NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NEW ZEALAND.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9611, 8 September 1894, Page 3

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NEW ZEALAND.

AUCKLAND SECTION. The Council's Reply to Attacks Made upon the Association in Parliament. ! Prom the Hansard reports of Parliamentary debates it appears that during the present session several Ministers of the Crown, as well as Messrs. Stevens, E. M. Smith, Harris, and Lawry, have in their speeches attacked and- misrepresented the National Association. me of the m embers named above have spoken with more or less flippancy, through insufficient knowledge. Messrs. Lawry and Harris cannot be excused on that ground ; neither can the Colonial Treasurer and the Premier, who have gone further, and used forms of attack which are improper and unjustifiable. As has been the custom of the Association on similar occasions, it appeals to the public to judge between it and its assailants. - THE HON. THE PREMIER (WESTLAND). The Hon. R. J. Seddon, the chief in place and in virulence, says {vide Hansard, No. 8, pp. 477-8), the Association is " banded together to injure the country and their, fellow-colonists;" that "the Government from time to time received communications from the Association" in a tone and language which, were " not such as should come from gentlementhat the language used by Mr. Robert G. Hawes (in his impertinent letter, to be presently referred to) "was on a par with that "used by the Association and its Secretaryand that "he had received communications from the Association which he had not replied to, for the simple reason that the language was absolutely discourteous." To this the Association replies that the Hon. the Premier has been treated with the utmost courtesy throughout, _ and that his attack is as unjustifiable as it is injudicious. There has been no correspondence sent to him by the Association that has not been made public through the press, aud it challenges the Premier, or any of his supporters, to poiut to a single word or expression in any of its communications which justifies the terms which the Premier saw fit in Parliament to use. His full speech is too long for quotation, but it will repay any who wish to see for themselves what sort of man is now ruling our destinies, if they will read the pages iu Hansard from which the above extracts are token. The Premier's professed conception of the motive which bands the members of this Association together will excite wonder in the minds of all who know the Association, however slightly. It can only mean that the Premier tries to persuade himself that all who differ in opinion from the Hon. R. J. Seddon are enemies of their country.

THE HON. THE COLONIAL TREASURER (awarua). The Hon. J. G. Ward (Hansard, No. 8, p. 474), naturally resenting the action of the Association in regard to his Oamaru speech, and its previous advocacy of a simplification of the system of publishing the public accounts, aud its exposure of the falsity OF the Government's oft-asserted selfRELIANT, NON-BORROWING POLICY, Stooped, in the same debate, to the use of a weapon against the Association which at once has shattered his reputation as a straightforward politician. He read a letter which had been written to him by Mr. Robert G. Hawes, of Northcote—well knowing, as he read the letter, that the statements in it were untrue —and taking refuge under the statement that he did not know the writer, proceeded to say that he himself " expressed no opinion whatever upon the letter in question or upon what was seated in it." Yet; he knew that the Association held on several points the directly opposite views to those attributed to it by Mr. Hawes. He knew, for instance, that it was opposed to borrowing, and he knew that it had never overstepped the legitimate mode of giving public expression to its opinions. The Hon. the Colonial Treasurer not only allowed himself to read in Parliament, and so give publicity to this impertinent and auntruthful letter, but later on he identified himself with a false charge, in the following words: —"Now, speaking for himself, he regretted very much the way this Association, during the last twelve months, had attempted to dictate to everybody throughout the colony." The word dictate is amusingly inappropriate. That the Association has endeavoured to influence everyone within its reach is true; but to say that it has in any case attempted dictation is absurd, especially in connection with the views which the same hon. gentlemen and others of his colleagues profess to hold as to _ the Association's "insignificance," "obscurity," etc., etc. As the " honourable" gentleman has been able to discover a wide distinction between "raising" money and "borrowing" it, a mild application of the same_ method of reasoning would have enabled him to perceive the difference between " dictating" and "influencing," MR. E. M. SMITH (NEW PLYMOUTH). To Mr. E. M. Smith's remarks (Hansard, No. 10, p. 652) it is enough to reply—by way of explaining what to him seems to be a difficultythat the National Association is so called because its object is to promote a National Sentiment in New Zealand, as appears in the first clause of its published platform; and if it at any time appears to work on party lines, it is only because its main principle compels it to attack particular points of policy which are directly at variance with a uational policy, and tending either to the oppression of a class, or to the giving undue privilege to a class, in the community. It seems to the Association that the party now in power represents a wouldbe privileged class, and that they are striving to further what they (wrongly) consider the interests ;of that class to the injury of the community as a whole. The baneful effects of this policy are being felt—in absence of security, lack of enterprise, and general stagnation throughout the colony.

