Evening Post. FRIDAY, JANUARY 9, 1920. A LABOUR SURVEY

Evening Post, Volume XCIX, Issue 8, 9 January 1920, Page 6

Evening Post. FRIDAY, JANUARY 9, 1920. A LABOUR SURVEY

Mr. M. J. Reardon's holiday in California has, we are glad to know, restored him to full health and strength, but it is also good to see that attention to the primary objects of his visit has not .prevented so keen a student of the Labour question from pursuing his studies in a land which is a perfect laboratory of political and social experiment. Mr. Reardon is, of course, something more than a student of Labour problems. He has for many years s~taken an active and conspicuous part in their solution, and a man cannot do any good with work of that sort without acquiring a point of view and a bias of some kind or other. Though in every subject the opinions of the * most competent observers—those, namely, who speak from experience—are ■ properly subject to a discount on' this score, we believe that any reader who is not himself seriously disqualified by bias will concede, that Mr. Reardon's general. survey of the Labour problem in the United States which we published yesterday was informing, well-balanced, and plainly inspired by a conscientious desire to. tell-the truth and nothing but the truth. It would have been easj' to paint"" a lurid picture of the vices of American capital and to depict the virtues of the opposing forces in glaring colours, and inferentially to discredit the capitalist and eulogise the cause of Labour in this country. Mr. Reardon has resisted this temptation. Instead of a partisan philippic, he has given us a historical and analytic survey of the position in the United States, and .not the least interesting and instructive part of it is the candid exposition of the sharp line of cleavage within the Labour Party itself.

Militant Labour in the United States is, Mr. Reardon points out, divided into two distinct sections. "The followers of Mr. Gompers are," lie says, " termed the Conservatives, and they are very much more conservative than the so-called ' Moderates' in the New Zealand Labour movements. The extremists are called Radicals. They are the Bolsheviks^ and comprise a type with which New Zealand has not yet made acquaintance." The debasement of the term " Radical" is an interesting example of the,tricks that custom plays with the same terms different countries. For a century tha word has been in current use in British politics, and for about half that time its associations have been quite respectable. It is trne that almost the first example of its use that the Oxford Dictionary is able to cite is from a letter of Sir Walter Scott,.written in 1819, in which he says: " ' Radical' is a word in very bad odour here, being usejl to denote a set of blackguards, etc." But we must remember that Scott was a hopeless Tory, and it is also to be noted that his reference implies that this use of the term represents a perversion of it from a less uncomplimentary sense. Its rapid progress to something higher than respectability ,is illustrated by the next r quotation, which is dated 1830: "The term Radical/'bnce employed as a name of low reproach, has found its way into high places, and is gone forth as the title of a class who glory in theiy' designation." In New Zealand, as in Great Britain, "Radical" has in recent years meant nothing more alarming than a Liberal in the advanced wing of his party, or so far ahead of it as to keep himself free of party ties altogether. But we need to bear Mr. Reardon's gloss in mind if we are not to misunderstand very seriously the news which reaches us from day to day: of tho remarkable "round-up" of Radicals now proceeding in the United States. It is Bolahevists, and not Radicals in our sense of the term, that the Government is after. The State Committee which is investigating Bolshevism is said to claim " the- discovery of 20,000 organised Radicals aiming to overthrow the United States Government," 'and they are credited with " a fully-organised Soviet system " for the purpose. , America, which, as " the land of the free," boasted- of ar almost indiscriminating hospitality for the surplus population of Europe before the war, cannot afford to continue that hospitality in the light of the new experience that the war haa brought, and the new influences that it haa set in motion. The Bolshevist and the Anarchist are the enemies of liberty and civilisation, just as obviously as were tho Germans themselves. That the most democratic of countries should have undertaken so thorough-going a campaign, for tho eradication of these pests is a fact of which other'nations should be quick to appreciate the significance, and supplies a lead which they should be glad to follow.

In the Labour movement, as in so many other matters, America is, as Mr. Reardon reminds us, a land of contrasts. A rampant Bolshevism of a kind which he declares to be without a parallel in this country, is answered by a Conservatism at the other end of the movement which goes further in tho opposite direction than " the so-called ' Moderates ' in the New Zealand Labour movements." Mr. Gompers, who is the leader of the Conservative section, has made a worldwide reputation for himself by the brilliance of his war-service. ' His resolute patriotism was Etrong enough not merely to keop American Labour on the right !>ath thvoKSjtwui tli'o wnf, but to administer a valuable tonic at a highly critical

period to the Labour Party of Great Britain, and even to the statesmen of all the Allied countries. But one of the most gratifying features of Mr./'Rea-rdon's statement is his testimony to the fact that patriotism in America ia^ not the perquisite of any one Labour leader or of any small section of the party. He speaks of "the American workers' intense patriotism and pride in their own country " as a most striking feature; and that patriotism is not to be confused with the conceit that thinks it won the-'war. "It was not jingoism," said Mr. Reardon, " but pure love of country, and a desire to make that country the best and most prosperous on earth." The American worker takes a pride not merely in his country, but in;his work. How much room for pride of either of these kinds lias been found in the Labour gospel with which this country has been deluged during Mr. Reardon's absence? There is a great future before the party if he can bring about a change.