THE DREADNOUGHT OFFER.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXX, Issue 14976, 23 April 1909, Page 11

THE DREADNOUGHT OFFER.

THE MEETING IN KING EDWARD BARRACKS. The Christchurch public will be naturally interested in the accounts sent out of the dominion of the Dreadnought meeting held in King Edward Barracks last week, The following is a telegram which appeared in the Sydnoy “ Telegraph ” on April 16 : Wellington (N.Z.), Thursday.—A disgraceful 6cene took place in connection with a. meeting called by the Nary League at Christchurch to discuss a motion approving the offer of a Dreadnought to the Admiralty. About four thousand persons attended. As scon as Bishop Julius and Bishop Grimes appeared on the platform they were greeted with irrelevant pleasantries. Tho chairman vainly endeavoured to gain a hearing above tho shouts raised by a few score of hoodlums in the front scats. The gathering was quickly out of hand. Two constables, who attempted to stay the noise, were tossed about by the crowd like straws. A team oi footballers worked a passage in and out of the gathering. This caused a further uproar. Half-an-hour was put to waste in an endeavour to secure a hearing for the speakers: but it was then realised that no one had a chance of talking intelligently to the audience. At the suggestion of one of the speakers the words “ Hands up for the resolution ” were written upon a blackboard and displayed to the crowd. A forest of hands at once flew up, amid cheers and yells, and when Mr T. E. Taj lor, ALP., rose in his seat to move an"amendment ho was accorded much the same reception as those who previously attempted to speak. Thereafter the meeting degenerated into “ howling- hysteria.” The blackboard was filched from the platform and borne aloft by supporters of the motion. This action was accepted as a challenge by the opponents, and the board swayed hither and thither, perilously rapped knuckles, and was eventually brought to the ground. In the melee thatensued several free fights occurred. Then someone waved a Union Jack. This was torn from him and trampled under foot; but after violent hostilities it was rescued and conveyed to the platform. The meeting ended in chaos. '■ TO THE EDITOK. Sir, —1 have often wondered what sort of electors there are in the Christchurch North electorate. Some three years ago, they elected Mr C. M. Gray by a large majority, and would have nothing to do with Mr T. E. Taylor. Mr Gray went to "Wellington and committed no great sin, so far as is known, but in December last, the electors said by their votes, “ Wo are tired of you, and we want Mr Taylor,” and they elected him by a huge majority. Parliament has not mot, and yet some of these electors are crying, “We want another change. We worked for you and helped to put you in, but we want you out again.” Why? Mr Taylor has dared to say publioly what thousands are saying in their homes. You have only to move about and you hear the same opinion expressed in workshops, club-rooms and in the street. Mr Taylor took exception to the gift cp a Dreadnought without the consent of the representatives of the people. Mr Taylor also stated that there was no real crisis, aud consequently the question could have been considered by Parliament, before the offer was made. Mr Taylor’s version of the scare is fully borne out by Mr Asquith’s remarks, as published in your issue of Wednesday, when he states that there is no immediate need to order Dreadnoughts. Mr Taylor’s critics, Messrs D. Bates and J. W. Hunter, would sacrifice all Mr Taylor’s political abilities simply because they do not see eye to eye with him on this matter, and Mr Bates makes a strong point of his objection to Mr Taylor’s cablegram to Mr Asquith, informing him that the offer of a Dreadnought had not been sanctioned by Parliament. Had the cablegram not been sent, what would have been tho result? When Parliament met and Mr Taylor made a protest against the offer being made without the consent of Parliament, members would have said: “ The offer has been made and it cannot be withdrawn now, so what is the use of our discussing tho matter.” I am sincerely afraid that our Premier has been rather unwise in not delaying tho offer, especially at a time when tho Government is applying the pruning knife, by a severe retrenchment both in the Civil Service and railway workshops. We are told that there is no work for the men at Addington, and yet Mr Witty says there is a shortage of trucks, and at Easter passengers on the north line had to ride in trucks.—l am, etc., E.A.M.L. ■ TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—-Like many more of your readore, I have been considerably annoyed by the letters of J. W. Hunter. It is quite possible for a person to bo sincerely opposed to the Premier’s rash offer and yet be as much a patriot as ho is. Mr Hunter has evidently forgotten that we live in a Christian country, the Founder of our religion being the “Apostle of Peace.” To say that Air Taylor is a discredited politician is an absolutely false statement. Air Taylor has acted with credit to himself, although his actions seem to clash with those of Mr James W. Hunter. What about Air Taylor’s labours in connection with old age pensions, land for settlement, licensing, etc. P Is there another politician more sound on these questions? Surely Mr Hunter will admit that his own views are quits identical with those of the member for Christchurch North. I trust that Mr Hunter will yet. _s<?« that Mr Taylor is acting within his rights and that his influence, instead of going down to zero, is climbing higher and higher and will he too strong for even Air Hunter to rail against. Air Taylor is a patriot in tho true sense of the word, and not merely a. “ flagw&ver ” and trumpet-blower on occasion.—l am, etc., A.G.H.