FUSION DEBATE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 13 July 1925, Page 5

FUSION DEBATE

MR. ATMOJtE’S AMENDMENT

DISCUSSION IN I'ITF. HOUSE

LABOUR ASSAILED

VITRIOLIC REPLIES

The Wellington papers devote a great deal of spare to toe discussion on Mr Atiiiore’s amendment before Hie House on Friday afternoon and evening, reported at considerable length m Satiu,lav's issue. The appended report is from The. Post i he. arguments in invour ot .LiberalReform fusion were stated by .Mr H. Atno.re (Nelson) in the House of Representjitives wle-n he moved an addition to the Addross-in-Roply. declaring that the formation of a strong National Party was essential. Mr Atni.i"i. drew a hitter attack from the Labour benches, led by Mr P. I'l aser, who moved an amendment to Mr At mole’s amendment, advocating lusion. tint in itniorent terms. Moth amendments were treated by the Government as want-of-confidenee, and the voting was mainly upon Party lines. At the commencement of the afternoon proceedings the Prime Minister stated that any amendment of the kind moved by Mr'H. At more (Nelson), involving an nttfiehniont to the Address-in-Reply to the (hivernor-Geiieral's Message, must be treated as a no-con-lid., nee motion.

Mr At more said that on the previous evening he had been told that he would not he called upon to speak until Friday evening. It was nut until the House had met on Friday afternoon—until the bell bad rung' and prayers bad been said -chat be was informed lb .t be was repaired to speak. It savoured very much i f sharp practice. He had been told by the Leader of the Op position and by* the Senior Government Whip that he would not be required to speak until the evening. He did not blame the latter, but he. thought lie was entitled to some explanation as to whv the arrangement should be suddenly altered, placing him so obviously at a disadvantage.

The Leader of. the Opposition (Mr T M. Wilford): “'lf the honourable gentle man will give way for a moment —

‘’••No. I will not give way,” said Mr At more. "You made your statement before.”

‘‘A MERE SU BTERFUOE’’ Mr At more said that before proceeding he wished to say that the Prime .Minister’s explanation did not clear the si!nation. Although it was customary to treat any proposed amendment to the Address-in-Reply as a no-confidence motion, it was not incumbent upon any Government to do that, and it was mere subterfuge to follow custom. Where would we bo in the world to-day if we had followed custom in the past and never gone for a change? The reason for the statement asked for in his amendment was that there were so many members in the House who had proclaimed their belief in the necessity for a National Government. He would read the resolutions passed at the caucus, of tlie Reform Party in 1922. when they declared she absolute necessity for a National Government. Now negotiations were still going ahead, when any business or outside iiistitutio.n could have fixed the whole matter up in tv.en. tv minutes, .the question of lusion Intel been before the people for years, and the late Prime Minister, whose loss thev deplored so much, and the present Prime Minister had expressed themsolves ns being in invouv of fusion. Inc Loader of the Opposition and other speakers had also expressed themselves in favour of it. He referred tn> the interview in which Sir John Luke had advocated fusion, and also the manly statement of the member for Gisborne. Now those gentlemen were to be asked to ir,> back on their convictions at the behest of the Party Whip, and vote against what they had declared only a short time ago to be necessary in the interests of the country. If the resolution of the Reform caucus three years ago had been acted upon they would not have had*the negotiations to-day. WHITE-ANTING THE EMPIRE The trouble with the British Empire today was that it was being whiteanted' by Revolutionary Socialism. Many members on the other side of the House had been returned at the last election because of their avowed liking ioi fusion, and if they voted against it todav tliev would be proving themselves unworthy of the confidence which had been reposed in them. That was the position. The Parliament of the Old Country was the only Parliament in the British' Empire to-day that was functioning. Representative institutions throughout the world were on thentrial. ~ Was there a Parliament m Australia that was functioning? They knew that there was not. They had the spectacle of government by a party which had a majority of only two-, and also the spectacle of certain sections challenging the supremacy of the will of the people. They had loin Walsh. Who was be? A representative of the people? No Yet they bad the Prime .Minister of the Gommonwealth taking serious notice of Tom W alsh and stating that he was determined to fight him to a. finish. Sound Imperialism Tiad formed the basis of the high name which M. .Massey had won for himself, but- who bad been the result when Mr Massey had gone to tilie country at the fast election ? lie had returned witli a following of 38 members. If that hau happened under Mr Massey, what cou-.d they hope for under the present Pn no Minister? He made that statement with n,;. wish to reflect on the capabilities i.f the present Prime Minister, who, labelieved, should be given every elm i e.

