Labour And Conscription

Press, Volume CV, Issue 31061, 17 May 1966, Page 16

Labour And Conscription

Sir, —I would remind Tom Bryce that, irrespective of whether the Prime Minister actually fought on active service, no National member of Parliament or parliamentary candidate has ever been guilty or accused of smuggling seditious literature into the country, inciting strikes while our men were fighting overseas (1914-1918 war), or going into years of hiding to evade military service. On the other hand, Labour candidates who claimed to have done all or any of these things, especially with the added distinction of having been gaoled for their beliefs, were among those gaining the most responsible positions in the 1935 victorious Labour Government. —Yours, etc., ISABELLA C. BROWN. May 16, 1966.

Sir, —“A. B. Cedarian’s” latest reference to Peter Fraser is not going to win him very many admirers. In effect, he says National politicians are too shrewd to get into such a position. Did this apply to Sir Sydney Holland when he walked out of the War Cabinet, or Messrs Gordon Coates and Adam Hamilton when they got offside with their war-mongering colleagues? The last matter your correspondent should have raised under this heading is election fighting funds. Everyone knows of the highly-paid National collectors, but the donors of these funds are carefully concealed for “fear of victimisation.” Surely this is conscription of wealth in its most objectionable form. Labour has to rely on the mere pittances from real dinkum unionists. Is your correspondent a real live Nationalist? If so, why did he and others accept the outcome of the sham fight put up by

their government on compulsory unionism?—Yours, etc., TOM BRYCE. May 14, 1966. Sir, —Regarding America’s entry into the last war, even a nitwit should ask himself just why Japan committed the apparently incredible folly of attacking such a powerful nation when so many ripe plums were lying about the Pacific just for the taking. The answer is, of course, that she believed America would not remain neutral when she went rampaging, particularly when she attacked white kindred populations. Mr Skinner might also note this: China could. When a powerful nuclear Power, easily enough pick a row with us over our immigration laws, to whom would Mr Skinner appeal? Spare us the folly of appealing to the impotent United Nations.— Yours, etc., E.T. May 12, 1966. Sir, — “A B. Cederian” writes about the late Mr Peter Fraser, a man honoured in his adopted country, with many things to his credit. A selfstyled Nationalist like “A. B. Cedarian” must agree that his ex-servicemen’s rehabilitation form scheme must have been a most worthy one as several of these rehabilitation farmers are present National Party members of Parliament. —Yours, etc., RESPECT. May 14, 1966.