BROTHERLY LOVE.

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 59, 11 March 1926, Page 6

BROTHERLY LOVE.

We have from (time to time, come across Laftour agitators and Labour leaders who are in the habit of signalising their devotion to "the solidarity of tne proletariat" by subscribing themselves "yours fraternally" even when writing to such unregenerate and unsympathetic outsiders as ourselves. But it is our experience that this, welladvertised conception of "universal brotherhood" altogether fails to stand

the wear and tear of everyday life. The sort of man who makes a strong point of declaring that he has no country, that he belongs to no particular nationality, but that all men are his brothers, is not infrequently jealous and quarrelsome, an unpleasant neighbour, and an impossible colleague "on the job" or in the union; and these rather disheartening characteristics of the cosmopolitan Socialist are very much in evidence in Labour circles in Australia to-day. It. is not for tie to pry into the mysterious happenings which have set the. Australian Seamen's Union "by the ears, and have so bitterly estranged those erstwhile bosom friends and allies Mr. Tom Walsh and Mr. Jacob Johnson. Apparently the irrepressible Johnson hag never got over his disgust at the refusal of the unions to back him up in the absurd strike into which he and Walsh dragged the Unfortunate British seamen two or three ibonthaago; and in his wrath and disappointment he has turned against his old comrades in general and Tom Walsh in particular-. Johnson has always been peculiarly monopolistic of power and resentful of interference, and he is Apparently disinclined to do justice to Walsh on this and other matters. But Walsh M 6 Other troubles of his eWit connected with the financial weakness of

some of the. unions that tatve_ had their funds constantly depleted, 'by the senseless policy of aggression and strife that he has promoted, and he and his friend Mr. .Raeburn, general secretary- of the Sydney Union, are now virtually on trial before their followers. At this point the controversy becomes 4,00 complijiated for us to follow. Raeburn has been suspended by the Sydney branch of the Seamen's Union; but Johnson, secretary of the Federal Union, has been expelled by the Federal executive, while Waist, though in serious danger, is apparently' too powerful to be disposed of summarily. Now Walsh declares that llaeburn's suspension is illegal, while Johnson, though officially expelled, is reported to dominate completely the Sydney branch, and he is determined to "carry on." It is a very unpleasant quarrel, marked by more than the usual acrimony and vituperation on both sides. Clearly, Australia in general and Australian Labour in particular would have a much better prospect of peace and happiness for the future if "Mr. Bruce had been able to carry, out his intention of deporting Walsh and Johnson and "dumping" them elsewhere. Perhaps all this may help to persuade the Australian workers that it is a mistake for them to entrust their destinies unconditionally to the keeping of outsiders or aliens. But what a bitter commentary, it all is upon the boasted "fraternity" preached so eloquently by the Socialists! Is it not time for the men and women who are so fond of airing their enthusiasm for "international solidarity" to remember that brotherly love, like charity, must begin at homo?