THE INDUSTRIAL MERGER

Evening Star, Issue 19614, 21 July 1927, Page 10

THE INDUSTRIAL MERGER

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,--! notice that. Air J. 1). Smith has been good enough to tell your readers that I am suffering from a delirium, and that, my recent letter was a “disjointed jangle of drivel.” This may appear worthy argument, from the point- of view of your correspondent., but- as a- qpitter of- fact to intelligent people it is simply a scold. It. carried neither weight nor logic, and indicates that- my friend is in a tight corner. 1 note also that lie is an expert with tho tape measure. From his letter it seems that the test of logic in any statement, made by me i.s _ the putting of the tape measure over it, and 1 am then abused for using four or five inches on some special subject. Possibly this i.s due to the great efficiency nf Air .Smith, hut I would ask him in all seriousness if he put the tape measure over his own letter. And it ho did. how niamy inches, yards, or miles (for that matter) of Ids inky effusion would if, take to convince anyone but himself?

One great- trouble with Mr Smith is that, in Press correspondence tic becomes so involved and excited (hat one never knows what he means in one letter until he explains it in the next. 1 assure him that as far as 1 am concerned I thought he accused mo of being bankrupt from the financial standpoint, and I cannot, acquit him of being guilty of a statement to that effect, for he must, know that 1 could never ho bankrupt for ideas while 1 am in conflict In Press correspondence with the chief exponent of efficiency in New Zealand, Air J. D. Smith. However, Air Smith has now explained the meaning of his former letter, and possibly in his next literary cffort_ ho _ will explain what he has written in Ids last. One thing tor which Air Smith must be given credit, is that he is a champion at assertion. He stares that, of course you. .sir, know that 1 butted in in this 'matter. Now, -if yon will look up the files of tho Dunedin ‘ Star ’ you will find that “True Unionist.” made an attack on me in a letter dated May 23. I replied to that letter on Juno 2, and on June ti Mr J. D. Smith '■ hutted in.” Lot Air Smith wriggle out of that if he can. His cheap sneers about Air Herbert, secretary nf the Otago District Council of the Alliance of Labor, carry neither weight nor conviction, but they do boar the hall-mark of nastiness cm the part of Air Smith. With reference to the £f> a week, the total sum and substance of my offending is that I quoted exactly what Air Smith had saitl—namely, chat lie was not interested as to whether the workers got £G or £6OO. Possibly your correspondent did not realise the significance of his statement until I drew his attention to it, and frankly 1 am not s.rpnsed in the least that he, as ani alleged Labor man, is now pained and hurt at the absurd statement lie himself made.

The considered opinion of Labor throughout New Zealand, and indeed throughout tho world, is that both national and international Labor organisation is necessary, and I recognise t-ho fact that every trade unionist and Labor supporter in Otago, with the. possible exception of “True Unionist” and J. D. Smith, realises this. Your correspondent, however, is not troubled with the considered opinions ot the Labor movement in New Zealand or anywhere else. Ho still states that a national organisation is not necessary, lio goes further, and says that if wo were 100 per cent, organised we woulj not have unity or organisation. How does lie prove it? He adopts_tlm simple plan of tho business efficiency expert, and aiseris it, and remember when Air Smith asserts anything ho insists that your readers accept it as a. proved fact. In short, what he wants your readers to believe is that all the Labor propaganda and a.ll the efforts ol tho Labor movement for years should go for nought against one bare assertion of the wonder man of the south.

I would like to refer to his statement regarding (he open conference of the Alliance of Labor and the. deputation from that- conference to the Prime Minister. He states that the, conference was incompetent, to bring down any concrete proposals. Now, the conference did bring down concrete proposals, and told the Prime AfiuiMcr definitely how tho unemployed problem could ho solved. Mr Smith further states that, ttio committeo which met to consider the proposals only discussed proposals prepared by me. This is an absolute misstatement. There were no proposals until the committee met, and tho position regarding the unemployed was so glaring, and the methods by which the unemployed problem could he overcome so patent, that any six men connected with tho Labor movement, could formulate very concrete and definite proposals in n lew hours. Air Smith further says that 1 stated at the conference that I claimed that I represented 80,000 unionists. I made no such statement. What I did say was that the open conference represented 80,000 workers. I repeat this, and can prove that statement to the hilt. His jeer about haranguing the Ministers is all that one would expect from Air Smith. Alay I remind him, however, that it would be more in keeping with tho host interests of Labor if he left it to-the opponents of Labor to do this jeering? Tho policy mud platform of Labor is so clear, just, and definite that no haranguing is necessary when putting the ■ c.aso for Labor before Alinisters of tho Crown. Air Smith has been launching an attack on the Alliance of Labor for long enough. If- is time htat we put him on the defensive, and. indeed, that is quite an easy matter. First, I want- to ask him if ho is a trade unionist, and, if so. of what union is he a member? Secondly, I would ask him if he ever did any organisation work either in the political or the industrial Reid, and what were the results nf his efforts in that direction? Thirdly, may I ask him what have been the net results of the Central Labor Office which be stated

in a previous letter was organised in Otago years ago? Have the efficient accountancy methods of that office proved to ho siiccossln! . Has Mi Smith’s patent protected the Binds or the trade unionists ol Dunedin? And, last, but not least, have the workers in Otago obtained better awards or industrial agreements than tho workers in other parts of New Zealand who are not enrolled and initiated into the J. D. Smith sprat-catching device?-—! am, etc., Jas. Rouerts. Secretary N..Z Alliance of Labor. July 19.