TRADE UNION REPLY

Dominion, Volume 34, Issue 195, 15 May 1941, Page 12

TRADE UNION REPLY

Mr. Nathan’s Charges

In the course of a statement issued by the secretary of the AA’elliugtou Trudes Council, Air. P. E. Warner, on behalf of the executive of the council, he says:—

“In reference to exaggerated rumours respecting ’ tin episode arising from lilt' election campaign, and which apparently were tlie subject of tlie sensational allusion of the mayor, Mr. Hislop, ou Tuesday evening, I desire on behalf of the officials of the trade unions who have been subject to a gross attack to make the following statement.On Friday morning, Mr. H. Nathan, a well-known stockbroker, was reported as having made a very vicious suggestion to the effect that Labour Candida les, who were also trade union secretaries, would not carry out their duties impartially as they had to bow to Hie dictates of the unions. Mr. Nathan was exceedingly carefui not to refer to any individual candidate. Had he done so necessary steps would have been promptly taken. Only a baseless, ambiguous charge was made. Tlie utter unfairness of Mr. Nathan's .stutement and its complete absurdity will lie apparent to every fair-minded tiersort, when if is borne in mind the important part Hint trade unionists and their officials are taking in tlie present conflict. It is common knowledge that a large number of Mr. Churchill's reliable and responsible colleagues are trades union officials. "The statement.'’ said Mr. Warner, "caused considerable resentment among trades unionists. The statement was the negation of actual facts and an insult to the trades unionists who are serving witli distinction in oitr national affairs as well as in tlie fighting services. The matter went beyond local politics and was a grave reflection on the integrity of n large section of tlie community. It. was felt that if the statement had been made without fully realizing the unfairness of it and' without due regard to tlie actual facts, an opixirtunity should be given Mr. Nathan to act uprightly after hearing representations on Hie subject.. With liis consent, nil interview was arranged to suit his convenience. Two delegates were to have seen him. but in the interim the resentment Imd grown amt three oilier delegates attended. Mr. Na Ilian welcomed and shook hands with the representatives. The published statement was then read to him and lie was asked it lie was correct ly reported. After some hesitation he agreed that tlie report was correct. Then, to tlie surprise and amazement of tlie representatives, lie said he would not listen to any comment mi it nor to any protest regarding it. He Imperiously ordeied tlie representatives from tlie room rind acted in a most liigh-lmmled manner. In anticipation of tlie fact that Mr. Natlitm might probably act in this manner. a written protest bad been prepared ami this was read lo him. despite his repeated interruptions He then calmed down sullieiently to enable the representatives to attempt to reason with him respecting his serious and sweeping allegations. He was requested cither honestly to admit lie hud spoken liastil.v rind unfairly, or openly and publicly to accuse any Labour immliiltiie of malpractice, in order thill tlie nuilter could be cleared up in a court of law. Mr. Nathan refused to adopt either course. He was llien thanked for tlie interview and tlie delegation left. There were no threats of force matte. Il was felt that a sense of propriety and fair play would lead Mr. Ntitlian tn right a palpable wrong, lint niil'oriiinately this was not so.

"Apiiarctilly.” continued Mr. Warner, "the episode Ims linen circulated in distorted form. . It is obvious thnl .it was io Illis interview which Mr. Hislop referred on Tuesday evening in a rather sensational and darksome manner. It is apparent that lie desires to cloak the matter in tin air of mystery, withhold the facts and place an entirely wrong construct ion on tlie affair. He withholds Hie facts of the case and the statement wliicli gave rise to it. In his usual opportunist manner tie presumfis ‘o s-Lxrm olbcxoa's wuii u Local

•Zinovieff letter’ to the advantage of himself and other anti-Labour candidates. In addition to the innuendos and rumours it is noted that on Tuesday night Air. Nathan again repeated the objectionable charge and with Mr. Hislop has attempted lo make political capital from it. This action is most reprehensible and deplorable in view of (be garbled account given by Mr. Nathan, which is far from the facts of the case. AA’e unhesitatingly present lhe facts for the benefit of the people. AA’e welcome any inquiry. AVe suggest that Air. Hislop should concern himself with correcting the untrue and friction-making statement of his colleague rather than attempt to use it to his advantage.