CORRESPONDENCE

Evening Star, Issue 22880, 11 February 1938, Page 1

CORRESPONDENCE

GOVERNMENT AND MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —It is perfectly true, as Mr Moss says, that 1 appreciate to the full the mayoral work of the Rev. Mr Cox. He has been tested and has been found true to Labour’s ethical ideals. Mr Cox’s ability attracted many to study Labour ideals who otherwise were either prejudiced against or uninterested in them. It is safe to say that he contributed largely to securing Labour’s majority at the last municipal elections. For that reason among others I remember the old adage that it is dangerous to change horses when crossing a stream. Ido seriously think of the danger to Labour if it loses Mr Cox as a mayoral candidate through ingratitude for’his good work. During the last General Election the work put in by the Revs. Mr Cox, Mr Carr, Mr Archer, and Mr Nordmeyer on behalf of Labour as candidates frustrated the anti-God charges the whisperers of the “ alias ” parties used. Once again the malevolent manoeuverers seek to remove Mr Cox in the hope that the anti-God slogans may be as iftnrderously manipulated against Lab|rt® as in its infant days, Mr Moss resents my. statement that those who are not with ns are against ns, and says he is 100 per cent. Labour. The late Mr Massey, the most successful opponent of Labour in New Zealand, called himself moderate Labour. Even the late Mr George Reid, who was the, most successful anti-Lab-ourite leader in Australia, like Mr Moss, first praised Labour’s ideals. He thus slimed his victims before attempting to swallow them. Ever since I can remember all the anti-Labourites, no matter what alias they used to camouflage themselves with, boastedthey were as good as any Labour man. Mr Moss says he is 100 per cent, as good. What better evidence that Labour is the genuine article when tho substitute is represented as being' as good as Labour is? I wonder what sort of a reception an enemy line prisoner of war would have got in the last war who used Mr Moss’s line of argument and said to those who captured him, “ I am 100 per cent. British. I am as good a Britisher as you, hut the reason I am not fighting in the British Army is that there are just as good Britishers in Germany sniping British soldiers as there are British snipers shooting German soldiers.”- This proves that Mr Moss’s arguments are fallacious, and tho electors, like the British soldiers, would know how to designate such a lack of solidarity and unity of purpose against the common enemy. TheEisb'buf'TEorty, believing duction, distribution, and exchange are the result of labour power, whether of brain or brawn, never changed its name of Labour because it was never ashamed to admit that production, etc., was'the result of service. When a private citizen is ashamed of his name and when he assumes a lot of aliases the police know how to view those aliases in their proper light. The anti-Lahourites have so many political aliases they seem to he ashamed of their identity and are anxious to conceal it. As Mr Hargest has now explained the anii-Lahour policy, and as Mr Savage and other Cabinet Ministers will he here shortly to explain Labour’s policy, it would be presumption on my part without inside knowledge to explain why the taxation, such as exchange rate, sales tax, and gold tax are not yet removed. It is indeed illuminating to find anti-Lab-ourites complaining about the form of taxation they imposed themselves to find the money to pay for their many bungles. It would appear that even the evil that political parties do lives after thaen.—l am, etc., J. E, MaoManus. February 11.

MR HARGEST’S MEETING. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Mr Hargesf s meeting at South Dunedin certainly was a pretty torrid affair, but what else could anyone expect? The audience was far too politically enlightened to let him get away with his tall claims. Anyone knowing the facts could not possibly let them pass without protest, and the South Dunedin audience knew its politics too well, much too well, for Mr Hargest. Take his claim about the Nationalists being a new party. What absurdity! The audience could not let him get away with a political slinter of that kind. If it is a new party, why are

the old gang so much in evidence in Reactivities ? Wo know how Mr Coates was cheered when making his appearance at one of its meetings at Wellington. If it is a new party, why is Mr Coates associated with it? Is not Mr Forbes also a member? How it is that Mr Adam Hamilton (an old gang Tory of the deepest dye) is its leader? Why did both Mr Falconer and Mr Sidey (who, by the way, made a greater hash of things than ever when he tried to explain away his attitude towards the 40-hour week) figure so prominently in the arrangements at ! the South Dunedin meetings, if the party is really a new one? They are both, supporters of the old gang. Who is the organiser of the “new” party in Dunedin? Is it not the same man who for years has organised the Tory, party here? No wonder Mr Hargest was not allowed to get away with this and other claims he made. Another thing: Mr Hargest justified the Coates-Porhes party’s policy during the depression. This means he regards the leadership of Mr Forbes and Mr Coates during that period as sound. How is it then that he and his fellows have thrown over these two gentlemen as leaders? If his claim in regard to their Government’s depression years’ policy is correct, then both Mr Forbes and Mr Coates should be acclaimed by the Nationalists as New Zealand’s two leading statesmen. Yet it is clear they want to disown them. _ What a dilemma the “ new ” Nationalists are in. And, don’t forget that the emphasis is on the “new.” No wonder Mr Hargest got the hearing he did.—l am, etc., John Blunt. February 11. THE WHITE LINE. TO THB EDITOR. Sir, —“ Reasonable Latitude ” has found himself incapable of answering my arguments, so, like the' poor debater, he indulges in sarcasm. Of course I did not expect him- to answer them because he is so entirely in the wrong, hut I commend him for his perseverance in trying to save his face.—l am, etc., February 9. Keep to Lept. COST OF LIVING. TO THB EDITOR. Sir, —In reply to Mr Hargest with regard to the cost of living figures quoted by him in this evening’s ‘ Star-,’ he does not take into consideration the ’rise in the cost of production and a greater consuming power by the people. Where the demand exceeds the supply and a scarcity arises, up go the prices, and those who control the market corner the food and juggle with the prices. v During the depression food -and goods were pleLuiul. . Fruit was being dumped, ' coffee was burned, but the people did not have the money to buy. Their,’* earnipg power was stopped, and even though the prices of food stuffs were very low the people were starving amongst plenty. Items such as eggs, flour, fruit, and vegetables are subject to climatic conditions, and during war periods we find prices of food and goods high, as materials are used for the manufacture of war implements. At the present time large consignments of food and clothing will be required by Spain, China and Japan, and with production in these countries practically at a standstill the products of other countries will he required to feed the different and the citizens. Thue the demand rises and Mfeeone profiteers. ' The National Party to-day must realise that as a result of Labour’s policy, its large employment schemes, the guaranteed prices, and the increased pensions, the housewives now have _ a larger spending power, and they realise this.' Thus the strong organised front on behalf of the Labour Government.— I am, etc. February 10. Alice Herbert.: