ELECTED ON MINORITY VOTES ROWDYISM AT MEETINGS

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 138, 8 December 1931, Page 6

ELECTED ON MINORITY VOTES

ROWDYISM AT MEETINGS

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—lt is hoped that the election results will have brought home to some candidates the futility (and danger) of their efforts and that they now. realise what important factors they have been in giving victory to the party (Labour) to which they are opposed.; A perusal of the figures should: also show to Labour, and particularly the Labour leaders, that their jubilation at their so-called progress —an increase of members (from 20 to 24 in a House of 80) —is quite unjustified. Mr. Holland, with his usual subtle reasoning, holds that • "the majority Labour has received on-this occasion is the forerunner of a stronger, majority to come at the next election." I contend that the figures show just the opposite, and that according to the votes cast Labour would not have won either Auckland East, Roskill, Gisborne, Wellington North, or Timaru in a straight-out contest. The split votes of thf anti-SocUlistic' candidates, not the voice of ■ the- people, gave five Labourites the victory. Taking the figures at present available, one finds that their nominees were elected on minority votes as follows:— . ; :. -. • ■ Auckland Bast.—Schramm (Labour), 3695 votes; majority 1559. Opponents1' (anti-Socialistic) votei, 5108. Total votes polled, 8795. Schramm's actual minority, 1413. Roskill.-*-Richards (Labour), 4661 votes;. majority, 1169. Opponents' (anti-Social-istic) votes, 7231. Total votes polled, 11,982. Richards' actual minority, 2570. Gisborne.rrColeman (Labour), 4162 votes; majority, 234. Opponents' (aiitisocialistic) votes, 5048. Total votes polled, 9310. Coleman's actual minority, 886. AVellington North.—Chapman (Labour).

4175; majority, 991. Opponents' (antisocialistic) .votes,. 5268. Total votes polled, 0443. Chapman's actual minority, 1093. Timaru.-f-CaW (Labour), 5016; majority 739. Opponents' (anti-Socialistic) votes, 5350. Can's actual minority, 334. Total votes polled, 10,3615. United and Reform are avowedly antiSocialistic, bo that in contests where both these candidates stood against Labour—a fatal mistake—the anti-Socialistic vote was hopelessly split. Had there been straightout fights between anti-Socialistic and Socialistic candidates in -Auckland East, Roskill, Gisborne, Wellington' JSorth, and Timaru, these seats' would not have gone, to Labour, .which would then.have had 19 members in the House instead of 24. But Mr. Holland sees fit to claim the result of the General T'ection as "a great Labour victory!" This.(to put it mildly) is nothing- but blind optimism. Anyhow, the electors have given their verdict; and despite the unpbpular legislation that-the C4overnment has been forced to introduce to save the country. from disaster, New Zealand has wisely preferred sane,, safe, and honeafc measures to the ufisound, extravagant, and dangerous proposals of the Labour-Socialistic Party.—l am, etc.; . ' ■. ■' ANTI-BLUFF. sth December. ' "'; " .

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —During the recent election campaign, much was written about; interjections and heckling of candidates in Wellington and elsewhere. Now, Sir, as a resident of Wellington, for 30 years, a ratepayer, and an elector, may I be allowed to air my views* on the subject. I claim the right to question any candidate at the correct time and further to interject if, during the course of his remarks he attacks an opponent's religious beliefs, or other' personal matters, which have no bearing on the .subject, without in any way being accused of interfering with the right of free speech. Which, by the way, we have not got iv Wellington. In "The j Post" a letter appeared signed "Wellington East," and the inference from it is that the reception which Mr. Forbes, got was from "Homeys," many of whom no doubt have been disillusioned since coming here. But who fetched them here except the Coalition Government or Forbes party or Coates' party? Surely the Labour Party can't be blamed for their being here or being disgruntled. That by the way. ,Mr. Ooates three years ago got a much worse reception, and I remember the late Mr. W. F. Massey getting a pretty rough spin one election night at the "Evening Post board. Surely, Sir, there is much to do about nothing if a disappointed' populace cannot express their feelings at election time without inpurring the opprobrium of "Wellington East" and several other representatives of their opponents.—l am, et°" "GROWLER."