THE RESIGNATION OF MR FISHER.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXIV, Issue 8336, 12 April 1889, Page 2

THE RESIGNATION OF MR FISHER.

.•. WELLINGTON; Thursday. In the, course of. aii interview with Mr Fisher tljat- gentleman- said; that the ■'• general -Mea; :^hat; his Teßigßattop: was \ brongli^aooat'throußh. a difference of ••; > opinion over/Certain prosecutions under '- : - : .v" the .BeßrjDatjf-AcMas -scarcely correct. ~'. '■ \^c Tttere*TVere>~nittjlj v nior6 serious disafiree* ; ; ; & -, mwta/tfaavtb^.; le wm :$ yeyrjanof :;l&i :":;-,-"■ hrX.: : >'■:&-: ■■x.,':,^M

'HSSS 'L hl Mn^ On Btteh i»P»rtant quesSrf" ' *• composition of the Halfway «S*L » *« c Peon""' treatment of Mr •tw^tae English expert j the appointment TnhJ , ! BUocess °r to the late %r Jnstieo Johnston; the behaviour of certain Ministers in the Gasparini affair; the i e f"»ti expedition • the leasing of the Canterbury runs; the exposition by the rteipier of his views on the questions of lan< » nationalisation and pauper farms • ana the necessity of proposing a raodiHca£Z°!, the g rope - rty tax ' He dlffet ed. too, inT c frenuer vu P Ori the «ncalled-for and unnecessary expenditure on costly • surveys .connected with tho Monosed ™ c md the Stratford-Taranaki route. , "5: b n ng ' he Ile coul d not concede to the Premier the right to select a par ticular, much Wa momentous, Question - wherein no political principle at all was involved upon which to ?orce hfs (Mr Fisher 8 j resignation. It was altogether a false issue. With regard to the beer fnrnf 9 " T* H 8 laCtS Were th^ On reSrSJT VictO f ia in D ««mber lw. Z \t£ by a tele R ram asking him to stop BOrne proceedtap that had been WK6n against a Wellington brewer. *-fter making inquiries he forbore to interfere, and gave instructions that air offenders were to be prosecuted without tear or favor. Some cases were taken into Court, where the hearing lasted a lon K time, and m the meantime the defendant, S.r? °v beh £ f th ? Tele S ram had _ sent to him (Mr Fisher), threw himself on the mercy of the Customs Department In such cases it was quite customary to deal with the offenders off-hand, but he . preferred to let his colleagues have a say »n the matter, and called a Cabinet Meet- ■ S*f Owm S j° the Premier's absence the meeting could not he held till March 4th, SSm? i? J °V vhloh an information «W a ht* and 80 much discussion took tew» ' V™ sffi5 ffi . cc of the clef k of the m^dT^ 8010864 before the y had determined to prosecute. He was not to blame of th«fl\ and b ? ld ? t he .y llad the letter ottn^tiefendant submitting himself to the J"<?pnient of the department. Other cases wfiich were not barred by the limitation « j 5 We i r r n . ow S° in S on M tlle Cabinet ordered. He had nothing to be ashamed ot, and had done nothing which could not it d^ ended »n Parliament, as had been alleged. He had resigned because he felt ne was in a false position, and could no longer act with the rest of the Ministry. ae had not been the originator or cause Of a sinele personal disagreement in the cabinet, though personal differences had occurred between some of the Ministers and considerable divergence of opinion •■ existed. . The Premier was also interviewed and asked whether lie had anything to say on &V Ub) v f Pißh^' 8 resignation «ZSt,i d * th^ hUformer had submitted to the same ordeal, Sir HamAtkinson said : « The only reason, so far ir? v- - w> for Mr Fisher leaving the •Cabinet is the non-prosecution o? the Junction Brewery Company. It was upon tms 1 asked him to letire. Mr Fisher never expressed to me as Premier any dissatisfaction with the doings of the Cabinet oil any point. The differences alleged as ms reasons for leaving are all new to me. I never heard from Mr Fisher any objection to the action of the Cabinet on any one of these points until I received his letter conveymg his resignation. On , some of the points which are now said to foe serious points of difference Mr Fisher's wiews were actually given effect to. It •was the beer duty case alone on which he nvas asked to resign. It is impossible at this stage to go into any particulars, as it would be fair neither to Mr Fisher nor the Government. I am still in correspondence with him, which is absolutely necessary to elicit the true facts of the case, and as soon as the correspondence is j?° -d » ahall be ver y glad to see it pubIn may be mentioned in this connection that a letter appears in the Post tonight signed by the Premier, explicitly denying *he statement that he went out to the Lower Hutt on Sunday to consult the Speaker of the Legislative Council on the situation. Sir Harry says that he went there on a visit to his son, and did not attempt to see Sir William Fitzherbert, and had no comtounication with him directly or indirectly on the snbject. The Premier also refers to a statement in the Waikato Times to the effect that a seat in the Cabinet had 'been offered to Mr J. B. Whyte, the member for Wnikato, and to tl c statement that Mr Fisher's portfolio had been ottered to an Auckland member before the Minister of Education had resigned. - Sir Harry confirms the denial telegraphed some days ago by the Press Association and says ; "No portfolio or seat in the Cabinet »»as been offered either directly or indirectly to any person since the Government was completed in 1887."