New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-06-20

| an error under similar circumstance.
| Is II wise or just for the House 10
| persist in this motion? The ministers
have admitted their error. but their
honor is unstaincd They had abused
no public trust, they retain the COM
plete confidence Of their political asso-
clatcs. and | ask the House 10 say that
it regulates the infamous calumnies
which have been disproved and TO put
on record that the House Of Commons
accepts their statements"
Ex-Prerier Balfours Reply.
EX-Premier Arthur J. Balfour fol-
lowed Premier Asquith and suggested
! that If the government supporters
would agree to combine the motion
with an amendment the House would
/ be- unanimous He himself. he said, re-
Garded all the charges OF corruption as
absurd, but he insisted that the con-
I duct Of the two Cabinet ministers was
Of the most vital importance 10 the
public life Of the country.
There was no question Of dishonesty
| he declared. only d question OF the
gravest indiscretion. He continued:
If possibly there is some doubt re-
garding the propriety Of Attorney Gen
oraly Sir Rufus lsaacs INDUCING in
what / am told is called a hutter
there is no doubt whatever that the
! Chancellor of the Exchequer should
not have engaged in such dealings"
Mr. Balfour pointed out that neither
Of the ministers had expressed regret
at the transactions; that what they had
regretted was the unplcasantness arts
ing from them. The mistakes made in
this case were. he declared, those Of
honest men. and they should have OK
PRESSED their regret about them. He
continued:
If the Prime Minister will find words
in which to express the regret We all
feel and which will be put in the jour
nails Of the House he will find no en-
emics among the Opposition. ! appeal
10 him for the honor Of the House 10
accept the course which / suggest
VindictivenesS Olsclalmed.
Andrew Bonar Law, the Opposition
leader. said that his party had no de-
sire 10 drive the ministers out OF pub
lie life. The Opposition had not pushed
the charges vindictively; the ministers
alone were 10 blame for the situation
which had arisen. When the country
found, after their speeches in October
that the ministers had been dealing in
Marconi shares the country was aston
ished and angry.
MIR. Law said that what made the
whole transaction more unpleasant
was that IL enabled further exploita-
ton Of the wireless at the time the
| Titanic disaster was fllng the whole
country with sympathy and sorrow
an exploitation which was utilized TO
| fiji the pockets Of the men floating the
company. He commented on the
Chancellor Of the EXchequer Fronting
| bv the folly Of others who speculated
in Marconi shares.
THE party opposite" said Mr.. Law
1 has always IHdu' 1iic 'i''''' =" ~
| virtue: the Attorney General said yes
tordav that the governments standard
was the higher In the circumstances
the claim was not altogether appropri-
ate.
THE charges the Opposition makes IS
that two ministers have done things
which I'm their position they ought not
IN have done. and have shown a lack
~ moral courage in attempting TO con-
coal from the House what they have
done"
/ Sir Edward Grey concluded the de-
! hate He said: II the motion OF the
Opposition we're passed it would mean
that the political career of these TWO
ministers is ended forever II there
r.as corr,ipt or dishonorable conduc,
they ought 10 go; but there has peeh
only carelessness. This House ough'
not to pass any motion that could De
regarded as vote of censure. Every
ono admits that an earlier complete
acknowledgment should nave peeh
made Of these transactions. ..
The Foreign Secretary. conunulng'
| said that the House should do every
| thing i'm its power TO relieve the mn
| isters Of the injury done them by the
| charges Of corruption banded apou'
| the country, although. nc deciaIeu'
nothing that IL did could right All Iho
wrong they had suffered.
S---