MR. J. STEVENS (RANGITIKEI). Mr. Stevens (Hansard, Mo. 8, pp. 472-3), in his place in Parliament, speaking of the National Association, made the following pronouncement: —" Its great object was to deprive everyone who was not a property holder, in this country, of the right and privilege of the franchise." The honourable gentleman places himself in this dilemma: Either he knows nothing about the Association—in which, case he is in the ridiculous position of talking nonsense; or else he does know—in which case he is in "the dishonourable, position of deliberately misrepresenting the Association's "great object." The Association has no such object as that Mr. Stevens ascribes to it. MR. BENJAMIN 'HARRIS '(FRANKLIN). Mr. Harris (Hansard, No. 8, p 479) is reported to have said "The Association had, for some time past, distributed certain pamphlets from door to door, . . . and those pamphlets were sometimes of such a nature that the people burned them before they would let their families see them." This statement may be true in fact, but it conveys a wrong impression. It implies that there was something improper in the leaflets circulated by the Association ; whereas, probably Mr. Harris would deny that he intended to make such a charge. The Association is, _of course, aware that when a leaflet, bringing damaging charges against the Ministry, falls into the hands of a Government supporter, it is as likely as not to be suppressed—by burning or otherwise,—rather than discussed and considered ; but, to the ordinary reader, Mr. Harris' statement would convey more than that, and he certainly ought, in justice to his own reputation, to explain himself. Again (in Hansard, No. 12, pp. 183 and 184), Mr. Harris facetiously remarks that his constituents, "being used to hear truths from their neighbours and from the ministers of religion," fell an easy prey to the alleged misrepresentations of his opponents! the inference being that the honourable member was himself the guileless advocate of truth, and a sufferer from misrepresentation.

MR. F. LA WRY (PARNELL). Mr. Lawry (Hansard, No. 15, p. 448), charges the ' National Association with having meanly tried to prevent him from speaking at Helensville during the late bye election, by hiring die hall in which he intended to hold his meeting. The fact of the National Association having nothing whatever to do with the incident mentioned by Mr. Lawry. did not prevent him from stating boldly that it had; and the whole trumpery business was .elevated to the dignity of a.scandal by the interjection, by no less a person than the Colonial Treasurer, of the remark, "Those were the tactics of the National Association ! ' to which - Mr. Lawry replied, " Yes; those were the tactics of the National Association." It is highly probable that Mr. Monk, whose name also figures in Mr. Lawry's speech, had as little to do with the matter as the Nationa Association had ; but Mr. Monk must speak for himself. He is a valued member or the Association, but was in no sense (as Mr. Lawry calls him) " its representative." The Association had no representative at work for it during the election in question ; and though its members very generally gave Mr, Massey a vigorous support, the Association itself only took official action namely, when it published a manifesto in reply to a scandalous attack made upon it by the Government candidate, Mr. Jackson Palmer. Mr. Massey was,. as Mr. Lawry very well knows, a candidate for Waitemata at the invitation of the Waitemata electorate, not at the nomination of the National Association. It is an impertinence to the electors of Waitemata to refer to the hon. gentleman as the representative in Parliament of the National Association. GENERAL REMARKS. The Council of the National Association has made the above short comments upon some of the attacks m ,upon it by Mem

bers of Parliament, with regret: regret that; it should be necessary to meet such charges, made in Parliament, by members elected by the people to legislate for the general interests of the community. The object of the speakers has been to discredit, by misrepresenting, an Association which exists for the one purpose of benefiting the colony by opposing abuses, and by supporting efforta at reform. Further, the misrepresentations were made in Parliament, where the speakers are privileged jiot only to speak freely, but to publish such slanders at the public expense in Hansard, where no replies can be admitted. Surely the electors of this colony cannot much longer submit to be represented in Parliament by men capable of such proceedings. In any case, the Association will continue to do what it considers its duty fearlessly, without regard to the threats, ridicule, or misrepresentation of its opponents.