CRACKING THE PARTY WHIP Members on the other side of the House were unanimous that it was necessary lor them to fight the Alhniut of Labour, vet thev were willing to. respond to the crack of the party whip when the time eame to vote on his amendment. He did not mind how .individual members voted, lor his amendment was so framed that it could not he regarded as offensive. It was in no sense one oi no-confidence. 1 eihaps the hurdle to the formation' of a National Government was the personal interests of members and candidates, but it members were airaid to- jump o\ei the low hurdle thev were committing a political falsehood and playing a trick on the countfv. Mr At more proceeded to allude to what had happened in Italy before Mussolini's advent to show how attempts were being made to support representative institutions at the present dav. MussoFni had united all elements in his country against the Reds, Was it too much to ask New Zealanders to do the same and make a slight sacrifice in their country's interest, or did they prefer to see the dictatorship . f the Vom Walsh's and the Roberts's? He denied that lie had been inspired by anyone in framing li'.s amendment.

Could anyone say that the present debate had not been a damnable display of tlie party system? THE WORKERS’-INTERESTS

The Labour Party arrogated to itself the sole right to be the guardians of the workers’ interests, but lie ihad done as much service on local bodies for the workers as any member of the Labour Party. Auckland, the biggest Labour centre in New Zealand, could only get two representatives on to the City Council. Three out of every four electors in Wellington were workers, but they had rejected all but three of the Labour candidates for the City Council. In New Zealand the wage-earner did his duty when dealing with the Revolutionary Socialists, and it was the duty of the members of the Reform Party to- be. true to their oaths ami do the same. With all goodwill to the present Prime Minister, he said that Mr (.’cutes’s prestige was immeasurably inferior to Mr Massey, and if the latter could only get 38 members in how could Mr Coates do better? The biggest indictment against the Reform Party was the law of popularity in that it had been in for 13 tears, which the people now regarded as being too long. They bad no chance, of getting in with a majority •again, and at the present time they wt r■> depending for their position on the votes of three men who were not elected as Reformers. Throughout the present Addross-in-Reply debate the Labour members had not thrown one ray of light on the economic darkness that was troubling the world, but they had poured down on .Mr Coates a tirade of abuse and uttered a lot of stuff that could have very well been done without. But what were the opponents of Revolution doing? They were not prepared to get together. Mr P. Fraser had admitted that the Russian revolution was only part and parcel of the Labour resolution that was going on all over the world. The Labour Party had never -receded from the point- of vie.v expressed by tlie Maoriland Worker- —namely, that the rebellion in Ireland would bring about the downfall of the British Empire, which would he a boon and blessing to the world. The Labour Party was under the crack of the party whip in the same way as the Reform Party.

