HC Deb 26 June 1854 vol 134 cc702-16

The Order of the Day having been moved for going into Committee of Supply.


rose for the purpose of calling the attention of the House to the conduct of the late Governor of New Zea- land, in delaying and partially frustrating the new constitution granted to that Colony. The hon. Member said, it was with very great reluctance he impeded the progress of the regular business of the House, even for a few minutes. If the circumstances he was about to relate had affected this country, he was sure there would be sympathy enough; but, as they concerned only a distant Colony, he was well aware that it was necessary for him to entreat the indulgence of the House while he detailed them. He was free to confess that several years' close study of colonial affairs had brought him to the deliberate conclusion, that it was absolutely impossible for any Imperial country to govern distant dependencies with justice. If any country could do so, it was England, for England had a love of freedom and a respect for the rights of citizenship; but, nevertheless, he found, that whoever might be Minister, by some sort of fatality he was sure to fall into the same regular course of tyranny and injustice towards the Colonies. The selfishness of human nature, rendered it hopeless that the right of distant fellow citizens should be guarded for them at home. During the last few years, it was true, our colonists had struggled into the recognition of their constitutional rights, and the right hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington), during his tenure of office as Colonial Minister, had the merit of fully recognising those rights in the case of the inhabitants of New Zealand, and likewise of recommending Her Majesty to give up the disposal of the Crown lands to that. Colony. In doing that, he had not only given them that which they had looked for, but he had added the, grace of a voluntary favour from Her Majesty, which had increased the attachment of the Colony towards the Crown, and the confidence of our fellow-citizens in New Zealand towards this country. Now, that being the case, what should be said of the executive officer who had chosen to place himself in obstruction of the enjoyment of those constitutional rights—who had placed himself, with respect to the further favours promised in 11cr Majesty's way—and had arrogated to himself, by a bold assumption of Power, the popularity which, if he had obeyed his instructions, would have belonged to his Sovereign? He would not occupy their time long in stating the circumstances which, he believed, justified him in saying that nothing less than this had been the conduct of Sir George Grey—Sir George Grey had been accustomed to autocratic rule in New Zealand—and that he had ably carried out, as he (Mr. Adderley) believed; but having been accustomed to the old tyrannical régime which was now being everywhere abolished, he had not only felt a repugnance towards the promised constitutional government, but had feared the censure of its constituents, and had resolved in his own mind to quit the Colony before that constitution came into full play. He would first show how he had contravened altogether the spirit of the Constitutional Act introduced by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich, and passed in 1852. The House would recollect that that Act provided that there should be both Provincial Councils and a General Assembly, but that the General Assembly should be the primary body, while the Provincial Councils were to be little more than mere municipalities discharging delegated local functions. He recollected this distinctly, because he had endeavoured, unsuccessfully, to get this order of things reversed. He had preferred the American precedents, which starting with local municipalities, grew up into central powers. But although the house had refused to concur with him in the view which he had taken at that time, Sir George Grey had taken upon himself to contravene the spirit of the Act by first allowing the Provincial Councils to come into play, while he had avoided altogether calling together the General Assembly, which Parliament had undoubtedly intended should have the foremost place. Let the House look for a moment at the dates, and they would see the animus with which the Governor had dealt with the new constitution. The Constitutional Act arrived in the Colony in December, 1852. The proclamation of that Act took place on the 17th of January. 1853, which was exactly six weeks after the arrival of the constitution—so that the Governor had taken the full limit of delay which the law allowed him in that first step. The writs for the election of members of the General Assembly were issued on the 17th of July,1853, which was exactly six months after the Constitutional Act had been proclaimed; so that here again the full limit of delay had been taken advantage of by Sir George Grey; and finally Sir George Grey left the Colony on the 7th of January, 1854, up to which time no meeting of the General Assembly had been convened, although the writs had been returned. When the right hon. Gen- tleman the Member for Droitwich (Sir John Pakington) put some questions upon this subject to the Under Secretary for the Colonies, and had addressed the House at considerable length upon it some few weeks ago, the first point to which he had alluded had been this delay, extending, as he had already pointed out, to the utmost limit which the law allowed. The answer of the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary fur the Colonies was—that the Governor had had full work to occupy him during the whole interval that had elapsed—that he had had a great deal more thrown upon him than usually devolved upon Colonial Governors, the introduction of a new constitution—and that he (Mr. F. Peel) was only surprised that he had been able to get through it all, so as to be in a position to take the necessary formal steps