5

H.—22

tion, but that the prosecutions must be general and impartial, and, if so, how it came to pass that, when Mr. Fisher wished all the breweries to be prosecuted alike, you recommended, apparently against his direction, that there should be a delay in the Junction Brewery case. I have, &c, H. D. Bell, Esq., Crown Solicitor, Wellington. H. A. Atkinson.

Sib,— Wellington, 10th April, 1889. I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter of yesterday's date. 1. The first interview which took place between Mr. Fisher and myself was immediately after his return from Melbourne, and at my office. The subject of the interview was a then pending action against Mr. Fisher in his private capacity, in which I was acting as his solicitor. A reference was made to the beer-duty prosecutions, but Mr. Fisher is quite mistaken in supposing that he gave me any instructions of any kind. He is also mistaken in his recollection that I then told him that a case against Messrs. Staples's brewery had been discovered, but that it was a small one, which I did not intend to proceed with. I think Mr. Fisher did say that he would not care so long as all were dealt with alike. But it is quite impossible to suggest that the conversation between us could bear the interpretation of an instruction by the Commissioner of Customs to the Crown Solicitor. I am not at liberty to state the particulars of the conversation. 2. The second interview between Mr. Fisher and myself took place at my house on the night of the 17th December; and Mr. Fisher is correct in stating that, as the result of the conversation which then took place between us, I wrote the letter of the 18th December, recommending that no further informations should be laid until the cases against Hamilton and Edmonds had been disposed of. All that time it was supposed that those cases would be dealt with in the course of a week at most; but the engagements of the Magistrate and of counsel were afterwards found to be so constant on other matters, and the evidence was so protracted, that unexpected delays occurred. I think I am not at liberty to give the details of an interview which took place between Mr. Fisher and myself at my private house without Mr. Fisher's permission. I may say, however, that I informed Mr. Fisher (1) that, in my opinion, the Junction Brewery eases were the worst of the three then before us ; (2) that in my opinion they must be prosecuted ; but (3) that there was no reason why they should not be delayed until the others had been dealt with. 3. With regard to the last paragraph of your letter, I repeat that Mr. Fisher is mistaken in supposing that he ever gave me any instructions or directions at the first interview, and that my letter of the 18th December was, as Mr. Fisher states, the result of his second interview with me. I have, &c, The Hon. the Premier, Wellington. H. D. Bell, Crown Solicitor.

Sir,— Premier's Office, Wellington, 11th April, 1889. Being desirous of obtaining from Mr. Bell, the Crown Solicitor, some further information as to the instruction stated to have been given him by you, as mentioned in your memorandum to me dated 6th April instant, I addressed him a letter, a copy of which is enclosed, marked " A." To this I have received a reply, a copy of which is also enclosed, marked " B." In the latter you will notice Mr. Bell says, in referring to conversations he had with you as to the pending prosecutions, " I think I am not at liberty to give the details of an interview which took place between Mr. Fisher and myself at my private house without Mr. Fisher's permission." As there appears to be a conflict between Mr. Bell's statements and those made by you in the memorandum above quoted, and as I am sure you will be desirous that all the facts should be ascertained, I beg to request'that you will as early as possible place Mr. Bell in a position to give me information as to the nature of the arguments used which induced Mr. Bell to instruct the Collector of Customs to take two cases as test-cases, and generally as to the instructions or suggestions made to him by you in connection with the brewery prosecutions. I have, &c, George Fisher, Esq., M.H.E., Wellington. H. A. Atkinson.

Sib,— 12th April, 1889. Your ungenerous treatment renders it impossible for me to hold any further communication with you upon any subject whatever. The questions put in your letter of yesterday are questions which ought in all honesty to have been put to me at those Cabinet meetings from which I was by you unfairly and unjustly excluded, I being at the time a member of the Government, and having therefore every right to be present to protect myself against misrepresentation, and to defend myself if necessary. This, you will see, is a reiteration of my complaint in my letter to you of the 6th April— namely, that questions so vitally affecting me should have been discussed upon in Cabinet in my absence. As to any disputed question of veracity arising between Mr. Bell and myself, I may, should I think fit, discuss that matter with Mr. Bell. I have, &c„ Sir H. A. Atkinson, K.C.M.G. Geo. Fishee.

Sib,— Premier's Office, Wellington, 23rd April, 1889. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt, on Sunday, the 7th April, at 9.40 p.m., of your letter dated the 6th April. His Excellency the Administrator of the Government having