UNEMPLOYED WORKERS’ MOVEMENT.

Evening Star, Issue 21099, 11 May 1932, Page 14

UNEMPLOYED WORKERS’ MOVEMENT.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Under the above caption a correspondent signing himself “ Delegate ” writes to your paper attacking our movement and inferring that money is being wasted on sending delegates to Wellington to the National Conference One of the charges made is that £lB was spent on the trip. For his information. and your readers’ information also, we will quote the actual cost incurred. The total amount came to £lO, made up of the following items: —Train and boat fares for two, £7 17s Sd; meals for same in train and on arrival in Wellington, 10s; total, £8 7s Bd. This leaves the small balance of £1 12s 4d for two men to live and pay board, etc., in Wellington from Thursday afternoon until the following Thursday. They had to live on the cheapest meals to make their finance spin out, and, unfortunately, two days’ work and two days’ pay were lost by these delegates for attending this conference on behalf of the Unemployed Workers’ Movement. Without exaggeration, the sacrifice made by these men saved the exchequer at least a £5 note. Not content with his misstatements, “ Delegate ” insinuates that it is intended to send representatives to conference again in the near future. This is not so, and we do not expect anything like this to happen for at least six months. Re expulsion of members from the movement. This has been done in compliance with our standing orders. Rule 32 reads; “Any member acting in any manner considered unsatisfactory to the movement will be expelled.” We are determined to keep our movement clean, and drunkenness on the part of a very few members has been the chief factor in causing their expulsion. “ Delegate ” also states “ That the Unemployed Movement only represents a small minority of the unemployed.” Evelyn© Bennett, in your issue of the 9th, makes the same assertion. The Presbyterian Assembly apparently has the same idea. It might interest your readers to know that the “ Unemployed Workers’ Movement’’ has a financial membership of 1,400 in Dunedin. These are registered unemployed. If we cannot speak on behalf of the unemployed or represent their interests, who can? Not “ Delegate ” nor Mrs Bennett, nor the Presbyterian Assembly, surely! Finally, Mrs Bennett was until lately vice-president of the “ Women’s Branch of the Unemployed Workers’ Movement.” Owing- to her autocratic methods and complete absence of working class ideology, she (through pressure of adverse opinion against herself at the meetings) felt compelled to withdraw from same. We are gradually weeding out the disgruntled elements, and it says a lot for our movement that the membership has grown in eight months from 50 to 1,400 members. Enclosed please find balance-sheet for month ending March 31.—We are, etc., Press Committee U.W.M. May 10, TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —As a notification from the above organisation has appeared in your issue of the 10th inst. demanding that all money, books, etc., held by the late Relief Committee of the U.W.M. be handed over within seven days, it may bo as well for your readers to come into some information concerning the workings of those who aro alleged to be representatives of the unemployed. In the first place, the break between the Relief Committee and tho executive of the U.W.M. occurred because the Relief Committee was requested to hand over all funds which it was responsible for raising, and to ask no questions as to their disposal. We, of course, took strong exception to this attitude, as we were not at all satisfied that the said funds. were being put to the use for which they were intended. We therefore completely severed our connection with the organisation, and are now operating in the best interests of distressed fami- • lies. The funds raised by us were' intended to be donated in the shape of relief to cases of distress, and not for the general use of a doubtful organisation. Some question has arisen concerning the expenditure of £lB, which was spent on a joy ride to Wellington by two officers of the U.W.M. As two more “ Cook’s tourists ” have been appointed to proceed in the same direction there is ilo doubt that the executive desires tho relief funds to provide the expenses of another trip. “ Watchdog,” whoever he may be, struck the right note when he mentioned a one-handed organisation. We, the members of tho Relief Committee, desire it to be known that we are in no way connected with the Unemployed Workers’ Movement, which is in our opinion only a camouflage for Communists without adopting any semblance of Socialistic principles. Wo are now known as the “ Relief Workers’ Social Service,” and as such we are out to do the most good in the best possible manner. Our policy is to build up, not to break down, and our motto is “ Service before self.” W© are fortunate in having such a well-known and highlyrespected social worker as the Rev. V. G. Bryan King as our patron and trustee, and also the backing of several well-known business gentlemen. We intend to carry on the work we have started despite the petty, spiteful, selfish attacks made on us by a body of people whose past performances have killed all sympathy which they might have enjoyed had they adopted a more gentlemanly attitude. We challenge the executive of the U.W.M. to publish a balance-sheet in the Press and to inform the public of this city what has become of the money which has been donated for the purposes of relief. In the report of the last general meeting the name of Mr R. Matheson as a member of tho executive appeared. This is incrorect, as Mr Matheson resigned from the organisation before the publication of that report.—We are, etc., M. Matheson, Hon. Sec., P. H. Petbie, President, Relief Workers* Social Service. May 10. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —“ Watchdog,” m last night’s ' Star,’ tries to stir up public feeling against the Unemployed Workers’ Movement in this city. When any man descends to a personal attack, and more particularly when that attack is made against a man whose mental ability and courage have bceu well proved, not only in the battle front of the unemployed of this city, but also on the “ bloodstained fields of Flanders,*’ it is despicable indeed. “ Watchdog ” seems to worry about where the money goes. Perhaps* he is like many more who writ© to your paper and make statements without first trying to verify them. My statement at the Ova) on Sunday still stands good. If any lady or gentleman interested calls at No. 234 Hanover street I will take them to the secretary’s house and go through the books, receipts, and expenditure. T am afraid " Watchdog's ” warning to the public of Dunedin will fall on many deaf cars. 1 know many business men in this city who will not only give shillings but pounds, because they know it is going to feed women and children whose husbands have been sent to gaol because they fight for bread. We nave friends

who are not afraid to dip into their pockets.—l am, etc., George S. Geddes. May 11. TO THB EDITOR. Sir, —I wish to inform “ Watch Dog” that ho should make sure before publishing a statement in the Press. Hie total cost ot sending two delegates to Wellington was £lO not £lB, and why sbomun't the U.W.M. send delegates to any conlereuce to discuss tnc unemployed workers' problem, and to seo wnat steps snouid be taken to bring about better conditions? 1 would also like to mention tbat Mr O'Koi ke was elected unopposed lor the ensuing year as secretary. Would “ Watch tmg do as much tor tho unemployed and their movement as Mr O'Rorko has done in the past, and is prepared to do in the future?—! am, etc., H.R.C. May 10.