—and that the House should bo practically put off from considering the report. Mr SMITH (Christchurch) asked the Premier if ho would fix a day for the discussion of the report on the police force, which had just been laid on the table. .... Mr TAYLOR complained that the House had been debarred from discussing the recommendation of the Police Commission that political patronage should be clone away with in connection with appointments to tho force. Some of the other recommendations had been carried out, including tho appointment of a largo number of additional men, as to the necessity for which there was. a great diversity of opinion among competent police officers. s Mr HOGG (Masterton). said the result of. the Commission was to show that the bad characters in the force wero not appointed by the present Government, bub by its predecessors. Most of them had since been weeded out, and he did not believe that Mr Taylor could point to a single member of the force who boro a character worse than that of his fellow men. Mr SCOBIE MACKENZIE (Dunedin) remarked that tho members of the police force wore anxious that a. superannuation fund should he established, and that the system of political natronage should cease. The universal testimony of the officials was that previous to 1891 no interference was made by Ministers with appointments to the Force. (Laughter.) Last session the Premier declared he was not going to relinquish .the patronage, and the House had now to declare whether it ■sholdd remain in the bands of Ministers or whether the power should be centred in the. Commissioner—lt had to decide between the Premier and tho purity and efficiency of the police force. Blr MORRISON! /CVersham) twitted J, 'e last speaker with haying delivered that - same speech three times already since last ■session. (Laughter.) -Where; bo asked, was the political patronage they heard so much about? He was not aware of it. If there was no political patronage before 1891, where did all the black in arks come from? If they were not appointed by the Ministers thev must,have been appointed hv the Commissioner, and it was therefore evident that bettor appointments were made under the system in vogue under the present Government than under the previous Administration. Mr J. ALLEN (Bruce) said the last sneaker was a standing instance of what political patronage could do in the Railway Department. It was well known the hen. member lived upon political patronage, and no wonder he would. net support a proposal +o do away with it. If “black marks” were appointed by previous Governments, it was tho duty of the. present Government to have got rid of them. |Hon W. HALL-.TONBS (Minister for Public Works) said that every member knew that nearly «verv valid recommendation of the Police Commission had been give” effect to. The only execution was the superannuation fund. The Government, agreed with that proposal, but It wanted to pot. the best and most, feasible scheme. Tho police force had been increased by the addition, of several men, and not one instance of Political interference could bo mentioned as having occurred in connection with those appointments. Proposals for a superannuation scheme would bo submitted to Parliament. Mr SLIGO (Dunedin) said be thought the House would bo very pleased to give its support to a superannuation scheme. ’ Mr GEORGE FISHER* (Wellington) said the effect of the Police Commission at the time was to disorganise a.nd disgrace the police force, and 1 to brand the’ people of the colonv as being utterly corrupt. It instituted a reign of terror such as was never known in this country before, and it was a blot upon the legislative records of the colony. while the evidence was a libel on the people of New Zealand. The object. of this and similar discussion was in waste a month at the beginning of tho session, and then to charge the Government and its supporters with rushing Through the Estimates at the end of the session. Mr LEWIS (Christchurch) wanted to know if the recommendation of the Commission that tho age at which men could join tho force be limited to thirty years had been given effect to? Mr SYMES (Egmont) said they heard from tho Opposition of political patronage, but although ask'od for an instance time and again, tho Opposition had never been able to give one. Prior -to 1891, however, they heard frequently of cases of political patronage, including one case in which the whole of tho members of a man’s family had been put. into the Civil Service without examination. ■ Mr CARSON (Wanganui) considered tho money spent on the Police Commission was well spent, and that they wore now building up a force which would bo a credit to the colony. Mr R. McKENZIE (Motueka) said this discussion had been started with, tho deliberate intention of delaying the debate on tho no-confidence motion, so that tho member for Palmerston (Mr Pirani) might bo able to speak to the galleries. Mr CARNCROfS (Taieri) said there were cases in which men were kept on in tho force, although too old for active work, simply because there was no fund lor them to fall hack upon for suppurl . Mr J. W. KELLY (Invercargill) said

