HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Otago Witness, Issue 249, 6 September 1856, Page 5

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

MR. J. CARGILL's REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OS PRIVILEGE. Mr. J. Cargill wished to bring a question of privilege before the House, and would ask the advice of Mr. Speaker as to what course should be pursued in the matter. It was relative to a statement which appeared in the " Lyttelton Times," of the 18th June, gravely compromising the characters of three members then present. In stating so much he felt assured that the House would grant him that indulgence which it always shewed on occasions when matters personal to any of its members were brought before it. There was nothing particularly captivating in the position of a member of that House ; it was a severe tax both on the time and purse ; the only reward to which they could look, was the consciousness of having performed a public duty. He, for one, would regret to see a system of politics pursued in this country by which a seat in that House would be considered undesirable ; and such would be the result if the characters of members were attacked instead of their arguments. The letter he alluded to was dated from Auckland and concluded thus :—: — " I decline making any remarks with reference to the conduct of the Canterbury members further than that I have supported Mr. Sewell throughout, and that Mr. Hall and Mr. Cuff have opposed him. I am quite prepared to justify the course I have taken." From that it was evident that it was written by one of the Canterbury members, or if not, then the hon. member indicated as being the writer was grossly libelled. The words of which he (Mr. Cargill) complained were these :—: — " And in the rear were the Otago members, voting as they thought for themselves, and no one else. To explain in full the manner in which they sold themselves would make one blush." He (Mr. Cargill) characterised this attack as not only untrue, but the mode jn which it was made most unfair. It was circulated through the Canterbury Province, on the authority of the writer of this letter, that the Otago members had sold themselves, not for anything specific, but in a manner which the writer blushed to mention. He (Mr. Cargill) was glad that this letter had fallen under his observation before leaving Auckland, as it was not by a newspaper correspondence that such a matter could be satisfactorily settled, but there, on the floor of that hoxise, he desired to challenge and rebut the absurd statements contained in the letter referred to. But not only in Canterbury, where they were comparatively unknown, but through the Province of Otago, which they represented, would that obnoxious statement, calculated to injure them, both politically and socially, be circulated for two months before they would have an opportunity of refuting it. He need not point out the difficulty of removing an evil impression after so long a period had elapsed during which it would pass unchallenged. He felt assured that not even by the political enemies in that Province of the members affected would the statement be received with exultation ; he believed there was that " esprit de corps" — that feeling of " Nemo me impune lacessit," distinguishing the inhabitants of that Settlement, which would prevent them from glorying in any imputed mis conduct of their representatives. He (Mr. Cargill) desired to enter on the groundwork of that matter, which was the political part taken by the Otago members in the early part of the session, when they stood in the same position as the Nelson members who arrived by the " Zingari," afterwards did, that of turning the scale by their votes, yet no one attributed such mean and paltry motives for the part they (the Nelson members) acted on the occasion. The real facts of the alleged compact were these : on their arrival in Auckland, after the session commenced, the Otago members agreed to support the then Sewell ministry so far as might be necessary to introduce .Responsible Government by forcing through the Pension Bill, but when they learned from his three hours speech what his general policy was, they were anxious that he should make such a modification of his policy and of his ministry as might enable them to support him ; taking for granted that on the land question they should be agreed. But they found he was averse to either. Things were in that state when the hon. member for Wanganui (whom they had hitherto rather avoided, from the. hearsay reports of his republicanism which they had heard circulated,, and bis alleged shark-like views on t the land .fund of the .Middle Island) . asked .them .whether Jthey would . support him , in. over-

turning the Sewell policy. They hesitated to join Mr". Fox for this purpose until they knew what his views were pn the all-im-portant question of the Middle Island land fund. Mr. Fox asked whether they ignored the liability of the Middle Island land fund to contribute anything to the general burdens of the colony ? They answered, certainly not ; they objected to the whole being swept away as it arose, but not to making an equitable payment, which would be fair to the Northern Island, and not unduly weigh on the resources of the Middle, and they proposed 2s. 6d. an acre as a final contribution from all the waste lands in the colony. Mr. Fox took time to consult his friends, who, desiring to protect the Customs' revenue of the Northern Provinces in the same manner as we desired to protect the land revenue of the Middle Island, stipulated that 2s, 6d. should be considered as an equivalent for one-third the net Customs. He (Mr. Cargill) still adhered to these views, which he believed would be an equitable settlement of the much-vexed financial question, not of Otago only, but of the whole colony. In this*view of course he might be mistaken, but the scheme was adopted with as hona fide a view to the interests of the whole colony, and as little regard to mere personal or local interests, as was doubtless shewn at the Council-board of the present Government when they were discussing their views of financial policy now before the House. He (Mr. Cargill) would appeal to the House whether there was anything censurable in that line of conduct of the Otago members, and whether it deserved to be characterized as mercenary and unblushing. He would fain suggest some excuse for the writer of the letter ; probably he was a youthful politician, and might have imbibed the notion that all was fair in love, war, and politics — a sentiment which it was to be hoped would find no j response in this House. It might be that he had promised to write to the " Lyttelton Times," and, knowing that the public was a dainty as well .as voracious animal, required its food highly seasoned ; or, what is more probable ; he had written without due reflection — had discharged a political squib without calculating on the combustible nature of the material on which it might alight, and, treating the rumours and tittle tattle which arise during keen political strife as matters of fact, on the spur of the moment had unwittingly misrepresented the true state of the case. If these surmises were correct, he (Mr. Cargill) would suggest that the best course for the hon. member to pursue would be to express his regret. Such a course would doubtless be satisfactory, not only to the Otago members, but also to the House.