The Larnach-Mackenzie Correspondence.

Otago Witness, Issue 2111, 9 August 1894, Page 28

The Larnach-Mackenzie Correspondence.

TO THE EDITOR.

Sir, — Having found, very much to my surprise, that Mr Larnach had published in pamphlet form, and without asking my consent, a correspondence that (on my part at least) was never intended for the public eye, it becomes necessary that the entire correspondence (for the last two letters have been omitted in the pamphlet) should be laid before the public. I have only to explain that of my first letter, dated from Lawrenco, I kppfc no copy, but it is here giveu as mar as popnible word for word — I am, &c

August 8, 1894.

Scobie Mackenzie.

Lawrence, 10th July 1891. Dear Larnach, — As one of my eyes is this morning in a state of high inflammation from cold caught last night, I am sony I cannot see you. Perhaps you could look me up, but if inconvenient do not trouble. I do not at all grudge you your victory ; but you have to thank Rawlins for it and the tirao ho kept me out of the district.— Yours, sincerely, Scobie Mackenzie.

Lawrence, July 10, 1894. Dear Mackenzie,— l am sorry to learn by your note that you are Buffering from the effects of a severe cild. I shall not bo able to see you, although I have some unpleasant things to say to you, aa lam going to the Blue Spur. You are at liberty to form any opinion you like as to the result of the contest ; but 1 know had I a few more days to fight my majority would have increased, as I would have had an opportunity and time to contradict the scurrilous and lying statements that you and your people had persistently circulated to my detriment. What did you do when you entered the contest a week before I had even announced my candidature ? You commenced to scandalise my political reputation for years past ; and when you did not abdolutely lie in your statements you only told half-truths/ Night and day you have carried on the same kind of abusive attack on my political career ; while I never once have referred to you or Rawlins on the platform. Have you ever once in all your political addresses given your hearers any politics or policy ? No. Your politics during this contest have been political scandalmongering. In my opinion you have not fought a manly nor an honourable tight, hut the fight of a political cur and a political blatherskite. 1 have never stated this opinion on the platform, but I would do so if you were present, in consequence of the number of times that you have struck me below the belt. You may continue to try that style of fighting with your opponents ; but should I ever again be one you will find that I am able to take care of myself even against unfair and unmanly play. You even, after I had announced myself, discovered that my name was not on the roll, and you wired the news to your friend in the interior, requesting him at same time to keep it secret. You hoped to spring a mine under me on the day of nomination. Was that fair fighting ? Was it manly? No. I feel very sorry that my opinion of you has very considerably changed.— Yours faithfully, W. J. M. Larnach. M. J. «. Mackenzie, Esq., Victoria Hotel, Lawrence. Melness, 12th July 1894. Hen. W. J. M. Larnach, O.M.G. Dear Sir, — Your letter from Lawrence I only got here last night, and I need not say that I was amazed and indignant both at the tone and statements therein. The story of my inquiring about your name on the roll to invalidate your election has not one vestige of truth in it, and at first I could not even imagine what you were alluding to. Then it occurred to me it was a message I sent to Palinerston about my oion name that served as the foundation of the story. A day or so before leaving for the district I wrote to Mr Wilson, Naseby, requesting him to see that my name was on the Waihemo roll, and that if by any accident it had been taken off to say nothing about it till I got it on again. Mr Wilson replied by wire that I would have to apply to the registrar (Mr Gwynne) at Palmerston. I accordingly wired Mr Gwynne to make sure I was on, and to reply to Naseby, where I was going that night. Mr Gwynne replied I was on all right. That is the story. Hpw you got it twisted up to have any connection with yourself I am sure I cannot say. If you have any doubt about it, call in at Mr Gwynne's, who is close to the Palmerston railway station, and satisfy yourself, in Heaven's name. I never for an instant inquired about your name personally or through, another, or by letter, wire, or verbally ; — never thought of such a thing. I suppose this is a sample of the foolish stories that have been going -about, and to which you appear to have been giving credence, though you ought to have known better. Not one word did I say about you during the entire tour, off the platform, that was not alike fair and generous. What "my friends," as you call them, have been saying, God only knows. But you might as well blame me for the egg some wretch threw at Mrs Larnach, or I you for two that some other wretches threw at Mrs Mac--keDzie.

