TORY NEWSPAPERS.

Grey River Argus, 31 May 1922, Page 8

TORY NEWSPAPERS.

EMPLOY PECULIAR TACTICS. Chatting to an “Argus" representative Mr H. E. Holland M. P, chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party, emphasised the great success of his n'rcnt tour through the South Island and the Wellington and Manawatu districts of the malignant attitude of some of the Tory papers towards both himself and the Labour Party, and the mendaciousness of some of the statements publisned. Referring to the gentlemen who conduct their anti-Labour campaign under the self-imposed designation of the “Welfare League,” he said he was still awaiting the information he had asked for as to the “League’s” bona tides. As soon as this was forthcoming he would be prepared to answer every question the “League” eared to put to him. Up to the present, however, the “League" had refused to establish its bona tides, and the only conclusion he could come to was that it had no real existence as a- organisation—that t comprised merely one or two wealthy entlemen, several lawyers, and some .•aid agitators, and could not afford to ,et the people know the sources of its income nor yet the details of its expend iture. With respect to the newspapers’ attacks on himself during the course of his tour, some of them were too silly almost for notice. When they could not get over the intense enthusiasm of his mootings and—with one or two exceptions —the consistently large attendances at the said meetings, they endeavoured to camouflage the ease by de daring that he was not delivering the same kind of speech that he delivered in his own electorate. And yet the notes that he used nt all his meetings were the same notes, and the speech was substantially the same speech, that iodelivered at Rewanui, Runanga, Blackball, Millerton, Denniston, Stocktor, and other Buller centres before commencing his tour. The Socialist oh jective was emphasised, and the prin cipal planks of the platform dealt with extensively; and the trouble was that the amateur journalists who hang on to the coat tails of the exploiting interests were at a loss to explain away the unanimous endorsement of the principles expounded. They did not wish to see that the changing economic comli tions produce new political outlooks. The most amusiing peculiar demonstration of the lower type of Tory journalism he found at Oamaru, where prior io his arrival the local morning paper printed the silly allegation that he was coming there to speak as “the Leader of the Alliance of Labour.” Of course at this meeting he publicly stated that he was there not as the leader of the Alliance of Labour—as the editor of their paper out of the fullness of his lack of knowledge had declared —but .-is the chairman of the Parliamentary La hour Party. He had pointed out that the Alliance was a purely industrial organisation, with which as a matter of fact the industrial organisation of which ho was a member was not y n t affiliated, and he had no authority to speak for it officially; he was there to state the case for the political unity of Labour. Not once did he use the word “repudiate" in his reference to the Alliance of Labour; nor could h’> remarks be construed by any honest person to stand for a repudiation of the Alliance of Labour. On the contrary, at any of his inc ■ •qs he stated that, while he did not '< e with the viewpoint of some of th- principal officials of the Alliance of Labour with respect o political action, he was still of opinion that the workers should link up industrially with the Alliance of Labour and politically with the Labour party. These facts nothwithstnnding, the un happy editor (who had not sufficient courage to attend the meeting) was capable of publishing the palpable falsehood that he had ‘repudiated all connection with the Alliance of labour.“ The falsehood w: s duly communicated to the leading Tory pap er of Christchurch, which paper with characteristic disregard for the actual ities gave it immediate publication. It was not to the credit of Westport that the slander found ready r nd apparently spiteful re-publication there. The Oamaru paper did not, of coins?, stand alone in the employment of ques tionable tactics. At Timaru he found one of the local papers suggesting that at one time he (Mr Holland) had been in favour of the socialisation of women and also in favour of bombing Labour’s opponents. Questioned in his meeting about this charge, he had replied that it had been penned by no honest person —that its author was either mentally irresponsible or deliberately criminal in his attempt to defame. Needless to say, that editor did not include in his report of the meeting the reply to his own infamous falsehood. In some cases the papers printed fair reports and severe criticism. To this no one objected. There were cases where the papers shrieked that tin* La hour policy would mean confiscation and the rest, and there were some most ludicrously serious attempts to combat the Labour Party’s case. But in no single instance was there any very serious attempt to defend the Government from the Labour Party’s indictment. Every where, in spite of the hostility of the Tory and Liberal press, he found a splendid spirit of solidarity growing up and anticipated that. working-class unity would make itself felt in Decern ber next in a multitude of centres.