•ALIEN IN THOUGHT” The majority of those who were in the Liberal and Reform Parties were New Zealanders, and the majority of the Socialist Party were not. The former were doing their best for the benefit of New Zealand before the latter evei touched our shores. The Socialist Party was hopelessly alien in thought to- tlie average Britisher. Aspiring to the Treasury betfehes, the Socialist Party showed how it would paralyse industry by the methods it proposed to adopt, and it was so utterly foolish and shortsighted that it could not see that by paralysing industry it would alsoi be affecting its own people. He, instanced the ‘‘silly land tenure, tlie usehold” of “these men who talk about functioning on behalf of the people.” There was not one man on the Socialist Party benches but entered wholeheartedly upon a defence of the murders that took place in Russia. Mr Atmore repeated his challenge that lie was prepared to meet, them on the public platform, particularly the member for Wellington Central, whenever they were prepared to defend their Socialistic actions in New Zealand. The Socialist movement was not confined to New Zealand, he sai 1, in conclusion. It was appearing all over the world. What the Italians did in defence of their country- was it too much to expect of the men who were supposed to represent New Zealand? Was it too much to ask them to make a little sacrifice, not of life, but of small party considerations? The people demanded it, and if the members concerned were not blind slaves of Government they would do what the people were demanding through the whole of the Press of the Dominion. Mr Atmore formally moved his amendment. Mr J. R. Corrigan (Patea) seconded the amendment. A LABOUR ATTACK Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central) was the. next speaker, anil began, by complimenting the mover of the Ad-dress-in-Reply. He showed a knowledge of bis subject, and in that respect Mr Atmore might well follow his example. He regretted the references made by Mr Hudson to the workers going slow. Mr Hudson was connected with tea growing in Ceyion, where the tea growers had agreed to go slow. Before addressing his remarks to the miners of the Dominion Mr Hudson should pay some attention to the tea planters of Ceylon. Dubbing Mr Atmore as one of the “minor critics,” Mr Fraser said Mr Atmore bail been digging up the past. Mr Atmore: “I never referred to your past.” Mr Fraser: “My past was not challenged as the lion, member's was on one occasion. I am quite prepared to put my private and public character up against the lion, member’s.” Mr Atmore was throwing out challenges in the same way as lie used to challenge Mr Massey. Challenging was becoming a habit; a disease with him; it had got beyond his control, and lie was deserving of the pity of the ordinary rational people. The speaker was prepared to debate the platform and planks of the Labour Party with Mr Atmore anywhere ill New Zealand. Fiercely assailing the Reform Party, Mr Atmore —“this miniature Mussolini from* acVos-s Cook Strait”—was now appearing in the role of a harmless little twittering dove attempting to move a vote of no-confidence in those with whom he wanted to make peace. MV Atmore had attempted to east aspersions on- the birthplace of members of the Labour Party, and yet posed as a great Impelialist. Certainly Mr Atmore deserved credit for selecting Nelson as his place of birth. (Laughter). ’ But.” said Mr Fraser, using a quotation which lie said he bad not orig mated, "I'd rather he born a man in Scotland than a- jackass in New Zealand.’ The lion, member is not a fair ciiterinn of a New Zealander.”

A FURTHER AMENDMENT Mr Fraser then moved the following amendment to Mr At more’s amendment: —-That it is desirable in ti e intei-t-i-ts of tile Dominion that the three party system should come to an end, and that the proposed union between the Reform and Liberal Parties slum!•! he consummated • that there is no siegßpolitical principle upon which the two parties mentioned are in disagreement and that no question of the allocation >f p ortfolios, personal ambitions, or claims of candidates is any justification '.<■ blocking the way to the immediate formation of a united Conservative Party, or for the Reform and Liberal Parties Kniaiiiitg separate and apart. That amendment stated the position bettci than that of the member for Nelson Mr Fraser quoted a statement by Mi Atmorc to the effect that the best policy was that of the Labour Party

Labour membeis: "Who said that'’ Mr Eraser: "The lion, member for Nelson.”

L-iboui members (with son.use': "Oil indeed.''

Mr Eras pro-j-*ede Ito quote further references, ( tie of win h reported Mr At more as liavirg expressed himself in favour of common o who ship. Mr \tn ore had ilso stated that the Conservative Party should recognise that it was not the ('illy party, but that all men aim all women who worked bv bead oi bv

1 rnd were truly labour, whether thev belonged to the Official Labour Party or ret.

