FARCICAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE HOUSE. A QUESTION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST. (From Our Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, October 10.

Otago Witness, Issue 2744, 17 October 1906, Page 16

FARCICAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE HOUSE. A QUESTION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST. (From Our Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, October 10.

Contrary to the usual custom, the House of Representatives took a half-holiday for Labour Day, and when members met in the evening they found, not the Land Bill, but five or six more or less unimportant measures at the head of the Order Paper. One of these— the Sayings Banks' Proiits Bill — led to some farcical proceedings, but matters assumed a more serious phase when a division was taken on a motion by Mr Barclay that the trustees of such private savings banks be allowed £1 a day for each meeting they attended, the payments not to exceed £12 a year to any member. The motion was carried by 34 votes to 33. Mr Wilford then raised the question of whether under the Standing Orders members who were pecuniarily interested could vote on such a clause. The Chairman (Mr Flatman) said he did not know that anyone had so voted. Mr Wilford named Messrs Arnold and Barclay as two members who had voted for the clause, and who were pecuniarily interested, seeing that they were trustees of the Dunedin Savings Bank. The Chairman: How do you know? Mr Wilford: Because they told me so. Mr Flatman ordered Mr Wilford to resume his. seat, but the latter persisted in raising a point of order. He said that the Chairman should rule whether or not these members were entitled to vote. The Chairman asked Mr Arnold to state whether he was interested. Mr Arnold said he did not know that the proposal made it compulsory that any amount of money should be voted to the trustees. It only made it permissible to vote the money, and it might never be voted. Mr Wilford: A point of order, sir. Mr Flatman: Sit down, Mr Wilford.— (Cries of " Sit down," and " Chair, Chair.") After some further skirmishing. Mr \N ilford prevailed, the Chairman paying, "Let me hear your point of order." Mr Wilford . Well, sir, you objected to hear it a second ago. The Chairman: Order' Order! Order!

Mr Wilford : You asked the hon. member whether or not it* was a trustee of this savings bank, and whether he was interested in this, but he is going beyond an answer to the question. My point of order is this: That you asked tho hon. member a question, and he should answer that question.— (" Hear, hear.') Mr M'Nab argued that the members referred to were not directly interested pecuniarily. . While Mr M'Nab was speaking the Chamber fairly bristled with points of order, and Mr Wilford's voice could be heard above the din calling. " Mr Flatman, Mr Flatman, Mr Flatman." The Chairman: What is the matter'— (Loud laughter.) What aro you waiting for. —(More laughter.) Mr Wilford: I am waiting for you to name somobodv to speak. _ Mr M'Nab ro=o aaain. and the Chairman. arl<lro,-,jnsr Mr, Wilford, again ordered him to "-it down." Gray and M'Lachlan followed with othor points of order, and the House became a Babel, the proceedings being farcical in the extreme.

The Chairman seemed loth to rulo, and the members had got out of hand. At length he said : " I trust the committee will maintain order," a remark that was re teived with cries of "Hear, hear.**

Sir Joseph Ward, who was in charge of the bill, said the House was really frilling with the bill, and the practice of naif a dozen members continually raising points o£ order was frivolous. Mr Wilfoid once more interposed. The Chairman : Will you please* resnmo your seat. — (Laughter.)

Mr Wilford (sitting down): Yes.

The Chairman : Now. sir, I will" hear what you have got to say. — (Peals .of' laughter at the Chairman's action.)

Mr Wilford said the matter was very simple one. The members could state whether they were interested or not, and then the Chairman could rule.

The Chairman then asked Mr Arnold to} continue his statement.

Mr Arnold said that unless the Chair* man defined what was meant by the term interested it would be impossible for him to answer the question. The, Hox*. Mr Hall- Jones raised the' point as to w'hfether' Mr -WHford was in order in -raising frivolous paint® of -Sflfer. Mr Massey ' raise&. a^fiatbjar. point o£ order by asking whether 'tfep^. JBtiniat^r was ,^n ,ordej»%!J^ er « t *ff: < * i P- :MRSewb ei sK: II 3 )om * --■ ; l!^;3Jjcw!ißy,"s : on' : ''bein^'cSwSi# on to;*tat^ whether or not he was interested, said that the member for Hutt had,' as usual, discovered a mare's nest. " Mr Wilford : A tru-tees' nest. — (Letughter.)

The Chairman : Order. — (Laughter.) Mr Barclay : I don't know why. £t tbo dictation of the member for Hutt tho Chairman should ask (Cries of " Chair, chair.") Mr Barclay "said thaSE if'tberfe was any question about his being interested another remedy could be taken, and not the one sought to be used by-AIo-.Wilford. Mr Kidd said that he had voted against the bill, and he asked the Chairman what his (Mr Kidd's) position was. He added that he was a trustee of the Auckland Savings Bank, and he and hi* co-trustees were aeamst payment to trustees. Sir William Steward quoted " May." and argued that Messrs Arnold and Barolay were not interested, and could vote.

Mr Massey said that it appeared to him that the Standing Ordor was perfectly clear. Either Messrs Arnold and Barclay were trustees or they were not. As the amendment provided for the payment of trustees. these gentlemen, if trustees, were interested and could not vote.

The Premier cited the case of members who were shareholders in mini«p companies votinsr on mining legislation when before the House, and further asked, what about members votine for the Payment of Members Bill ? "If I were the. members referred to," he continued. "I would decline to answer the question. It is nothing more nor loss than an interference with the members of the House." Sir Joseph Ward continued that this sort of conduct was hittiner below the belt. Where, he asked, was this sort of thing to end? and he* instanced as a parallel case the Land Bill. Any member owning land might be deemed as interested if Mr WHford's contention were correct.

The Hon. Mr Millar, after defininff " direct pecuniary interest," said that ho had a bill on the stocks for the purpose of regulating solicitcre' fees. Would it bo held that no solicitor should dare speak on that bill?

Mr Wilford indicated that in his opinion solicitors should not vote.

Mr Millar differed, and said that there was not a bill brought to the floor of the House in some clause or another of -which, some member was not interested.

Mr J. Allen assumed that Messrs Arnold and Barclay had not quite understood what; tbev were doing. , Mr Arnold: I knew exactly what I was doing. Mr Allen: Very well, then, I have no apologies for the hon. gentleman. Mr Barclay said that ho would neither deny nor admit that ho was a trustee. Mr Allen assumed then that both gentlemen were trustee^. Mr Millar contended that tho proposal was to pay the trustoos or allow the money to bo voted by tho trustees as a whole, and Mossrs Arnold and Barclay were anlf a portion of them. MY Wilford complained that the Premier had introduced heat into the debate, and said that he wondered what the Chairman would havo said to him had he advised mombers not to answer a query put to thorn by tho Chair, as the Premier hatl done.

Eventually the Chairman ruled that Messrc Arnold and Barclay were justified in voting, that the clause providing for the allo^-nnco of a fee be read a second time, and that thov had no pecuniary direct interct as trustees in the vote.

Mr Wilford: But thoy have not said they were, i.rustoe 3 , sir.

Mr Massey called for a division, and th« clause was inserted in the bill, but the divi-ion was close— 39 io 32.

Me-srs Arnold and Barclay voted with the " Ayes."