CHALMERS ELECTION.

Evening Star, Issue 15644, 7 November 1914, Page 5

CHALMERS ELECTION.

to rm; editor. t-iir, — In vour issue of last -evening is a letter by .Mr Ed. Kellett regarding the vote of thanks passed to me at my Ravcnsbourne meeting on Thursday evening. In the first place, does it not seem rather pouliar that Mr Kellett should have been able to refer to the report of the meeting before it had actually been published by you 7 Leaving that matter alone, however, and dealing with that portion of hisjettcr that does matter. 1 find that Mr Kellett is one who cannot lake a heating like a true Britisher. It is quite true that Mr Kellett proposed the motion quoted by him ; and. backed up by several present, he was determined to damage my cause if possible liv forcing it through. Before it was seconded 1 asked leave, to explain, and having icecived the chairman's consent. I first of all showed that Mr Kelletl's statement regarding* the arrange-

merit between Liberals and Labor was entirely wrong, and asked that .Mr Kellett, in common fairness, withdraw his motion until such time as he could prove what he stated • to be correct. This ho absolutely refused to do. Even the chairman (another supporter of .Mr Moller) did not attempt to maintain the dignity of the chair, hut actually delivered a short oration against my candidature. In fairness to Itavensbourne, however, I must say that what appeared to me to he a clique out to spoil my chances was composed of loss than half a dozen persons out of the fairly latge audience, considering the wot night, that came to hear me. U hen .Mr Keilell refused to withdraw his motion I fought my ground harder than ever, and eventually the chairman, who could have done so when the motion was brought forward, and so saved a lot of unnecessary discussion, informed the meeting that what I stated was absolutely correct, and that the conference, when discussing the City seats, had agreed that Chalmers was outside the jurisdiction of the Dunedin Political I,abor Representation Committee, and consequently could not come within the scope of the arrangement conn* to between Liberals and Labor, lie therefore, when he saw that I had suiJicicnt British pluck nut to give in, advised .Mr Kcllctt to withdraw Ids motion. Mr Kellett agreed, provided that 1 was willing to state clearly that I was an Independent Labor candidate, not chosen by the Representation Commit toe. I told the audience that the Representation Committee could not possibly choose a. candidate for Chalmers, also that at my first meeting at Anderson Ray. over a week ago, and at every meeting since, I had made it. perfectly clear that 1 was not the nominee of any organisation. 1 object, therefore, to Mr Kcllctt misleading vonr readers by telling them that I slated "that 1 “ would have to acknowledge." I said no such thing, as I have aireadv pointed out. "hair play is bouuic plnv,’’ but when men like .Mr Audis Wiklaiid. who, although a strangjr to the residents of Fairfield, attended my inert in;: there on 'Wednesday—he. stated he heard of my meeting there by sheer accident—with the sole intention of expressing his MasseyLiberal views, and trying to put the miners against me by heckling me; and then, again, when Mr Kcllctt and others did the same thing at Itavensbourne. instead of dong me injury, they’ have actually’ done mo good, t am quite capable of standing on my own feet and lighting with no uncertain ring not only my own battles, but those of the working classes. Perhaps Mr Kellett, can explain why, a,s he told me over a week ago. Mr Moller refused to accede To his request that he allow himself to come out as a La-bor candidate. —I am. etc.. lirtoiuiK S. Thomson. November 7. [Mr Thomson hardly requires to be told that we are not in the habit of disclosing the tenor of our reports before publication. oven if, as in this instamc. supplied by the candidate whose action was impugned. Mr Kcllett’s reference was obviously to a report that had appeared else where. We have felt called upon to cxei.se portions of Mr Thomson’s letter, because be essays to give ns a lesson in newspaper ethics. Now. we wish him to understand once and for all that we arc cajiable of running our business without bis assistance. As to the merits of this discussion, Mr Kellett. as an elector of Chalmers, had a perfect right, in onr judgment, at the meeting in question to put a. motion which tested Mr Thomson's claim to ap))ear thereat as a Labor candidate, when the latter’s pretensions were ridiculed by the accredited Labor organisations in the City. Further. Mr Kellett was well within his rights in endeavoring, through the medium of onr columns, to Jet the ejectors of Chalmers in general. and of Ravenshonrne in particular, know what the true position was. ]f candidates send to this journal reports of their outside meetings our understanding with

them in this relation carries with it perforce an obligation that such reports shall be substantially’ correct. We will not willingly allow* our columns to be made the veiiide for the dissemination of biased communications; and we trust that this timely warning will be borne steadiiv in mind toy all concerned in “running parliamentary elections.—Ed. E.S.I •to THE EDITOR. Sir, —I tvas one of a number who attended Mr Thomson's meeting at Ravensbourne‘on Thursday tiighl. and Mas surprised. to hear that gentleman state that. Messrs Haymes and Breen, who are respectively president and secretary of ins Labor Representation Committee, had informed him that it was quite open In him (Mr Thomson) to come out as a Labor candidate for this seat, as the Labor party were not recognising any other candidate. I would therefore ask these two gentlemen through your columns to stale whether or not Mr Thomson has their authority to make, such statements as these. Such, of course, Mas inferred hr Mr Thomson's letter in Thursday's paper. but I think that we workers are entitled in know onr position. I have no desire to injure hint, hut wish to know the exact jiosition.—l am. etc., F.M. November 6.