CORRESPONDENCE. THE RECENT DEMONSTRATIONS.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 149, 25 May 1934, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE RECENT DEMONSTRATIONS.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —In yesterday’s paper (24th. inst.) you published a letter signed “N.A.J.” The writer asks if he may draw attention to the “general good behaviour” of the two demonstrations by the relief workers yesterday. This is a most extraordinary statement and one wonders whether “N.A.J.” is sarcastic, or deaf and blind, or was not present at the demonstration, or is just being made use of. Nobody who was present at those demonstrations (1) outside the front doors of the Grand Hotel and (2) underneath the balcony in the Square, could, by any stretch of imagination, describe them in the term used by “N.A.J.” In the first place, I suppose Mr Forbes, being the Prime Minister, must be regarded as the leading citizen of New Zealand and by virtue of his office the only proper course would have been to request him for an interview at a time that reasonably suited him—after he had finished his dinner. A short wait would have not inconvenienced the demonstrators.

Further, threats of violence were common, but Mr Forbes displayed wonderful patience and forbearance. All the same I would have liked to have heard the late Mr Massey under similar circumstances —there would have been no “beg pardons.” Mr Forbes’s courtesy and patience were evidently taken as weakness and found no decent response. Even Prince Henry’s name was brought into the matter, and it is to be hoped the authorities will not include Palmerston North in his itinerary.

Now, if a Labour Government were in power and, say. Mr Lees, Mr Hodgens or Comrade Sim were in the Cabinet —and after a good day’s work in the country’s interest, they had been attacked at their dinner and short hour of rest, as Mr Forbes was attacked —wliat would have happened? The unemployed must admit that the citizens of Palmerston North have done their utmost to alleviate their sufferings ajid therefore one would have expected they would not have let the good name of the city down by their conduct.

I am leaving “camps” out of the picture. I am not in favour of them except for young men of good health and stamina, and I understand that in every other part of New Zealand these camps are favourably viewed by men such as described. The object of this letter is to combat “N.A.J.’s” ridiculous reference to “general good behaviour.”—Yours, etc., GOOD HEARING. Palmerston North, 25th. May, 1934.