within the time which the Act of Parliament prescribed. But how did this excuse tally with the fact? Suppose the summons for the meeting of the Assembly had been issued at the same time with the writs, so that the Assembly might have met contemporaneously with the return of the writs—that would have saved some time. But he would not put a hypothetical case. He would prove first out of the Governor's own mouth, and afterwards by the testimony of the colonists, who were competent witnesses of the fact, not only that it was possible, but that he himself had first expected that the Assembly would come together in one-half the time. When this constitution first went out, the Governor was himself interested in convening new Provincial Councils; he had then, for his own purpose, to make arrangements with respect to electoral districts, and polling places, and returning officers, and a great many other matters of detail connected with the conduct of the election; and vet, when he had all this to do, the time which he himself thought necessary for the return of the most distant county was not to exceed ninety days. When expedition was the object, ninety days were quite enough; but when the animus was delay, three times as long as that was scarcely sufficient for the purpose. The intervals in the one case were six months each; the intervals in the other case were six weeks; although when he took the shorter time he would have had some excuse for delay, because at that time he had really some original work to do, and some first arrangements to make—electoral districts to mark out, and polling places to assign; whereas, in the other case, the electoral districts had been formed, and the polling places assigned, and the work was ready to his hand. The Duke of Newcastle, in a despatch dated the 8th of March, 1853, had referred to these arrangements made under the provisions of the local Act, and had expressed a hope that, although those arrangements would of course be superseded by the Act of the Imperial Parliament, "they might still be rendered in some measure subservient to the purposes of the more recent enactment." But now, having made good his statement out of the Governor's own mouth, he would see what the colonists said—because, although the hon. Gentleman opposite, who had now discharged with great ability for some years the duties of his present office, was entitled to the highest respect, it was not inconsistent with that respect to say that the colonists themselves were still better acquainted with the circumstances of their own country. Four of the Provincial Councils—those of Nelson, Wellington, Canterbury, and Otago—had sent in memorials upon this subject, but he would refer to two of them only. The Provincial Council of Wellington, with their Speaker at their head, had addressed a memorial to Her Majesty, dated January 6, 1854, in which, with the kindest feelings towards the Governor, they stated that the Governor might have had good reasons for the course he had pursued, but that those reasons were utterly unknown to them, and that they were all, without exception, unable to discover any valid cause for the delay which had occurred in bringing the constitution into work; while the Provincial Council of Nelson took upon themselves to state, in a resolution, that the delay was not justified by any reasons which could have prevented the meeting of the Assembly. Both the colonists, therefore, and the Governor, had proved his point; but he would proceed to prove by a still more significant act of the Governor himself, what his own expectations were. He had felt some time before that there must be some, delay in calling the Assembly together, and that there must be some appropriation of revenue in the meantime. The Act gave the power of appropriating revenue in the meantime to the old Legislative Council; and it was the Governor's own act to call that Council together again, and to obtain an appropriation of revenue up to the 30th of September, 1853, that being the time at which, accord- ing to his own words, the new Legislature would be ready to meet. There could be no doubt, at all events, as to what were the intentions of the framers of the Act; for Sir John Pakington, in his despatch transmitting it to the Colony, had instructed Sir George Grey to use all possible expedition in putting its provisions in force; and, by way of showing what expedition he intended him to use, he had told him to select at once the nominee portion of the intended General Assembly without waiting for further instructions from home. What would the House say when he stated that thirteen months after these instructions had been received by the Governor, not a single nomination had been made? He had, further, reason to believe—although, as it was not in the blue books, he could not quote it—that the opinion of the right hon. Baronet was fully sympathised with by his successor, and that that successor had given Sir George Grey to understand that he was not to leave the Colony until he had met the General Assembly. He had good grounds for expressing this belief; but if the hon. Gentleman opposite contradicted it, he had no document to prove it. Having made out, as he believed, the statement with which he had started, that the animus of the Governor had been delay, and that he had determined that the new constitution should not come into play until he had left the Colony, he would proceed to refer to one or two distinctly illegal acts which had been committed while this resolution of delay was being carried out. The first of these illegal acts was his continuing to appropriate money after the 30th of September, after the old Council, for the last time convened, had finally separated, without having any authorised body by whom this could legally be done. When this question was last before the House, the hon. Gentleman opposite had denied that Sir George Grey had appropriated a single shilling. He said that he had