ho had no doubt the Government; would receive the support of every member of the House in trying to formulate a workable superannuation fund scheme for tho force. Mrt GILFEDDER (Wallace) said that in the past the knowledge of how to pull political wires had been part of the education 'of policemen. Mr W. CROWTHEB (Auckland) said he could prove a largo number of case-; in which policemen had been removed and promoted to suit political friends. Tho present Commissioner of Police was a capable man, and would bo able to build up the force if politicians would only let him alone. Tiie PREMIER (Mr Scddon) said the report on tho police force which he was proposing to Jay on tho table was the most able that had over been submitted to Parliament. As to political influence, there had been a system of teirorism on tho part of those who wore now railing against political influence. Ho read a report showing that Mr Taylor, the member for Christchurch, had threatened to have certain constables shifted from Balclutba, while another constable at Napier reported that Mr Taylor had said ho was going to call every constable in. Napier to prove a charge of drunkenness against a certain person, and added, ‘lf thoy stuck to him' they would bo all right. As to political patronage, the official records would show letters from nearly every member of tho House recommending certain people for entry to the force. Ministers had to take the responsibility, and while ho saw no harm in members making such recommendations, he hoped members would bo careful that their influence ■ was not used in furthering tho interests of undeserving The Government took credit for having appointed Commissioner Tunbridge, who had recommended and begun to carry into effect nearly everything the Police Commission recommended before the Commission had concluded its labours. Replying to iVir Taylor, the Premier said the fact that that member had had the opportunity of proceeding with changes he had 'made against the force, and did not do so, showed that ho simply revelled in destroying the, character of the force. As to a superannuation fund. Mr Taylor had shown considerable destructive power, but a lack of constructive ability, and ho had not yet formulated 1 such a scheme. In his present report tho Commissioner of Police submitted a scheme and a draft Bill, although he must not forget to mention that tho former Commissioner (Colonel Hume) had also urged the necessity for such_ a fund, and had himself drafted a. .scheme. With tho pay the police received it would ho impossible for them to start a superannuation scheme without aid from tho Government, because some members of the force would go on the fund as soon as it was started. That had been a. reason for the delay in putting forward any superannuation proposals. Besides, if they provided a. fund of this sort Cor one branch of the public service, they would have to provide funds for the other branches of the service. Tho Government intended to bring down the scheme proposed by the present Commissioner, and he hoped it wonkl receive careful attention at tho hands of members. Tho report * 1 of the Commissioner of police was ordered to lie on the table and be printed. At 5.30 p.m. tho House adjourned for dinner. ADDRESS-IN -REPLY. Mr PIRANI (Palmerston) at tho evening sitting resumed the debate on the Address-in-Replv. and the hostile amendment thereto. Having congratulated the Government on having again followed the load of the Left Wing in setting tip the Marino Department Roval Commission, lie went on to complain that the Government did not, in setting up the Commission, see that the persons engaged were authorities on the subject thoy were authorised to inquire into. Tho result was that so far almost every Royal Coinmission had been abortive, and in this case the Government had adopted exactly tho same tactics, tho result of which would probably be that none of tho recommendations they might make would be worth twopence. As to the charge made against some members of having prejudged tho case, ho quoted the Premier as saying that if ho bad his wav he would sack the officials of tho Marino Department for what thoy had done, 'and the Premier had also told a Wellington audience wliat the result of the Commission would be, namely, the same as the results of inquiries made in respect of the other charges made against tho Government. If tho report was to recommend that the Department must be removed from political influence to purify it, as was the case in the Police Commission, would that bo what the Premier was expecting? He blamed the Minister of Marine for having made an unjustifiable attack on Dir John Hutcheson on Friday night. He ridiculed the idea that .the latter’s action in this connection played into the bauds of a shipping “ring.” The Marino Department, Mr Pirani