THE NEW ZEALAND LIBERALS AND THE HOME ELECTIONS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 8986, 17 September 1892, Page 3

THE NEW ZEALAND LIBERALS AND THE HOME ELECTIONS.

The following is a copy of the letter sent to Hon Mr. Gladstone by Sir R. Stout, as president of the National Liberal Association :— Dunedin, sth September, 1892. To the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, Esq.., Prime Minister, London. —As president of the National Liberal Association of New Zealand, I have much pleasure in conveying to you the congratulations of the National Liberal Association on the success of the Liberal party at the polls, and on your accession to office as Prime Minister of the Empire. I have also to state that the telegram sent by the Premier of this colony (Hon. John Ballance) represents the opinions of a vast majority in Mew Zealand. Of course, you will be aware that in New Zealand, as in all parts of the Empire, there are necessarily two political parties, and some colonists favour the policy of the Tories of England, whilst others are just as strongly Liberal. You may, however, I believe, accept the statement of the Premier as representing the feeling, not only of a majority but of a vast majority of New Zealand colonists. I have been requested by the Association, of which I am President, to make this statement, because a small Association in the colony calling itself the National Association, and having but a few members on its rolls, Has, it is stated in the press, written to you and to the Marquis of Salisbury repudiating the action of the Premier. This repudiation has emanated from but a few colonists, and from an Association that has little political significance in New Zealand. \ou will, ere this reaches you, have received congratulations from many members of the House of Representatives and from Liberal Associations at Auckland and Christchurch. These prove the statement I have made as to the feeling of the majority of New Zealand voters. I have, etc., Robert Stout. Subjoined is the reply to the above letter :— TO THE EDITOR. Through the telegraph we have been furnished with & copy of a letter forwarded from Dunediu, under date the sth iust., by Sir Robert Stout to Mr. Gladstone. In it Sir Robert congratulates Mr. Gladstone on " the success of the Liberal party at the polls," and on his (Mr Gladstone's) " accession to office as Prime Minister." The letter goes on to state that "the telegram sent by the Premier of this colony (Hon. John Ballance) represents the opinions of a vast majority in New Zealand. The remainder of Sir Robert's letter discloses ■ the motive which prompted him to write—namely, to minimise the effect of a protest, made by the Auckland section of the National Association of New Zealand, against interference by the Ministry or Parliament of New Zealand in the party politics of the United Kingdom. The protest was called forth by the now-oelebrated cablegram sent officially by the Ministry of the colony to Mr. Gladstone. Sir Robert is pleased to call this protest " repudiating the action of the Premier I" It is true we regretted the action, and protested against it; but repudiate it we could not, for, the Ministry being officially competent to represent the colony as a whole, and professing to do so. dragged us all with them into their improper partisan position. The protest was made, however, not to Mr. Gladstone or to Lord Salisbury (as Sir Robert disingenuously implies), but to the New Zealand Premier, who had acknowledged its receipt before a copy was sent to Mr. Gladstoue. Your readers will observe that the National Association, in their protest, carefully avoided any expression of opinion as to the sympathy of New Zealanders with either one or the other political parties of the old country, and this abstention was emphasized in their letter to Mr. Gladstone, so that Sir Robert's description of colonial parties has no bearing upon the question he has set himself to explain to the British Premier. Neither is the question affected by Sir Robert's laboured disparagement of the National Association. If the latter are right in their contention, it matters not whether they are few or many in number. But as a matter of fact Sir Robert is wrong in his estimate of the Association's status and influence, and he has given to Mr. Gladstone false information in the words following :" This repudiation {sic) has emanated from but a few colonists, and from an association that has little political significance in New Zealand." It is probably the case that in Otago there is as yet no association holding the platform of the National Association. That is regretted. But in Auckland and elsewhere the Association is strong, and vigorous, and there are sections, branches, and affiliated societies throughout the North Island, all having for their object the promotion of national (as opposed to sectional and party) aims in New Zealand politics, and all being determined enemies of misrepresentation, log-rolling, and class-favouring tactics. But we have a right to ask, what mandate has Sir Robert Stout to speak on behalf of "a vast majority in Mew Zealand?" And what authority has he for telling Mr. Gladstone that he may " accept the statement of the Premier as representing the feeling, not only of the majority, but of a vast majority, of New Zealand colonists ?" There can be little doubt that the " vast majority ot New Zealand colonists " regret the ill-advised interference of Ministers in English partv politics, and will resent the arrogance and weakness displayed by Sir Robert Stout in his letter now under review. It is clear that we have been, through our Government, laid open to the charge of impertinent meddling in other people's affairs, and in this, sir, the feelings of the vast majority have been misrepresented. It is by further misrepresentation that the letter bearing Sir Robert Stout's signature seeks to blind the electors of this colony to the grossness of the blunder perpetrated m their name by the Hon. John Ballance and his colleagues,— am, &c, John Batger, President National Association of New Zealand (Auckland Section).