The Pahiatua Herald. with which is incorporated THE PAHIATUA STAR. Published Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1897. THE HOROWHENUA BILL.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume V, Issue 582, 13 December 1897, Page 2

The Pahiatua Herald. with which is incorporated THE PAHIATUA STAR. Published Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1897. THE HOROWHENUA BILL.

The Ilorowbcnua Block Act Amend mont Bill is a queer piece of legislation, and it is more!—-it is about the most vicious and most dangerous Bill that has been presented to Parliament. The author of the measure, the lion John McKenzie, may be, and probably is, (juite sincere in the matter, but to the individual of average intelligence it looks very like persistent persecution of an individual. The history of tho Ilorowhenua Block since 1895 is such that every honest elector would wish that it could be buried out of sight. In tho session of 1895, some very strong charges were levelled against Sir Walter Duller, the central figure in tho Ilorowhenua melodrama. The Minister of Lands insinuated, if ho did not actually sny, that Sir Walter Buller had acquired his interest in tho Ilorowhenua by fraud of tho deepest hue. This led to Sir Walter committing a technical breach which brought him within the purview of Parliament and at the Bar of the House. From that historic part he addressed the House of Representatives, am! submitted himself to be questioned by members. It was generally admitted that his story was told eloquently, and that its truth was based upon something more than .circumstantial evidence. However, I ho legislation of 1895 led to the appointment of a Royal Commission, winch reported adversely to Sir Walter Buller. 'I lie report of the Idoyal Commission was dealt with in pamphlet by Sir Walter, and a perusal of R \you)d ho time well spent. The effect of the ltoyal Commission report was the introduction and i subsequent passing of the l{oroI whouiia Block Act, I Rider this Act the public Trustee was directed to bring an action in the Supreme Court to test the validity of Bailer's title, the time ill which tho action could he taken being limited to six months. This compelled Sir Walter to sit down and ! „\;"i' the attack; he waited anil waited, J,ul the Public Trustee showed no sigim of notion. If the Supremo Court was not moved before the time livid by the Act, namely, six in >n u , Sir Walter J/.ullor's title (happened. The J delay on the part of the Crown .Heeesril.jite.»"JSii* Walter setting the springs ii.i acfiee 'The Supreme (Court was moved first to order the Public Tyustoe tip issue p, writ, and sul.Hfcqmmlly to cause the said' yvrit to ho served, it is safe to say ll,iat every obstacle was placed in the way of Sir Walter Buller. How ever, tho case ovoutuully came before the Chief Justice, and Mr Thoo. Cooper, acting for the Public Trustee, absolutely aud unreservedly

withdrew the allegations of fraud and improper conduct, admitted that Sir Walter Buller had no notice of trust, and farther that he did not think that the Public Trustee could be successful, even supposing the decision of the Apellate Court were available. Judgment was given for Sir Walter Buller with costs against the Public Trustee, and we say it with regret, the non-payment of those costs is a disgrace to tho Government of the day. It is wonderful how many excuses Ministers can find when they do not wish to do a thing, Apart altogether from tho merits of the case, having been awarded costs, the least the Government could have done was to have paid them, for it must be remembered that the litigation was not of Sir Walter Buller’s choosing. Ministers have a high regard for constitutional procedure when it suits thorn, and in connection with the payment of Buller's costs their admiration for the constitution is unbounded. The only way to appreciate fully the scandalous nature of the Horowhenua proceedings is f n the reader to place himself in the position of Sir Walter Buller and endeavor to realise what his own feeiings would bo if similarly treated. We have no brief for Sir Walter Buller, but the plumb-line of justice aud common honesty is put out of gear by these peculiar actions on tiic part of the Government. Not content with making him wait for his costs of putting him to endless expense and consuming anxiety, tho Minister of Lands, with all the advantages that he enjoys as a member of Parliament, and all the power he possesses as a Minister of the Crown, took what to us appears an unnecessarily harsh pi o reeding (in the public interest of course ; ministers always act in the public interest and never from motives of personal enemity or political bias), by laying upon the table of tho House a memorandum setting forth not merely liis view of the Horowhenua case, but also his opinion of Sir Walter Buller and in effect reiterating his accusations of fraud and chicanery which the solicitor for tho Crown, Mr Theo. Cooper unreservedly withdrew as having no foundation in fact. To this memorandum Sir Walter Buller prepared a reply and requested the Premier to place it upon the table of the Houso. Mr Seddon professed to see in Sir Walter’s request a “ clumsy joke.” A man seeking to defend his honor and liis leputation instead of being helped to bring his case before tho representatives of the people is told by the Premier that he is perpetrating a “clumsy joke.' 1 This we confess is quite a novel view of a very serious matter, and does not reflect to the credit of Mr Seddon, and we are sorry to have to say so, Now comes the last act iu the introduction of the amending Bill, which seeks to compel Sir Walter Buller to submit to fresh aud costly litigation, and as a means of forcing Parliament to accept the Bill, the payment of the costs of the previous action is made a clause of the Bill. If the House rejects the measure it will also reject the payment of tho oosts now due to Buffer. If the Bill is rejected then we can well believe that the Government will, in the interests of the country and the democracy, tell Sir Walter to whistle the Psalms in lieu of the costs granted him by the Supreme Court. The public interest as an abstract thing has considerable elasticity and admits of the per petration of every wrong and of every injustice, which become sanctified by the incantation of the formula “ the public interest.” Sir Walter Buffer has we think by this time fully realised that Justice walks on crutches.