merely handed over the surplus of revenues to the Provincial Councils. But even supposing such to have been the case, by what right or authority did he hand such surplus over? Sir George Grey had no more right to hand that surplus over to the Provincial Councils than he had to appropriate it himself, or to spend it in his own family. The Act was clear and distinct upon the point. The power of appropriation was vested, before the General Assembly was formed, in the old Legislative Council, and was to be transferred to that Assembly as soon as it should be called into existence; and it was only after this power of appropriation had been exercised by the General Assembly that any surplus which might remain was to be handed over to the Provincial Councils. The object of this provision, no doubt, was, that the General Assembly should be called as soon as possible into play. But the next point to which he would allude struck him still more strongly as a gross violation of the law, tending not only to deprive the colonists of New Zealand of their rights, but to deprive the Queen of the grace of a gratuitous favour, while the Governor had grasped to himself, or to his office, the popularity which belonged to Her Majesty. The disposal of the Crown lands was given by the Act to the colonists, and at the close of the clause by which this gift was conferred there was a provision introduced, which was absolutely necessary under the circumstances, and which gave to the Governor an ad interim, power of doing anything that might be necessary in reference to the disposal of those lands, until the General Assembly should come into full play. Sir George Grey had taken advantage of this ad interim power to issue an elaborate series of regulations, completely revolutionising the whole system of land sales in the Colony. He professed to have issued those regulations in conformity with the powers conferred upon him by the Act; but his was certainly the freest translation of an Act of Parliament that he had ever seen. And let it be borne in mind that this was the question of greatest interest in the Colony—that it was the very first question which would have been submitted to the General Assembly—yet the Governor, reckless of the consequences, whether to the colonists or to Her Majesty, had by his own act forestalled irrevocably any expression of their own opinion upon the subject—had so taken it altogether for ever out of their hands, and had practically rendered nugatory and a mockery this great boon, and this singular favour which Her Majesty had granted to New Zealand. He called upon the right hon. Member for Droitwich to defend his own Act, which he considered could only be done if a proper construction were put upon the right hon. Baronet's letter of July, 1852, in reference to this question, by supporting the view of the question which he (Mr. Adderley) was then taking. But he had reserved the most monstrous act of the Governor for the last of his list. The Supreme Court of the Colony had been appealed to upon the subject of this last assumption of power, and decided against the legality of the Governor's acts, and had granted an injunction, which, although its legal operation was confined to Wellington alone, had in reality a much more general application, extending, in fact, to all the settlements established by the New Zealand Company. Sir George Grey had not scrupled to set aside the injunction of the Supreme Court in the Colony, to hold up his highest judge to defiance and contempt, and had proceeded with the illegal land sales. He had promised that he would not go into any other points, and he would only further trespass on the House to say that he did not think a Governor who had so acted, who had shown such an animus towards a liberal constitution, was fit to be promoted from New Zealand to the Cape, where the constitution was more liberal still, and where, if possible, more discretion was required even than in the Colony of New Zealand itself. In conclusion, and in support of the views he had taken of the conduct of Sir George Grey in the government of the Colony, he would refer to the words of the Duke of Newcastle himself, which he would quote, because they were of greater weight than any he could offer to the House. They alluded to another act of Sir George Grey, upon which he would not enter further than to say, that whereas constitutional Acts distinctly gave the New Zealand Company a certain proportion of the proceeds of the land sales, the Governor of New Zealand had taken on himself, contrary to the provisions of the Act of Parliament, to withhold that payment. The Duke of Newcastle, on the 30th of December, 1853, wrote to him, expressing his regret that he had determined not to pay, in obedience to his (the Duke of Newcastle's) commands. I cannot discern," he said, "either in your present despatch, or in any former despatch which you have addressed to me on the subject, any reason to justify you in adopting the resolution thus directly to disobey the orders of Her Majesty's Government. Whatever the justice of the arrangement, it has the force of law. To refuse to act upon it, therefore, is not merely to disobey the orders of the superior executive authority, but it is to resist the law itself; and it is but too easy to foresee the advantage which may be taken by persons eager to find excuses for a similar course, on future occasions, of the step thus deliberately taken by the Governor. Was there ever a severer censure pro- nounced by a Colonial Minister on a Colonial Governor than that which he had now read—telling him, in fact, that he had disobeyed, without excuse, the orders of his superiors, and had set the most mischievous example to others? He would only ask the House whether the officer who had so acted as to have brought himself under that censure was one who ought to have been continued in his office, and still more, whether he ought to have been selected for immediate promotion?


