Parliamentary.

Colonist, Volume XIX, Issue 2282, 11 September 1877, Page 3

Parliamentary.

Wellington, September 8.

The debate on the Hawke's Bay land transactions was. resum'ed, by Mr Seymour, who opposed the appointment of a Committee, which could net perform the duties of such ah extonsive enquiry. He suggested that they should be confined to|ac enquiry into the charges made in the House againsfc Mr Ormond and Sir George Grey, and the way in which Hawke's Bay law suits were carried on. Sir George Grey denied ever having heard of rosolutions passed by old settlers impugning his truthfulness. The men whose names were quoted as parties thereto were old and. valued friends of his. He denied that the House had anything to do with the Oranui case, which was with an European, who, if wronged, had the Courts of law open. He simply refused to pay money for a. bargain ho had never made. He denied positively ever having been a member of a Land Purchasing Company. He had been desirous of establishing a settlement near Taupo, and when a company was formed to establish one there he had promised to promote what he considered a good object, but ho had no further interest in the company consisting of Messrs. Henry Russell, Cox, Whitaker, Thomas Russell, Whitmore, and others. He read letters .from Colonel Whitmore, stating positively that Sir G. Grey was not a member of the company. He strongly condemned the means by which the Hawkes Bay lands had been acquired, as shown by the report of the Commission. He did not believe the House could pass a law to shut the ordinary courts to the natives and force them before a special tribunal for redress. He was quite willing to hnve his transactions investigated by a Committee. Ha had never bought an acre of native land. Mr. Sutton spoke at length in defence of the | Hawkes Bay land purchasers. [Mr Stout condemned the manner in which Sir George Grey had been treated by the House and the Press, and felt sure that a reaction would come. If Sir George Grey had acted wrongfully in being bribed regarding tbe Taupo land, as stated by Mr. Ormond, had not Messrs. Cox and Whitaker also been wrong in bribing a Governor ? He referred at length to the Hawkes Bay transactions, especially Mr. Sutton's, as detailed by the Commission. He supported the appointment of a Committee. Mr. Russell's amendment was negatived on the voices. Mr. Whitaker then moved to add to Mr. Rees' motiqn words to the effect that the Committe should enquire inlo the charges made against Mr. Ormond, and against Sir Q-. Grey in reference to the Taupo affair, and into the alleged improper oonduot of oertain law suits in. Hawke's Bay. He replied generally to Sir G. Grey's charges againsfc him regarding the Taupo land affair. He believed Mr. Cox's statement that Sir G. Grey was concerned as he knew that Mr. Cox was truthful and' that Sir G. Grey was not. His own connection with the affair was that when the company was formed in Wellington Mr. Tom Russell put his name down as one. When he heard of it he declined because the scheme was too large. Ha knew no more till Mr. Russell drew on him for £40 to pay expenses after the company broke up. [He was proceeding to repeat Mr. Ormond's accusations against Mr. Rees in relation to his leaving the West Coast, when "Mr. Rees denied that the accusation, was true, and the Speaker called Mr. Whitaker to order, and said that such personalities were highly irregular. Mr. Whitaker said that he had been attacked, and simplv wished to retaliate.] He supported making the natives give security for costs before suing. . Mr. Wakefield strongly condemned the conduct of the Government, and supported the' appointment of a Committee. Mr Tairoa supported the enquiry. He said 'ha was ashamed of the tone of the debate, and was inclined to say with King David, "All men are liars." On a division on Mr Whitaker's amendment, ifc was rejected by 26 to 25. The debate on the original motion was continued for a short time and then adjourned; and the House rose at 1.20 a.m. September 10. Sir George Grey gave notice that if a Committee be appointed, it be instructed to enquire into charged macle against himself and Mr Ormond. Mr Cox made a personal explanation. In 1867 Sir G. Grey.first urged him to come North, and invest in land. During the session of 1868, Henry Russell and himself had several interviews with Sir G. Grey in reference to leasing 250,000 acres soutn of Taupo. At the first interview told Sir G. Grey fully their plans ; at the second interview a few days after, Sir George Grey asked would ifc interfere with their plans if he joined in the venture, and they said there waß no objaotion. The plans were fully discussed, ai>d Sir G. Grey urged that due provision must be made for the native owners. At the tliird interview 'a few days after, Sir G. Grey asked to be allowed to withdraw from the matter; as he did not wish to give his enemies any opportunity of accusing him of any improper condifot. After this Mr Russell and himself went on with the negotiations, and.Sir G. JGrey furnished him with .letters to the native owners. Sir G. Grey had no further connection with the matter.. He had never entertained the idea of Sir G. Grey being corruptly connected with the transaction; any such idea was an entire mistake. Sir G. Grey never knew vpho thp .nembers qf the proposed company were. The project was for various reasons abandoned in 1869. When he heard Sir G. Grey talking about the impropriety of any man holding five hundred acres, he thought him inconsistent and mentioned these facts to several members. The whole of the letters, he had obtained from ItyTr Locke referred to tliis transaction, with a slight exception. He had gjven Mr Ormond permission to use them with Mr" Lo'cjie's ponsent'. Had he been consulted he would have objected to the letters being used in the way they were, but such charges as had been made against Mr Ormond were calculated to_make a man's tongue to run away with his reason, Mr Macfarlane thought the Supreme Gdurc was the proper tribunal to enquire into the points raised, and, therefore, moved the previous question., : Mr. Hursthouie said he heard from Mr Cox last session what'had »ow been stated. Mr. Stout expressed regret that Mr Ormond had i not withdrawn his accusations, which were completely contradicted by Mr Cox. ' MrOrmoDd considered all he said was fully confirmed by Mr Cox. He had been blamed for bitter speech, but he bad suffered frequent arid gross pro: vocation, and nothing he said was so bad as what Sir' G. Grey and flfiJ Rees had. constantly said. He felt bound to reply and retort to constant repetitions :of accusations Vhioh had killed Sir Donald M'Lean.

He objeoted to tbe appointment of a Committee fo go behind the Supreme Court, but would like to seo a commission. Mr Bunny urged the production of letters, as Mr Cox's statement failed to bear out the impression arising from Mr Ormond's speech. Mr Carringlon agreed with Mr Bunny. -Mr Barff defended Mr Rees, and condemned tbe intemperate tone of the debate. Mr. Lusk expressed regret at Mr. Ormond's not withdrawing the statements when proved to be un- , founded. He supported the appointment of a Committeo. • Mr. Bowen justified Mr. Ormond's speech by the gross provocation the Government and himself had received. The House should not interfere with cases pending beforo Courts of law. Mr. Hodgkinson thought tho country would believe the charges true if the Government stifled erquiry. Mr. Woolcook thought the charges must bo enquired into, but not by a Committee. Mr. Montgomery thought 'Mr. Cox's statement completely exonerated Sir G. Grey, and that no previous provocation justified Mr. Ormond's speech, made'deliborately in cold blood. The debate was interrupted.