The True Version.

Northland Age, Volume 2, Issue 15, 28 November 1905, Page 3

The True Version.

The following extract is reprinted : TO THE EDITOR. Dear Sir, —Owing to letters and a paragraph in your issue of 24th instant, I feel called upon to give a true version of what occurred with regard to Mr. Johnson at last general election, as follows: I am informed that the question asked Mr. Johnson at Kaitaia was : “ Did you agree with Mr. Glass, at a house in Kaitaia, to retire in favour of Mr. Glass if he got the most votes at the Farmers’ Union ballot ?” He replied “No.” If the question was put that way at Mangonui, and he gave the same answer, he was correct, as Mr. Glass was not present in my house at the time I arranged with Mr. Johnson. The following is briefly, but mildly, what occurred. When Mr. Johnson called I pointed out to him that it would be useless for two to stand in the sole interest of the Farmers’ Union, and that on the declaration of the ballot the candidate getting the least number of votes should retire in favour of the other. This he agreed to, and further arranged that I should wire the result to him as soon as I made up the ballot. I did so and he retired. I fancy that this is quite sufficient proof on that point. I did not ask for a distinct pledge. Such a course would show that I had no confidence in him. I was not prepared to assume so at that time. Mr. Glass agreed to exactly the same thing, and I was informed that both confirmed it on the platform at Awanui subsequently, where they addressed the same meeting. Until I saw the result of the voting at the general election I was under the impression that Mr. Johnson, as secretary to a branch, was working for Mr. Glass. That result disabused my mind, and gave a very different complexion to the whole business not at all complimentary to Mr. Johnson. There could not have been any mistake about the arrangement, as I distinctly informed Mr. Johnson that, although Mr. Houston and 1 were old friends, I would put self out of the question and vote for whoever was the Farmers’ Union choice. As the acknowledged father of the Farmers’ Union I could not do less. In view of the whole thing it would be quite impossible for me to vote for him (Mr. Johnson) at next election. He probably has his own ideas of honour, I have mine ; apparently they don’t agree. I would especially call attention to Mr. Johnson’s letter in reply to “True Blue.” He says “Mr. Glass and myself stood as candidates for the Farmers’ Union interests. It was no question of Government or Opposition.” Quite so; but that being the case where was Mr. Johnson’s loyalty in voting against the Farmers’ Union, and, as it now turns out, against the freehold. Mr. Glass would not only have voted for the freehold himself, but would have worried such a number of weak-kneed Government supporters as to have carried freehold by an overwhelming majority. Again, before last election, Mr. Seddon was the most bitter opponent the F.U. had, and tried all means in his power to suppress it, without success, but Mr. Johnson as secretary to a branch voted for Mr. Seddon’s most staunch supporter. Since that election Mr. Seddon has climbed down, seeing the loyalty shown by other electorates and the helplesness of fighting against what must eventually become the dominant power in New Zealand. Every newspaper shows the decisive point coming closer. Probably another year will determine.—Your most obedient servant. THOS. W. P. SMITH. Kaitaia, 28ih October, 1905.