Enough of this. What I now want to know is, whether you are prepared to make me some expression of regret for the language you applied to me over this registrar story? If bo, lam still ready to hold out the hand of good fellowship. If not, I shall of course take it as a declaration of war between us, which of course I would regret. On the platform throughout the campaign not one word did I say that was derogatory to you or irrelevant to the issue, and I am sure that had you heard me instead of listening to the busybodies you would have said so.— Yours truly, Scobie Mackenzie.

The Camp. Dunedin, July 16th, 1894. M. J. S. Mackenzie, Esq., Melness, Peninsula. Sir,— Your letter of the 12th mat., in reply to mine written at Lawrence, I found on Saturday evening on my return home, and I have now to acknowledge it. The story about your having wired to a friend to see that your -name was on the roll I have no doubt is correct bo far as it goes. Whether my name was mentioned by you in your communication as not being on the roll, aa I have been informed by an undoubted authority, or am I to accept your version of the matter? I may tell you plainly that, after my recent experience of your capacity for stating only part of a truth, I am not prepared to accept your assertion as a fact until I have seen my friend again. " A lie that is all a lie may be met and fought

outright, But a lie that is half a truth is a harder matter to fight." And in this direction and on this basis have your platform speeches throughout the rscent contest been addressed to me with the object of injuring me in the minds of the electors. You even went into my cateer of private life, when you gleefully and continuously referred to my having been the agent of Mr Clarke, of Melfit a»y future contest to stand on your own

bourne ; to my having purchased Moa Flat esiate for him ; to my having been a promoter and director of the Colonial Bank ; to my having been a promoter and a director of the National Insurance Company and other companies— in order to Bhow that I could not be a true Liberal or have sympathy with the working man. Such was tho burden of your soDg to the electors night after night, and also in the daylight when you had the opportunity. Why did you not tell the electors the whole truth — that when I did all this I was not engaged in politics, nor did I then even contemplate ever taking an active part iu'them.? I was first elected a member of Parliament in 1876, and the several great political crimes enumerated by you had their being loDg before that period. And why did Mr Clarke purchase the Moa Flat estate? When you attempted to show the electors of Tuapeka my political unsoundness— aye, long before I was a candidate — you should have told the whole truth. I purchased Moa Flat estate more to pl«*so the late worthy and patriotic Superintendent of Otago and his Provincial Government than Mr Clarke. The Government at that time being in a state of insolvency, and to oblige the Government I Went to Victoria at my own expense, and I not only communicated with Mr Clarke but with other wealthy friends in that colony. I received nothing for my trouble, nor did I ask anything ; but I felt a satisfaction in having, at? a critical moment, been of service to this part of the colony in a time of monetary difficulty— that I was enabled, by knowing how to do it, to place the Government in the position to pay all wages due to working men and other employees. You also told the electors that you voted against plural voting under Sir George Grey's bill, while 1 opposed the bill. Why did you not tell tho whole truth and say that when plural voting was abolished by the introduction of the " one-man-one-vote" principle, I voted with the "Ayes," and when you first voted for Sir George Grey's measure you knew precious well that the bill would notpass? How many voted for it altogether? About half a dozen at the eve of a general election, including your illustrious Self.

Now, a few words more and I have done : You may take the remarks which I have written to you in any spirit you like, just as the cap fits. You may constitute yourself the sole judge ; but, letme assure you, I mean what I have written.and should the result bring estrangement between us I have the satisfaction of knowing that I only did a duty I owed to myself and my good name by defending my character against your unmanly and scurvy attacks. — Yours, obediently, W. J. M. LAUNACII.

