EXTREME LABOUR

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 17 November 1922, Page 7

EXTREME LABOUR

ATTACK BY MR L. M. IS.TTT

(By Telegraph.—Special to The Mail.)

CHRISTCHURCH, Nov. 16

■Mr Isilt’s opening 'address was i-luir-acteiised by a sledge lianuner attack on tho extreme wing of Hie Labour Party. He said Red Fed ism mouthed about democracy when it suited Hie party’s purpose. It was a stage property taken up or dropped as Hie moment demanded. In a .lam) where adult franchise prevailed, these men approved of direct action in lieu of legislative action. What was the -‘’One Rig Cnioii” but a means of substituting the strike for the ballot box. He admitted that there was a difference of ppinion between the Labour parliamentarians and Industrialists, but lie- had never heard the Labour .Parliamentarians condemn the “go slow." They were out to destroy the presentParliamentary system and substitute an 1 “Industrial Parliament.” whatever that I was. j

lie ijiioted the .Maoriland Worker to the effect that “Parliament, as at present constituted, is an institution Hint cannot posibiy solve Labours needs,” and foretold the day when it would bo adjourned sine die with no date fixed for its resuscitation. The Candidate asked if this looked like constitutional reform. (

He was antagnostic to Red Fedism, because it was disloyal and refused to honour the King, because it hurled vulgar insults at the Prince of Wales, flouted the Hag and was bent on breaking up the British Empire. Direct action was inexcusable, because the people of the Dominion had universal suffrage, yet the poor silly fellows did not have the gumption not to go on strike just before an election. He was opposed to Red Fedism. because it had introduced into this country, as elsewhere, the most subtle, mischievous and disgraceful form of sabot age—“go slow.” He wished he had the ability to describe an evil like “go slow” as it ought to be described, so that every man and woman would fight it as they would fight the plague. He would rather see his son return from the war shattered and suffering, to drag out the rest of his time in pain and impotence, than see him turn into a miserable waster, such as must result from this “go slow” business, Had any labour leader condemned “go slow?” He had heard them deny its existence, but as regards its moral effect, they had maintained a criminal and cowardly silence. He was antagonistic to Red Fedism because of its grossly materialistic and agnostic spirit. He did not intend to introduce sectarianism into politics—there had been too much of that —but after all, they lived in a Christian country. How could the Rev. J. K. Archer (who is the Labour candidate for Christchurch' North) pose as a Christian Socialist and . say that his leader was Christ and not i Harry Holland, seeing that he (Mr j Archer) was a red fed? Mr Archer had, said that Labour was antagonistic to no church, that it believed a man s religion, to be individual. Did Mr Archer speak; of the Labour‘that lie (the candidate) | was associated with, ov of Red Fedism.