MR. MASSEY'S CHRISTCHURCH MEETING.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1186, 22 July 1911, Page 3

MR. MASSEY'S CHRISTCHURCH MEETING.

f.,?lm'~ Y ?n I,C, T i!>t '" "Hribiitinß the tdiluro of'tlie above meeting to Jlr T E Taylor M.l'. (Mayor of Christ church).' V, ono who was present, I beg.to sav that it was, on the part of the vast majority, s.i indignation meeting at the treatment of Mr. laylor by Mr. Massev. The crowds went/there not to'hear Mr Mas sey s political a(ldre;s-cer(ainly not until he had made the.amende honorable to Jlr. iaylor as representative of Christchurch North an,;] ns jioyor of th» cite And rest assured if Mr. Massev returned o-inorrow to address „ jiolitienl meeting he would not be given a hearing until he satisfactorily explained his attack on the man of (ho hour" in our city. Another thing which told against Mr. Masse.rs meeting was (he distribution of tickets by the Political Reform L".i»uo to electors yery largely of Mr. Mary's colour in poMies, in opposition h> electors lavniirinj the present parfv in Parliament, or those holding Mr. TavlorV views on many quest-ions. It will be weil for Mr. Massey before he returns -to spoak in C iristchurch to thoroughly understand what live inciNnjj will demand at his hands. It would also bo well if you were to snul a special reporter In the meeting as the Dunedin "Star" did ilc- ■" ?& " ~ nlp impression of it as the "f-tar" did. —1 am, etc.,

IV. H. WALKER (.'hrisfchurch, July 17.

[Our correspondent is hardly correct in sayms we attributed ■ |], c '■'failure"' n f Mr. Maxseys mcMin? to Mr T-ivlnr Although Mr. Mar-sey could not nddr««' the meeting, tho cause which he advocates was , probably assisted by the atlitudeot Mr. laylor who, when approached as Mayor of the _ city, dragged in his personal qjinrrnl with Mr. Mastev. But for Mr. Taylors action no trouble would have arisen about the meeting. \Yp-n»ree with our correspondent that the distribution of tickets, though it was undoubtedly a wise and necessary precaution against overcrowding, was undesirable from other points of view.]

SWEATING OF RAILWAY OFFICERS,

Sir,—Somo weeks back the Hon. Mr. Millar, in replying to a deputation of Wnirarapn t'arirtors, stated (hat he was paying his •dnlionmnstcr.s .£2lO per annum, and Unit none of (he .stations outside of Mnstc-rlon warranted such expondiiure. 1. was recently through the Wairnrapii making inquiries into the alleged discontent in the railway service and endeavouring to trace the'truth or otherwise of the statements appearing from time to time in the jirrs's to (he effect that discontent throughout the railway service was rninpuiit. During my journey I happened to make inquiries into (he salary of the slalinnmnstcr at Mauriccville, and found to my astonishmontlliat this .official, although in charge of an important .station, was drawing only ,0200 per annum, less house allowance of .£2O and superannuation fund charge of ,CG. or n net salary of J/171 per annum. This officer, 1 Was told, h.id nearly 20 years good comhict to his credit' and i'ltlioujh listed t'nr promotion in HUD. "'ch. uromotioa had teen with.

held oil one protest or another, and to date ho had not received tho authorised increas.o of pay. Jly informant staled that this method of iR-la.viiifr pnyment of increased salaries was not infrequent, the. Department UMinlly alleging there were no vacancies in the higher-paid division, and making the men wait anything from six to twelve months or more before, giving the pay. The fact that there were positions that should carry increased salaries or that nuiiiei'ou.s vacancies wore, being filled by lower-paid men, lind been represented to the Departmental head, but with'jut results, and of course the officer concerned naturally feds aggrieved. Tins case appears to bo -typical of tho general treatment of the officers, and indicates Hint the increased interest which the railways were supposed to luivo earned lust year is lioiug made up largely by reductions in salaries of (he. lower-uaid men. How this state of affairs can l>o reconciled with the. repeated statements made, by the so-called Liberal party I do not know, but 1 am satisfied the railwaymen, and particularly the officers, have just cause for complaint. Tho alleged sweating of the officers of tho Railway Department, is also being inquired into, but this will be the subject of a future letter.—l am, etc., SEARCHLIGHT V.