Mr Speight Explains.

Thames Star, Volume XII, Issue 3928, 1 August 1881, Page 2

Mr Speight Explains.

The Auckland Star has the following about Mr Speight's denial : - Mr Speight made a personal explanation in the House yesterday, which brought upon him a perfect howl of derision. It arose in this way: On Wednesday last Mr B.rown moved the adjournment of the debate at an early hour, an understanding having been come to between both parlies that the division was to take place during the next sitting. Mr Browu stated that this was done for the convenience of the Government. Major Atkinson repudiated this in strong terras, and Mr Speight then got up and said he was surprised the Colonial Treasurer should have thought proper to reply to Mr Brown. He should have known that gentleman better than to have takeq any notice of what he said. This remark was so pointed, and uttered in such contemptuous tones that the House seemed astonished, and was a subject of much lobby discussion that night and next day. Indeed, yesterday it was stated that Mr Brown intended to bring the matter up as one of privilege, and Mr Speight told one member that if h,e did so be (Mr Speight) would make it warmer for him. However, he appears to have thought belter of it, and to day be brought the affair up as a question of personal explanation. He quoted what had appeared in a local paper qt what he really did say, and to the utter astonishment of everybody flatly denied that he had said anything of the kind, stating that what he really did say was that the Colonial Treasurer should not have taken so much notice of such a trifling matter. At such a palpable " misstatement" the reporters almost fainted, and a perfect hqwl of derision greeted him from all parts of the House ; but he stjll stuck tq what he had just said, and asserted that when Hansard appeared it would bg seen that it would bear him out. Of course members are allowed to correct and tone down their speeches, and no doubt " Hansard " will bear him out. .INine reporters, however, who reported his very words on Wednesday last, and a host of members to day agree that Mr Speight today made a f#is-statement of facts? and the press representatives consider it a rejection upon them. They intend tq have the '? Hansard" reporter's notes transcribed as priginally takpn, if possible, ;n order to yhow the matter up. J gejid, tbia becgusie

the press representatives having tele- | graphed what Mr Speight really did say, his denial might be likely to reflect upon them. I understand the Speaker has the original proof «opy of the speech containing Mr Speight's words, and this will be called for in due course.