went on to say, was in such a scandalous conaition, chiefly through Ministerial interference, or what was probably worse, Ministerial non-in-terference when grievances had been brought before the Ministry, that it would be all the better for the investigation of a Royal Commission, but it was not the Minister of Marine who would come'clean out of that investigation. No one had done more than the Minister of Marino to prevent inquiries being made, and no one had done more to smudge New Zealand certificates than had been done by the action of the Government in appointing to the command of a Government steamer a man who held a foreign certificate. Further, the Minister did not come forward to give evidence until the publication in the “New Zealand Times” of some very strong comments on the subieet. With regard to the. appointment of shipping masters at the principal ports. Mr Pirani remarked that in 1897 the Minister of Marine, when approached b” Mr John Hutcheson on the subject, objected to making such appointments, on the score of expense. iuid yet. after this marine scandal was revealed, these, shipping masters were appointed, without the permission of Parliament. He should support the amendment, not Because he considered it wrong for the Government to appoint a Roval Commission, but because the Commission would have no power to investigate tbo question ot whether Ministers themselves had been guilty of doing what was wrong in connection with this marine scandal. Mr Pirani contended that unfair Ministerial interference had been proved with marine examinations, and with the department. When Captain Allman saw the Premier, after the charge'had boon made in the House, last session, he had seen the Minister of Marino just previously. Tho Minister of Marine asked him to stand bv him, and promised l he would assist him in any trouble, and immediately afterwards Captain Allman went to i.qe .Premier and denied the truth of the charges. As to the memorandum on the envelope, Mr Pirani said the. interpretation of the wording thereon was made by a Crown Law officer, who showed how it was possible to turn the meaning of the words, and he (tbo speaker) was informed that the reward was to he the Judgeship of the Arbitration Court. He produced a letter iu which the writer stated that the Minister for Marino had told him that Captain Jones was a candidate lev a vacancy on one of the Government steamers .(which the Minister of Marine' had denied), and declared that Captain Allman had given

Ministers a second and true statement of the case, and that he was prepared to go before the Royal Commission and give those true facts if he could get an indemnity, which he urged ought to be given in such a case. At a later .stage Mr Pirani said the master of tho Government steamer ho had referred to had a Now Zealand certificate, but at the time of his application he was not a British subject.

Mr MONTGOMERY (Ellesmere) condemned the practice of opening the session with a long Addrcss-in-Reply debate, and urged that opportunities should ”e given for discussing particular grievances at particular times, thus obviating a great waste of time. Referring to the marine scandal, he defended Mr John Hutcheson from the attack made upon him by the Minister of Marine, urging that the member for AVcllington City could not be blamed for having discovered the irrcgiilarities, and pointing out that the Minister ought to respect the opinions of those who were acting very much in the same manner as he (the Minister) would have acted when he was a free member of ' tho House and not a member of the Ministry. Tho blow which Mr John Hutcheson had struck for purity of administration and for political freedom would bo remembered when the little brief authority of the Minister of Marine had passed away and been forgotten. He stated he should vote against tho amendment on the ground that Ministers were not on their trial. If a Parliamentary Committee was set up it would be a purely party committee, and the verdict would be absolutely useless. The fact that district Judges and Magistrates wero being employed on Royal Commissions pointed very clearly in the direction that I they ought to have all their Judges and j Magistrates independent, as it was not fair to put them in such positions, and j then for people to insinuate that theywere not independent. No fault couhL be found with the scope of tho Commission, for which fact the Government de-/ served every credit, as well as for. tho | promptitude with which the Commission had been set up. Mr MILLAR (Dunedin) said that -a bigger scandal than anything done before would bo committed if a certain officer of tho Marino Department was allowed to remain there. That officer had withheld information which was in his possession that certificates had been illegally granted. Mr Hutcheson had said he did net know the name of the person affected by the charges he made. Did Mr Hutcheson remember telling him the name of the man ? Mr JOHN HUTCHESON : Never. Mr MILLAR : I say again emphatically you did, and on a second occasion also. Continuing, he twitted Mr Pirani with having been coached for years by Captain Von Schoen, who was one of the applicants for tho position of Nautical Adviser to the Government, and who mid been working tooth and nail against Captain Allman ever since ho was appointed. He contended that there was no proof of fraud in the obtaining of an extra master’s certificate in Sydney by Captain Allman. In regard to Captain Jones, he said that for fourteen years.he had bean master of a tug boat in Wellington harbour, and when he made, application for a service certificate on the ground that bn had been towing, he believed that, under the regulations, he ought to have got ; t. In asking the deputation which waited on him to make an affidavit of the length of service, the Premier was merely carrying out the regulations. If Captain Allman had received instructions from the Minister to pass Captain Jones, why did he destroy some of the papers handed him by Captain Jones? He‘did not believe Captain Allman went into Hie room intending to pass Captain Jones falsely,, and he did not see how such ah abt' could bo construed into Ministerial interference. He liad Captain, Jones’s authority for stating that he ,(Captain, Jones) had never applied for a'position on one of Hie Government steamers. Mr John Hutcheson had also, rlonied /that fie ,ever stated that he .did hbh want to get at Captain Jones., but at Mr Hall-Jones. Captain Jones, had also authorised him (Mr Millar) to write Mr Hutcheson to see him.iho following day in order to refresh his memory. (Laughter.) He further, pointed ont that Captain Von Schoen, . .despite what had been proved, had, been employed by the Marino Department as recently as last JanuaryThe MINISTER of MARINE: Unknown to the Minister. Mr MILLAR said that one duty of the Commission would be to_ inquire thoroughly into the relationship existing between Captain Von Schoen and a certain officer of, the Marine Department. As to shipping masters, he did’ hot want to take the credit of their apointment, nor did he believe Mr John Hutcheson wanted to. Mr Hutcheson des.crved cvevv credit for what he had done, but by His present action he was trying to put out a Government which was the only one that had ever done anything for the occupation to which he had belonged. Mr JOHN HUTCHESON (Wellington) denied that ho had disclosed , the identity of the person accused of having illegally obtained a certificate. He was not aware of the name at the time. He had been told bv his informant that the person concerned was daily carrying passengers up and down the coast. That took his suspicions entirely away from .anyone inside the harbour. Mr MONK (Waitemata) said he should vote for the amendment, not because he had much confidence in tho reports furnished by Parliamentary Committees oi Royal Commissions. In a Parliamentary ' Committee members had an opportunity of eliciting evidence which gave them convictions as to the merits of the case, altogether independent of the report which migtit be furnished by tho committee. He stronglv condemned the action of the Government in removing her Majesty’s image from the New Zealand postage stamps, and in regard to native legislation, he urged that individualisation of land was the very best means of killing the evil influences which were growing up among the natives. Mr FIELD (Otafci) said the cry of “corruption” eternally raised by the Opposition was becoming nauseating, and he urged that the Government was no worse than previous. Governments. The burden of the complaint was that instead of keeping appointments for the favoured few, as was done previously, they were now placed within reach of the masses. It was the right of the Government tc expend money wherever it could for to ■ benefit of settlers in tho back blocks, and ho hoped the Government would continue the policy of spending money for such a useful purpose. He did not believe in the nationalisation of the land, but his proposal was that all the land, public and private, in the colony, should be classifiod by competent men; they shoul 1 then decide how much it was expedient a man should own, and provide that n< man should acquire more than that area. Speaking as a member of the Welling ran Land Board, Mr Field said that for every section of land forfeited, there were throe or four applicants as soon ns it was vc-1 offered, showing that the hunger for landj still existed. He urged that the Government should fell and burn and gras? bush land, and charge the tenant interest on the capital value. If that was done the cost of survey would only be onctenth of what it is at present, the sections could be laid off so ns to bo more workable, and it would moan a substantial saving all round, while the man who took up tho land would have it immediately reproductive.; At midnight Mr Lethbridge moved tho adjournment of the debate, which was agreed to. and the House rose.