THE PREMIER AND MR. HOGG

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2634, 16 October 1909, Page 5

THE PREMIER AND MR. HOGG

A DISPUTE IN THE HOUSE,

fl’r.R Pkksh Association.] WELLINGTON, October 15. During the debate on the Address-m-Reply in the House to-night, Mr. Hogg traversed the points raised by Mr. V utord and, touching on land anc. labor, said there was the spectacle l ' ii un^lm ited quantity of land Iving idle in the country, while in ” the towns there was a large amount of labor crying out for occupation. Whan stood between land and labor? Such a state of alt airs was scandalous in a young country, and would not exist under proper Government. The outstanding feature of the debate was the Jam! question, the most important of the day, affecting, as i t did. everv member of the community. The land question was at the root of the whole social problem, lie reviewed his attitude on the land question, and his experience since he left the Government inion! 6 C ° UrSe ° f hIS tour of the Homm'?i°n+ P !-f niier . eXI)rOSSG<I Pained surprise at the actions of Mr. Hogo- and ,- Mr - H»gg joined The t a burnt lie (Sir Joseph Ward) cxplaina«ked°if°l!« y ° f Government, and m keu it ho could support it. Mr Hogg replied in the affirmative, mid duung Ins Ministerial career Mr Hog<r had never raised the..la U d question*! Hie Premier said he had felt it necess.m m tlie kindest way, to point out to Mr. Hogg the inadvisableness of speaking m a certain way as to the financial question. It was contrary to fact that Mr. Hogg had retired from the Ministry' because he would not alter his views on the land question. It was the duty of every Minister to eonform to constitutional precedent in his relations with nw. colleagues. The real reason for ’ retirement was his speech in the House,’Y ' ”Ti was entirely at variance with the views of his colleagues.\ If he (the Premier) had been wea'lc enough to allow Mr. Hogg’s financial statements to go unchallenged, the result would have been a financial crisis. After the incident, he (the Premier) felt it was his duty to write to Mr. Hogg. The result was a friendly interview. Mr. Hogg and himself had parted friends, and, ho hoped, would always be friends. He had never assumed an autocratic attitude towards his colleagues, and he did not think it fair that Mr. Hogg should, by innuendo, indicate that ho (the Premier) was to blame for the former’s retirement from the Cabinet. The Premier read a letter which ho had addressed to Mr. Hogg, asking him to resign, and the reply thereto. Sir Joseph Ward said tfiut the Cabinet was opposed to the aggregation of largo estates, and to monopoly, and was in favor of helping tlie oppressed and distressed.

Mr. Hogg, in reply to the Sir Joseph Ward, said that he had never expected consideration, nor had he received it. As far as tin* "olicy of the Government was concerned, he did not know what it was, nor was it once alluded to. Sir Joseph Ward: Then you joined the Cabinet without knowing what the , policy was? _ • . . .":•> Mr. Hogg, continuing, related the circumstances under which ho received • t-lie offer of a- portfolio, and said that: no explanation of the Government’s policy was tendered, and he did not yet know their policy on the land question.