MR BREEN IN REPLY.

Evening Star, Issue 12865, 14 July 1906, Page 11

MR BREEN IN REPLY.

TO THE EDITOR.

Sir,«-~ln your leader in Thursday's 'Star' you te'ke me to task for my remarks at the recent meeting of the I.P.L. League concerning Sir Joseph Ward. You quote me as having said that " Sir Joseph had refused to give a concession in. connection with a Labor Pay celebration." Now, sir, to begin with, I never made use of the words referred to at all. My words were that Sir "had failed to keep a promise made to the Labor Day Association, with the result that the Association bid to hide themselves in the country, instead of cebbrating Labor Pay as they had done previously by a sports gatherin» at the OaTedonian Grounds " The incident you referred to was not in my mind at the time; in fact, it was so tricing that I had forgotten all about it. What I did refer to is uot so easily fortrotten, and I consider I was perfectly psiifiod in saying that a man who breaks his word requires to be carefully watched. Sir Joseph Ward made a promise in I°ol that a totalisator permit would not be. granted to th« Dunedin Jockey Club on Labor Day, and on the strength of that promise elaborate preparations were made for ce'ebrating Labor The Association incurred heavy liabilities, and through the granting of a permit to the Jockey Club the sports wero a fiiv.ivinl failure, and re ultcd in a. k*« of atxuit .€6O, which sum had to be paid by the industrial union* concerned. Hfid Sir Joseph not given his word no exception could have been taken to the permit being granted, although the Association had a lccitinwie daim to the monopoly of that clay, but once bis word was given he should have kept ft.

Your reference to that, " eternal mspicion " would imply that that was a weakness of the Labor party. Experience h;is proved that the party have been quite the opposite; indeed, bad they not been so trustful in the pc«?t the worker would unquestionably have been in a bettor position to-day. In reference to prefprence to unionists, it r? interesting to know thnt both the late Pr°mifT and the present Premier reronised that th? principle wrs*ourd. ?vi] voted in favor of the B : ll. but Sir Joseph Ward, " the number of whose wcrks foT the benefit of the people (workers) is lerion." voted against the Bfl. That £ir Joseph has done rood work for New Zealand I do not d'spute. but I still say thnt I know of nothing of import?nee that he has done for the toilfrs of Now Zealand.

In conclusion, 1 cin onlv say that my ex porience in th? Lnbir movement has proved thnt the worker is little, if any, beHer of?, and that after fifteen year* of the Liberal Labor Alliance. Poverty and suffering ftill exist in "Ood's own country," and n-hJle women ard chldm "re compelled to jo foodlffis and irsufhVi.Titly c'nd we hflvo no reason to be proud. Thr Labor party are the only party that aim at removing these blots, and after due reflr>otion hnvv concluded that the most practical method of bringing industrial and socinl reform is to become in politics a force eqiml in weight to their preponderance among the ejectors.—l am, etc., R.. Breen - July 13.