Melnesa, 22nd July 1894. Hon. W. J. M. Larnach, C.M.G., The Camp. Sir,— l only returned from the country yesterday, and found your letter awaiting me. Uader ordinary circumstances that letter would be unworthy of an answer, so grossly inaccurate is it (for I will not condescend to use your own language) ou the political points alluded to. First, however, as to the Moa Flat purchase. If you cannot see that, after your attempt at Lawrence to tickle the eara of the groundlings by your pretence of demanding " leaps" of graduated taxation for bursting-up purposes (when even the Government have got all the graduation they wanted), I was not justified in pointing out that your whole lifo bad been passed in assisting the process of accumulation of large estates, and was even now employed in lending money upon them, it is of course hopeless for me to endeavour to make it clear to you. The point whether you were in the Houso or not when some part of this process was going on had nothing to do with the matter. None but a fool would question the honourable nature- of the employments mentioned, although you yourself were not above leading the people to believe, in your new-born zeal for bursting-up, that it was a crime to own an estate But when it comes to the plural voting question, I confess that I have a difficulty in keeping within due bounds, and it took mo Bomo time before I could believe that your remarks were due to ignorance and forgetful ness of what had taken place in the past ; while at the same time you would not take the trouble to look the matter up. Your statement is threefold and in all alike grossly inaccurate. You say (1) that you voted for tho one-man-one-voto principle ; (2) that Sir George Grey's bill (from which I quoted) was introduced on the eve of a general election ; and (3) that only some half a dozen voted for it, and that only for electioneering purposes. First, then, as to the one-man-one-vote principle. You did not vote for it. Here you are evidently confusing " manhood suffrage" with the " one-man-one-vote principle " Manhood suffrage was passed by Kir John Hall before I entered the House (about 1882). But it left plural voting behind it, which latter was only abolished "by Sir H. Atkinson in 1889, in the Representation Act Amendment; and you voted against; the clause (as, of course, you had a right to do) confining everyone to one vote. Secondly, as to Sir George Grey's bill, " brought forward on the evo of a general election." It was introduced and debated on Ihe 12th September 1884, that is a fortnight after the opening of the first session of a ivev) Parliament. Now for the " half-dozen " who voted for Grey's bill. The voting was : Ayes 25, noes 26. The bill therefore may be said (though I did not pay it) to have been lost by your vote. Of course I' could easily comment on all this in your own fashion if I chose, but I refrain from doing so, pei ct-iving that you are in the habit only of making rash statements, without taking the trouble to verify them. As to the registrar business, it is clear to me that you lack the manliness which prompts men, when they find they have made a mistake, to acknowledge their error I have been slow to break up an old friendship, under the belief that remarks whichi escaped you were made in haste and apger after a harassing contest. But that friendship is now at an end, and my patience and forbearance go with it, and this letter is the only intimation of the fact you will get from me. — Yours truly, Scobie Mackenzie.

The Camp, Dunedin, July 24th, 1894. M. J. Scobie Mackenzie, Esq., Melness, Peninsula.

Sir. — Your letter of the 22nd inst. I found at the Post Oftice this morning, in reply to my laßt, and I am glad that the circumstance* in connection with the latter were of move than an ordinary character, and so warranted you in answering it. I really do not understand your meaning when you speak of my attempts at Lawrence " to tickle the ears of the groundlings " by a pretence of demanding "leaps" of graduated taxation for burst-ing-up purposes Here you are again at fault by still pursuing your Baron Munchausen proclivities Why don't you stick to facts and the whole truth ? In none of my speeches have I ever advocated the bursting-up of large estates by the process of taxation. What I advocated, and shall advocate, is not to interfere with any estate if no land is wanted for settlement ; but, if land is required by the people, and the Crown has no land to satisfy the earthhunger in any district in the colony, then it is the duty of the Crown to take from any large estate, on equitable and fair terms, sufficient land to satisfy the bona fide demands of the people: and, let me say, that this is no " new-born zeal on my part, for I advocated the same policy during the general election, campaign of 1890. Considering the fact that you recently stated at one of your meetings at Lawrence that Hansard contained more lies than any book ever published, I am not surprised that you carry it about with you, and so often quote from it. lam content to stand by and justify any vote I have ever given in Parliament during my long political career.