would not reply to the prefatory observations of the hon. Gentleman's speech; and, being anxious not unnecessarily to take up the time of the House, and delay the entering upon the question of Supply, would confine himself solely to what the hon. Member had brought personally to reflect upon the conduct of Governor Sir George Grey. The hon. Member had, of course, used his own discretion in reviving a subject which had already been fully discussed and disposed of by the House; and knowing that the answer which he had then made was in exact and scrupulous conformity with the facts—believing that that answer contained a complete vindication of Governor Grey's proceedings, and not finding anything new in the hon. Gentleman's speech, except the very last point to which he had alluded, he did not think that any sufficient reason had been afforded for delaying the Committee of Supply. He must say he had been astonished to hear Sir George Grey represented as having long been accustomed to exercise undivided rule, and become wedded to autocratic power, and his having consequently endeavoured to prevent the colonists of New Zealand from getting the benefit of free institutions. Was the hon. Gentleman not aware that the Bill which was passed through Parliament to give them free institutions was framed, except in one particular, by Governor Grey himself; and that it was to him that the colonists were indebted for the constitution which Parliament had granted them? But the hon. Gentleman had told them that, when Parliament conceded the boon of the constitution, Governor Grey had stood in the way of their receiving it, and was the principal person who prevented the Colony deriving from it those advantages which Parliament desired to extend to it; and he had endeavoured to make out his case by stating that he had postponed to the latest period that he possibly could, without directly vio- lating the law, the several steps which he was required to take towards bringing the constitution into operation. He did not proclaim the constitution, it was said, until the last day of the six weeks that were allowed him, nor issue the writs until the last day of the prescribed period of six months; and he had evidently formed a fixed intention to leave the Colony without having convened the General Assembly. But the hon. Gentleman seemed to have forgotten, by the line of argument he had adopted, that when Parliament gave the Governor of a Colony a certain discretion with respect to time, and the Governor proceeded within the time limited by Parliament to do what was required of him, it was hardly fair to question the exercise of his discretion, or to ask why he had not proceeded on this day rather than on that. The constitution of New Zealand had been brought into operation in the Colony as soon as Parliament had intended it should be; and it was impossible that the Governor could proceed with the writs with greater speed than he had done, consistently with due consideration of the variety of parties and interests in the Colony. He had had thrown upon him the determination of all those matters of detail which were usually left, under similar circumstances, to a representative body in the Colony, and the whole responsibility of making the necessary arrangements devolved upon him alone. He did not think it was possible for Sir George Grey to determine such points as the boundaries of provinces and of electoral districts, the number of members of the Provincial Councils and of the General Assembly—the apportionment of those members fairly among the different provinces, the determination of the manner in which the electors were to register their votes, and in which those votes were to be revised—where were to be the polling places, and who were to be the returning officers, in a less time than he had taken to do it. He had completed them within about two months; but it took about three months more before the electoral roll was finally completed, and as soon as he knew who the electors were to be, he issued the writs for the elections. It was impossible to have the elections until the electors were known. The hon. Gentleman had charged Governor Grey with having delayed the summoning the Assembly until the writs had been returned, and stated that he might have issued the summons together with the writs. By the Act he was obliged to wait until in possession of the returns to the writs; but as soon as he was in possession of those returns in a complete form he took measures to convene the Assembly. The last return from the most distant settlement, which was 800 miles from the capital, was not received until about seven days before he quitted the Colony. He might, indeed, have convened the Assembly within these few days; but as he was about to transfer the government to a successor, he felt that the responsibility of that measure ought to be left to the officer who would have to preside over its deliberations. This was, in his (Mr. F. Peel's) opinion, a complete answer to the hon. Gentleman's complaint of Sir George Grey's delay in bringing the constitution into operation. The hon. Gentleman had charged Sir G. Grey with haying allowed that portion of the Act which regarded the Provincial Councils to take effect while he postponed the meeting of the General Assembly. The hon. Gentleman should remember that the Provincial Councils were summoned by the superintendents of the provinces, who were on the spot and had no difficulties to encounter; but it was impossible for the Governor to convene the General Assembly sooner. Many members of the Provincial Councils had been also elected to the General Assembly, and they could not attend the Provincial Councils and the General Assembly at the same time. The hon. Gentleman said that the Governor had postponed the choice of the nominee members for thirteen mouths; but till the elections were over it was impossible to make any choice, because many of the persons he would have nominated might have been elected. With respect to the appropriation of the revenue, he (Mr. F. Peel) should repeat his statement that Sir George Grey had not of his own authority appropriated any revenue—he had followed the direction of the Constitution Act, which provided that any surplus revenue not required by the General Assembly should be placed at the disposal of the Provincial Councils—Governor Grey found that about one-third of the revenue would be required for the purposes of the general government, and he placed the remainder at the disposal of the Councils, who expended it in their different provinces. He (Mr. F. Peel) differed entirely from the hon. Gentleman with respect to Sir George Grey's conduct on the land question. George had given the Legislature of New Zealand power to dispose of the waste lands of the Crown in that Colony; but till the meeting of the General Assembly it continued the powers vested in the Crown and delegated by it to the Governor. Immediately after the Act passed the then Secretary for the Colonies (Sir John Pakington) conferred the fullest powers on the Governor, and in subsequent despatches urged him to exercise his powers and bring the question to a settlement before the new Assembly met. The hon. Gentleman had referred to some proceedings in the Supreme Court; but he (Mr. F. Peel) was not aware that any injunction to stay the sale of land according to the Governor's proclamation had ever been issued. Sir George Grey was unable to give him on that point that full information that might have been desirable, as he had been absent from Wellington at the time of the proceeding. He (Mr. F. Peel) believed, however, that if any injunction had been issued, it was confined to the land in the immediate district round Wellington; it had no reference to the waste lands of the Crown in New Zealand generally, and did not proceed beyond prohibiting the final alienation of it. The reason assigned for the abandonment of the proceedings could not be correct; for no one who knew Sir George Grey would believe that he was capable of suspending a judicial officer because he had acted to the best of his judgment in the discharge of his duty. Lastly, the hon. Gentleman had impugned Sir George Grey's promotion to the governorship of the Cape. That was one of the last appointments made by the Duke of Newcastle before he quitted the Colonial Office, and no appointment was ever calculated to lead to consequences more honourable to the officer who obtained it, or more advantageous to the country. When Sir George Grey first went to New Zealand, the native question was most embarrassing; but by his influence over the aborigines, and the confidence he inspired them with, and his knowledge of their habits, manners, and intitutions, he had succeeded in reconciling them to British rule. The native question was now the most important at the Cape. We had succeeded in conquering the Kafirs, but it was too expensive a game to keep them in forcible subjection. We must endeavour to attach them to our rule. He believed that the best chance of stopping the drain on the resources of this country, and restoring tranquillity to the Cape, lay country, the agency of Sir George Grey. Strong comments had been made on a despatch addressed to Sir George Grey. He adopted that despatch; but still he thought the appointment the best that could be made. The Secretary of State had felt it his duty to write that despatch because the Imperial Parliament having imposed the debt of the New Zealand Company as a charge upon that Colony, he felt bound to enforce the payment without discussing the justice of it. He took an Imperial view of the question; Sir George Grey, being on the spot, took a. colonial view, and hesitated to carry out his instructions till he was certain that the Home Government had acted with a full knowledge of all the circumstances. He quitted the Colony before he received any further instructions. Had he remained, no doubt he would have obeyed them.


