THE WHITE NEW ZEALAND POLICY.

Evening Star, Issue 19275, 14 June 1926, Page 4

THE WHITE NEW ZEALAND POLICY.

TO THE EDITOR. Rir,—ln reply Lo Mr Gilchrist, the Maoris belong to a splendid race, and, personally, I am proud to be a native of the land of their birth. Mr Gilchrist has given your readers a most wonderful diatribe with reference to what ha maintains is my ability “to change my coat.” In this connection let, mo tell Mr Gilchrist that, while 1 am a stubborn fighter, I am never too “ pig-headed ” to learn, and I feel sure that your readers will agree that in the interests of tho general community and of our workers in particular it is better that I should help to give them a lead along what Mr Gilchrist calls “safe” evolutionary lines—more especially when I am convinced, as I have been for the last sixteen months, that the best means of progress is along slow but sure linos. Tho reason why tho old Liberal-Labor Party was so successful in doing good work for the people of New Zealand was because, under Messrs Ballance and Seddon, tho interests of the community as n whole were attended to, and not those of any particular small section on either side. Mr Gilchrist says that I have informed your readers for the first time that I am in favor of a volunteer army, but such is not the case. I have always contended that, while I personally detest war, ,[ realise that it we are going to maintain our present standard of life we must bo ready at all times to use force if necessary to prevent our people being reduced to tho “coolie” standard of life of the Eastern peoples. Mr Gilchrist haa possibly confused his mind with tho fact that under the present system I am a strong anti-con-scriptionist, and confused my attitude in this connection with that of a pacifist; hut even at the time of the war, when I was president of tho anti-cou-scriptionists in Christchurch, our defence authorities knew that I was not an anti-militarist, and therefore not a pacifist. Mr Gilchrist says ho knows that I “ have signed within the last few months a pledge to a party which has wiped out of its platform the citizen army.” In reply to this, permit me to say that at tho Labor Party’s Conference in Wanganui at Easter time I seconded a Christchurch remit in favor of a citizen army on a voluntary basis, with standard wages while on duty. It is true that those of us who supported such remit were defeated, but our pacifist friends—-Messrs Holland, Nash, and others—were compelled at a later stage to agree to this year’s constitution and platform including a clause which, although in my mind, too indefinite, shows clearly that our 1926 conference did not stand for straightout pacifist policy. 'While I am to-day connected with the Labor Party, and a member of the 0.L.1LC., I am by no means the only ono who will he prepared to bo “ rejected ” by such men as Holland, Nash, Gilchrist, and others who, while working along narrow sectarian lines, are retarding at every step tho progress of the workers whom they profess to represent.—l am, etc., G. S. Thomson. fThis correspondence is now dosed.— E(f. E.S.] June 11.