Iv respect to what you are pleased to call the "registrar business" you are entirely wrong in supposing that I have found I made a mistake. So far I have only your statement against the statement of my friend ; and perhaps, as usual, you have only told half of tho truth, and I may assure you that you won't find me "lack in manliness" if you ever desire to question the point

Nor can I see what good reason you had for calling the electors who were good enough to listen to me "groundlings" because they, in many cases, stoodin the halls ! While others you styled "wretches" for having thrown rotten eggs. Was this becauae they vrere chickenhearted at your defeat ? If I may presume to give advice to bo illustrious a politician as you, I would recommend you

merits — and everyone has some merits; do not abuse your opponent, the electors will judge him ; always tell the whole truth connected with any statement, and for ever abandon yaur habit of only telling half of the truth.— Yours, &c, W. J. M. Lauxach.

Melness, 27th July 1894. Hon. W. J. M. Larnach, CM G., The Camp. Sir, — Your letter was received by me last night. Let me be plain with you and point out now throughout it is characteristic of qualities that are not generally associated with truth and manliness.

You practically admit, and you know well, that you made a false statement in accusing me of endeavouring to invalidate your nomination, but you shuffle out an acknowledgment of your error.

You stand convicted of having made three false statements as to your attitude towards plural voting and aB to Sir George Grey's bill of 1884, and you now pass over the statements without a word.

You have admitted the absolute truth of every word I stated at the election, but you still go on drivelling about the " half truths."

You now deny the only possible meaning that could attach to your demand for "leaps of graduated taxation," although you knew the subject was as dead as Queen Anne and had no possible meaning— least of all from you, who had all your life been engaged in locking up land from settlement against the unfortunate settler. For amidst all your denials you are careful not to deny that your institutions are now lending money on the estates to which you pretended to be hostile (in your Bpeech to the people, but not in your letter to me) ; that you were the founder of the Agricultural Company, which for all these years has kept thousands of settlers off the land ; and that you were responsible for the fact that one man owns the whole of Moa Flat estate. Of course T am aware you have now the effrontery to say that you got Moa Flat purchased out of pure philanthropy, to help the Provincial Government ; but, as usual, you forget or ignore the fact that a committee of the iProvincial Council pronounced the sale to be in the highest degree prejudicial to the public interests: And there the estate stands to this day a curse to the locality and a bar to the settlement of the country. You will hardly, therefore, be surprised that I knew the full value of your remarks about graduation and settlement, though the poor fellows in tHe district could hardly be expected to do so. And certainly I was not surprised that you should try to shut my mouth by a pretence of not mentioning my name : — that is in public, where anything you said could be refuted. I notice the astounding attempt you make to twist the meaning of my remarks about " wretches " who threw rotten eggs at women, and "groundlings" — that is, poor fellows who, not knowing better themselves, are liable to be deceived by anyone who will stoop to deceive them. My first idea naturally was that you had some notion of making capital for yourself out of my very natural and iust remarks ; but after reflecting on the very small number of the human race who would even contemplate making capital for themselves out of an insult offered to their own wives, I am bound to suppose I misread your remarks. And I am confirmed in that better view when I recall the fact that you were the man who applied the remark "Kennel Tip, you curs ! " to the poor fellows who were guilty of no other crime than that of interrupting you. After all the facts I have detailed above, and after reflecting that you have been for years, to me and others, denouncing and abusing the present Government ; that you twice stood as an Independent candidate ; and that you were ultimately glad to go back to the.m and get their nomineeship for the sake of a seat (which is what, I presume, you call standing on your "own merits "), you will pardon me if I cannot form a high opinion of yeur political " manliness." As to what you will do if that manliness ia " called in question " it strikes me it was pretty well called in question when you penned the remark. It is called in question now ; but if you specially want it called in Question in any other or more effective way, kindly accept this aB my positive assurance that I shall at all times be very ready to gratify you.— Yours truly, Scobie Mackenzie.

Wellington, August 6, 1894. M. J. S. Mackenzie, Esq., Melness, Otago Peninsula.

Sir,— l only received your letter of the 27th ult. yesterday. I suppose that it has been delayed at Dunedin, as it bears the stamp there of 30th ult. This letter surpasses even your previous ones so far as the unblushing falsehoods it contains from beginning to end. You are still pursuing the same treacherous tactics that you used to defeat and injure the late Mr Pyke when you contested the seat with him. I have therefore determined to return your last letter to you, that you may make any use of it you like ; and I must now decline to hold any further communication with you. — Yours obediently, W. J. M. Lahnach.