said, he was not surprised that the hon. Member for Staffordshire (Mr. Adderley) should have brought this subject before the House, after the manner in which the Under Secretary for the Colonies had on a former occasion answered his (Sir J. Pakington's) questions with regard to the conduct of Sir George Grey, in bringing into operation the new constitution. He had put these questions to the hon. Gentleman in consequence of certain rumours which had reached him of the conduct of Governor Grey in relation to the elections in New Zealand—conduct, if those rumours were true, not at all creditable to the Governor, and certainly not in accordance with the intention of the Government by whom the Constitution Act was passed. He had put his objections in the form of a set of questions to save the time of the House, and he did not think the answer he received amounted to a complete vindication of Sir G. Grey; but he felt unwilling to take any further steps an officer whose general merits as a colonial Governor he estimated so highly. Sir G. Grey had been absent for fourteen years as Governor, first of South Australia, and then of New Zealand; during that period he had performed many important services to the Crown, and merited the approbation of the Sovereign and her Ministers; and it was, therefore, with the more pain that he felt himself compelled to speak in unfavourable terms of some part of his conduct. He would confine his observation entirely to his recent conduct in New Zealand. With regard to the sale of land and the injunction, the the re-hon. Gentleman could not be aware of the contents of the printed papers, as Sir G. Grey himself stated that an injunction had been granted. He thought that Sir G. Grey had acted indiscreetly, and that he had set a most dangerous example and precedent in disobeying the injunction of the Supreme Court; and he (Sir J. Pakington) believed no circumstances could justify a Governor in such a course. He regarded his conduct in the disposal of the lands with great disapprobation. When he (Sir J. Pakington) sent out the instructions giving a temporary power to dispose of land, he had no intention of giving greater power than might be necessary to prevent public inconvenience and to simplify the duty of the Assembly. He was not prepared to refer accurately to the despatches, as he did not expect the discussion would have come on that evening, but by referring to his despatches it would be perfectly clear that the then Government had no intention that he should exercise the powers given him in such a manner as to deprive the Assembly of the important privileges granted to it by the Constitution Act. He could not approve of the long delay in convening the Assembly; the intention of the Government in passing the Act was, that the Legislature should be convened as soon as possible, and the instructions sent out were to that effect. Sir G. Grey, however, waited till the very latest day allowed by the law before he issued the writs, and up to the day he left the Colony—thirteen months after he received the Act—he took no steps to convene the Legislature. The delay was the more to be blamed as he had called into existence the local councils that could not properly carry on their functions till the Legislature was constituted. Again, he did not think Sir G. Grey justified in leaving the Colony until he had put the Constitution into operation. When the Constitution Act passed, the Government then in power decided, after much consideration, that, instead of sending out a new Governor to commence the constitution, it would be better that Sir G. Grey should remain in New Zealand for that purpose; but as the usual period of colonial service had almost expired in his case, it was arranged, to meet his wishes, that leave of absence should be given to him as soon as be had put the new constitution into action. He thought, also, Sir G. Grey's conduct was open to censure when he committed the illegality of appropriating the revenue by his own authority. There was another point which he could not pass over without some notice, and that was the recent election of Lieutenant General Wynyard, the Commander of Her Majesty's Forces in New Zealand, to the post of Superintendent of the settlement of Auckland. This gentleman, it appeared, held the anomalous and incongruous position of being Commander of Her Majesty's Forces, and, at the same time, acting Governor and President of one of the settlements. He put it to the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir G. Grey), whom he now addressed for the first time as Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether he would give his sanction to such a combination of offices as this? He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would lose no time in intimating that the officer in command of the forces in New Zealand was not to be considered as eligible for the office of Superintendent, still less that his election should be obtained by such means as had been resorted to in this instance; for he was informed that Lieuteant General Wynyard's election had been secured by the votes of his own soldiers and the military pensioners in the colony, persons who were under his own control and authority.


said, that after the full and satisfactory statement of his hon. Friend (Mr. F. Peel), he would not enter upon the details of this question, more especially as he was not possessed of the full information necessary for that purpose. With regard to the last point stated by the right hon. Baronet, he might say that he knew nothing whatever of the circumstances of Lieutenant General Wynyard's election to the office he held as Superintendent. He might say this much, however, that he thought the office which he held as interim, Governor was inconsistent with the subordinate office of President of Auckland. He thought the offices incompatible; and in these circumstances he had no doubt Lieutenant General Wynyard would see it his duty to resign the subordinate office which he held. With reference to what had been said as to Sir G. Grey having improperly left the Colony, he had to state that he left it with the full sanction of the Duke of Newcastle, and not till he had made all the preparations that were necessary for bringing the constitution into full effect.

House in Committee of Supply.