(Daily Times, December 6.)

Otago Witness, Issue 2389, 14 December 1899, Page 9

(Daily Times, December 6.)

We now publish a copy of Mr MacGregor's reply to Air M'Kenaie's letter, published yesterday. Mr MacGregor explains that he expected Mr M'Kenzie to hand the whole correspondence to the press for publication at one time: —

Dunedin, 4th December, 1899. The Hon. J. M'Kenzie, AI.H.R., Palmerston..

Sir, — I have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of Ist insl. ..

I enclose a copy of your letter of 6th June, 1898, and regret that I am not in a position to adopt your suggestion as to publishing tho letter of mine, which you teem to regard — in Borne way incomprehensible to me — as justifying your truculent reply. I did not keep a copy of my letter, but I am glad to have an opportunity of stating the circumstances under which it was written, and my recollection of its contents.

About two years ago you announced that you would not again contest the Waihemo seat ; thereupon some friends of mine in the electorate aslced me whether I would stand, and I gave them an assurance that in case of your not being a candidate they could rely upon my offering myself, but I expressly stated that I would on no account oppose you. "With the object of preventing any misunderstanding between you and me, I wrote acquainting you with the arrangement, and stating that I had given my friends clearly to understand that I v.ould on no account «tand in the event of your being a candidate. I believe I added that I would never entertain the idea of opposing you, as that would be an act of ingratitude towards one who had ehown me kindness.

The -writing of this letter was an act of pure courtesy on my part, but your reply showed that -you failed to appreciate it as such ; and I have never been able to this day to understand why you should have written in euch offensive terms to one with whom you were apparently friendly. I was speechless with | astonishment, and I never bo much as acknowledged receipt of the letter, although it bore inherent evidence of having been written with a view to ultimate publication, and I con- j tinued to treat you as if nothing unpleasant had passed between ue. One part of your letter I considered not only unkind, but unjust ; but the nick-names you applied to mo did not cause me a moment's annoyance. Knowing as I do that in your vocabulary "wobbler" means one who dares to act according to his own judgment and conscience rather than in obedience to the dictates of a party leader, I took it rather as" a compliment ; whilst the expression *' lapsed Liberal," of which you are so fond, seems to me merely foolish, inasmuch as it implies that you are the sole judge as to who is a Liberal and who is not. I have as much right to think that you have lapsed from Liberalism to despotism as you "nave to say that I have lapsed from Liberalism to Conservatism ; but, indeed, in. Now Zealand the word " Liberalism has become as meaningless as " that blessed word Mesopotamia." You are evidently mistaken when you aay that in my speech the other night I endeavoured "to throw censure upon you" for your letter. I said nothing about the nature or contents of your letter. True, I read to the audience my letter to the Premier referring to your letter, but my references to it in that letter implied no censure, but merely that your conception of the duty of a member of tho Council was radically different from mine. I did not even say that yours was wrong and mine was right ; and I carefully refrained from publishing my letter to the Premier until you had returned to the colony. As for what you describe as my attack upon your land administration it was merely an explanation and justification of my action in opposing to some extent your policy. I was defending myself ratheT than attacking you, and I explained that I could recall only two instances in which I had failed to support your policy, and I stated my reasons. I regret very much that such a breach lias occurred between us, but I am quite unconscious of having given you any grounds for •writing in such terms on two occasions. I should have been glad to refer the dispute to any person you choose to name, and abide by the decision ; but, as you desire to have it referred to the arbitrament of the public, I gladly accept that course. — Your obedient servant, * „,,/-, J. MacGkegor. Tho following is the letter reforred to:— ■ Heathfield, Palmerston, June 6, 1898. Hon. John MacGregor, M.L.C., Dunedin. Sir,— l was somewhat at a loss to under-

stand why you wrote me, some time back, notifying that you proposed to contest the Waihemo seat in the event of my^ retiring. If your letter was intended as a mere matter of courtesy. I have to thank you for it. I, however, felt that my constituents were entitled to the first intimation of my intentions, and therefore delayed acknowledging receipt of your letter until after I had spoken at Palmerston. I still take, and will always take, a warm interest in my electorate, and I trust, for the sake of my many old friends and supporters, that your candidature will not be successful. Allow me to remind you that your first political speeches were delivered in this* very electorate, and that you then posed .O3 an ardent supporter of my administration, and of the Ministry of which I was, and am still,* a member. I thought that your elevation to the Legislative Council would strengthen the Government and Liberal party, and I accordingly (believing you to be- sincere) pressed your nomination, and gratified another expressed ambition on your part. What. was the result? You had barely taken your seat when you became an active opponent of the Liberal party — in season and out of season, — but you retained your seat in the Council 'all the same! I do not know what your present political views are, but I detest a, " wobbler in politics, and if the National Association is to capture the Waihemo seat I trust the successful candidate will not be a "Lapsed Liberal." — Yours, etc., , - Johx. M'Kexzie.