SEAT IN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Otago Witness, Issue 3193, 26 May 1915, Page 3

SEAT IN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

THE OFFER TO MR WILKINSON

MINISTERIAL EXPLANATION. (Fbom Oub Own Coebespondent.)

WELLINGTON, May 17,

A clear recital of the fact a relating to the offer by the Prime Minister of «, seat in the Legislative Council to Mr Wilkinson, which offer is generally supposed to have given rise to the recent election proceedings, was given by the Hon. H. D. Bell (Leader of the Legislative Council) in an interview' with a Dominion reporter tonight. Incidentally, Mr Bell refutes the charges of corrupt practices made by certain newspapers against Mr Massey. ■‘At the election of 1911,” said Mr 8011, *' the Reform Party adopted Mr Wilkinson as its candidate lor the Bay of Islands seat, and supported his candidature. Mr Massey was then, as he still is, the leader of the Reform Party, and upon him was imposed the responsibility of finally dererniiii.ng which ot the candidates nominated in every electorate had the host claim to his official support. Unfortunately lor Mr Wilkinson, the candidate of the party kd by Sir Joseph Ward was Mr Vernon Reed, the then sitting member, who was deservedly personally popular in the district. It was oven more unfortunate for Mr Wilkinson that Mr Reed had cons.stently supported the freehold policy of the Reform Party, and was then, as he has always been, opposed to the policy of universal State leasehold, which was the orirmonl pknk 'p the policy of Sir Joseph Ward and his party, so that the real issue oeiwcvn tlie policies of the two parties, as distinct from the personal popularity of the two candidates, could not arise in the Bay of Islands electorate. Mr Reed was elected as _ an avowed supporter of the freehold policy, though his candidature was officially supported by Sir Joseph Ward. When the Mackenzie Government was formed, alter the first session in 1912, it became manifest to Mr Reed that he could not support that Government without abandoning the principle of the freehold, to which ho had been definitely committed in his electoral pledges. Accordingly he was one of those members who, in the second session of 1912, felt themselves bound to vote against the Mackenzie Government and to support the Administration formed by Mr Massey. He became a member of the party, and was loyal and consistent in his support of its policy throughout the second session of and the sessions of 1913 ard 1914. In 1912, and again in 1915, the Government endeavoured to pass a Bill providing for the change of the constitution of the Legislative Council from nomination to election by, the people at the polls, and abstained from proposing to his Excellency for appointment the names of more than four or five gentlemen, but the Government Bill was defeated in the Legislative Council in both years. The Government was taunted in the Opposition press and by the Opposition in Parliament with its failure, and was accused of having no real intention to pass the Bill, to which it was pledged by the promises of ne.arly every member of the party to the electors who voted at the election in 1911 It had, therefore, become manifest that in order to pass the Bill in the session of 1914- it was absolutely necessary for the Government to propose a number of appointments to the Council, and some months before the seeson in 1914 the Government, and especially the Prime Minister, who has the principal function and duty in the matter of such appointments, entered upon the consideration of the names of gentlemen in various parts of the country who were qualified for seats in the Council. Mr Reed had everv reason to feel assured that his constituents approved of tho course he had taken in the second session of 1912, but he insisted that it was necessary for him to demonstrate that fact by being a candidate for his constituency at the election of 1914. Mr Reed’s confidence in the judgment of his constituents was entirely justified at the polls in 1914, for though ho was then opposed not only by a strong Opposition candidate, but also by Mr Wilkinson (who necessarily took from him a number of Reform party votes), he was elected by a substantial majority. That insistence on the part of Mr Reed was not only honourable to himself, but binding upon the party and upon Mr Massey. It was impossible that any other candidate than Mr Reed could, under such circumstances, be contemplated as the authorised Government candidate for the Bay of Islands seat at the election in 1914. and consequently Mr Wilkinson could not havo that official support. Tho Reform Party had, as I have said, adopted and supported Mr Wilkinson as its candidate in the election of 1911. Though it was bound by every obligation of honour and duty to support Mr Reed for the election in 1914, it had decided in 1911 that it desired the presence of Mr Wilkinson in Parliament, and had then endeavoured to place him there. I do not believe there is a man in the country, if ho will take the trouble to think on the subject, and if ho is not swayed entirely by a desire to vilify -the present Administration, who will not agree with mo that, so far from its having been wrong, improper, or corrupt for Mr Massey to intimate to Mr Wilkinson that a seat in tho Council might be open to bim if he would accept it, it would have been unfair and disloyal on Mr Massey’s part to have abstained from giving that intimation. Tire intimation was given bv Mr Massey to Mr Wilkinson some two or three months before tho session of 1914. It was given at the time when the Government was considering the claims of gentlemen throughout the country to the appointments which tho Governmnet was forced to make in order to carry its Bill in 1914. “ That is the position, and that is what

took place. Mr Wilkinson preferred to stand again for the House of Representatives, and for that reason only he was not amongst those gentlemen who were appointed to the Council at the beginning of the session of 1914. If at any time alterwards Mr Wilkinson should change his mind it was, of course, open to Mr Massey and the Government to consider anew his unquestioned claims on the party and ita leader. I have read in some of the Opposition newspapers statements to the effect that the judgment recently delivered by the Election Court which decided the petition adversely to Mr Reed was, in effect ,a decision that Mr Massey's intimation to Mr Wilkinson at the time and in the circumstances I have mentioned was corrupt within the meaning of the Legislature Act. Certainly The judges have not said anything so ludicrous. Mr Massev was the Prime Minister. Ho not only had the right to advise his Excellency to make appointments to the Legislative Council, but he was at that time forced to offer such advice by reason of his election pledges that he would do his utmost to pass through Parliament a Legislative Council Reform'Bill. He had not only the right to advise, but the dutv to select those whom he considered best fitted to servo in Parliament. But, in addition, as I have said, Mr Massey was bound in all fairness and justice to give the onportunity of a scat in Parliament to Mr Wilkinson, and T should personally have felt ashamed if, for any reason. Mr Mac-sov had acted otherwise than ho did. Mr Wilkinson could, of courseplease himself.”