MR HOGG'S OPINIONS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 496, 19 October 1909, Page 3

MR HOGG'S OPINIONS.

In a speech in the House of Representatives on Friday night, Mr Hogg said:—‘Task myself, have the opinions of His Excellency’s advisers changed or advanced in the right direction? Land aggregation is the twin brother of monopoly, the thing that I have been denouncing and for denouncing which I have been condemned by members of the Government and their supporters.” Mr Hogg read extracts from what he termed his ‘‘now celebrated” . speech of the short session in which he stated his belief that the man who added acre to acre and went in deliberately for aggregation was starving the people around him and was essentially a criminal . The capitalistic press—and, unfortunately, the greater portion of the press in New Zealand was capitalistic—the leading newspapers of the capitalistic press raved and howled against him on account of that speech. He was never opposed to angry criticism, but this was no ordinary scolding : it was strong denunciation, “ I had committed the unpardonable sin, and I awoke a simultaneous editorial chorus. Why? Because I maligned the fat man, the monopolist, the man who is responsible for the share register that holds so important a place in every one of these periodicals. I had calumniated the exploiter, and the poor editors raged and tore their hair — that is, those that had any. The Christchurch ‘ Press ’ described me as ‘ the untameable bog. ’ That is perfectly true. I have never been broken in ; I have never had the bit in my mouth, the harness on my shoulders, never written or spoken against my convictions. The ‘ New Zealand Herald ’ said that 1 called the landowner a criminal. I never said so —only the editor of that journal. The ‘ Auckland Star ’ said I had committed an amazing indiscretion. Singularly enough, a few weeks laler the streets of Auckland were crowded behind me and resounded, with approbation of all the sentiments I had expressed. The ‘ Lyttelton Times ’ termed me an ‘injudicious Minister,’ because I had angered the Liberal party. Well, there were manifestations of delight from thousands there at what I had had the courage to say. The Dunedin ‘ Star ’ called mean ‘erratic Minister,’ and yet I was lionised when I went there. When I denounced monopoly in this house, I was not speaking to my colleagues, nor was I particularly addressing members round me on either benches. I was talking to a much larger audience, and I was really addressing the country. And what was the result ? When I left the Ministry, I read resolutions passed by, I believe, every trade society, every workers’ union in New Zealand, supporting the sentiments I had uttered. And I received letters from mem who are honoured and esteemed by all who know them — communications from the officers and some of the heads of departments over which I had presided.” Mr Hogg read several extracts from these letters which were all of an enthusiastic nature. Continuing, Mr Hogg said that he had always prided hlmselt on being candid and fearless in support of his convictions. “ If you put salt on the tails of slugs, they shrival up, and I spoke out my convictions and it operated on some of the political slugs even in this assembly.” But there was no representative who should be ashamed to speak out bravely and manfully. He despised' the man who was not true to his beliefs, no matter what position he might hold, if it was the highest position in the country. Mr Hogg said he was glad to do honour to the leader of the Opposition. He knew that the leader of the Opposition was sincere, true to his principles and true to his friends. For that he honoured him. “ He is true to his traditions, and he keeps his party remarkably well together. There is very little dissension of any kind : they are all bound together as firmly as granite for a particular purpose. I may not agree with them, but I admire men who stick shoulder to shoulder, even if they are fighting for a cause which I cannot admire and cannot support.” Continuing, Mr Hogg said he believed he had offended the week-kueed supporters of the Cabinet. He resigned without remonstrance because he accepted office, not for personal gain or emoluments of any kind, but simply because he thought he might be of service to the settlers of New Zealand. Now, very much to Ibis delight, he found the Premier and the Cabinet were mounting: some of his favourite hobby horses ; and, if they would only keep their place there and ride straight, he would do all he could to help them in carrying out the reforms that were so badly required. He had always been opposed to monopoly, and he had always been on the side of labour. That was where he was at the present time. The Premier seemed now to be taking a good course, and one. which he (Mr Hogg) looked upon as a safe course. The allusions to what was going to be done in regard to the land question

showed that the Cabinet were now bending to public opinion. “ I am,” added Mr Hogg, “ beginning to be compensated for my first experience. lam quite prepared to put up with some denunciation if I can only attain my purpose.” He said that Ballance, Seddon and John McKenzie had been persecuted for their views. He (Mr Hogg) had entered the Cabinet with a view to helping the I settlers and the workers, and he was beginning to think now that his purpose was not after all in vain. Ministers were apparently gaining courage, not the courage of despair, and Ministers felt, he believed, that they had the people behind them.