Labour members: “When did he say that?” - : '

Mr Fraser: “The date is July, 1910. For once the member for Nelson anti myseif are m complete agreement. Voices: Fuse, fuse!’’ (Laughter). DIGGING INTO THE PAST---

Mr Fraser said there was a. mystery surrounding the entry into the House of Mr Atmore. He came in as a precocious youth of 41 years, and his precocity was shown when he objected to the methods in operation in the House at the time. Mr Fraser dealt satirically with some of Mr Atmore's actions and expressions in the House many years ago, and said he thought when he was first elected that so important were his views that he was justified in walking out into the middle of the floor to speak. Mr Fraser remarked that by joining two unsatisfactory parties the member for Nelson proposed to make one satisfactory party. He proceeded to read from Hansard, “revolutionary stuff” uttered in the House by "this young democrat. this Nestor, this wise councillor from Nelson,”- with a view to proving Mr Atmore’s insincerity and showing that years ago lie had expressed the same sentiments as were expressed by the Labour Party today. On dozens of occasions he had used violent language in attacking (he Reform Party. Mr Fraser likened Mr Atmore's utterances to the speech of Mr Gregsbury, M.P., to the deputation in "Nicholas Nicklebv.” written by Charles Dickens, a Parliamentary reporter. The hon. member appeared to have changed his oiptiions, for ho had previously extolled the Labour Party as the most perfect before the eyes of the people. The Labour Party would welcome Mr Atmore’s appearance on tlie platform or in the House to discuss every plank in its platform. If the platform could notstand criticism and incisive analysis. th.--u the sooner the Labour Party knew it the better for all concerned. If argument could ho adduced to show that he (Mr Fraser) was on the wrong track then he would he indebted to the person who could prove it. Mr Fraser characterised Mr Atmore as a “harmless dove of peace, shrieking and tearing and biting at everybody.” Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) seconded Mr Fraser's amendment.

A CONSTITUTIONAL BODY Speaking to Mr Fraser's amendment, Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) deprecated the attacks which had been made by Mr Atmore" on the Labour Party, especially in view of the opinions which lie had been shown to have expressed previously, and in view of his attitude during tlie war. According to Walpole and Macaulay, patriotism had become a by-word, and tlie position would be the same in New Zealand. He hoped that New Zealand would never be patriotic enough to follow in Italy’s footsteps, and submit to rule by a dictator. To the best of bis belief, the New Zealand Labour Party was a constitutional body ; certainly its representatives had been elected iu a constitutional manner. REFORM MINISTER’S SPEECH Tlie Minister of Labour (the Hon. G. J. Anderson) confessed that with a great deal of Mr Atmore’s speech he agreed. Everyone would like to* see a strong National Government, but the member for Nelson forgot that on his own showing lie was a free lance, while other members had made pledges to their electors. In these circumstances he was asking them to be disloyal to their pledges. That was the effect of the amendment/ Every member had to put by the board the preconceived ideas lie held when he first- came into the House. The ideal would be for each member' to carry out" what he conscientiously believed should be done, butthat was impossible under the present system of Government. Mr Atmore had made a mistake by not waiting until the fusion negotiations had been completed. Mr Atmore: “When was that likelv to be?” • • *

“The lion, member knows perfectly well,” said the Minister, “that- he would have had an opportunity of expressing his views later on.” Furthermore, Mio electors had a right to be considered in the matter. He agreed with Mr Atmore’s remarks to the Labour Party about breaking up the Empire, and' in connection with this, he quoted from the Maoriland Worker. There were forces at work which were undoubtedly tending to break up the Empire.

NEGOTIATIONS NOT ENDED The question was when the parties should come together. The negotiations were not ended, but lie believed that when everything was considered they would do as nearly all British Parliaments did —the right thing for New Zealand.

Proceeding, Mr Anderson denied certain criticism, which he said had Been unfairly levelled at him by the Labour Party in regard to- pensions, and said a contributory scheme would : be brought down next session. The Minister then dealt with housing questions, defended what the Government had done, but said the Labour Party wanted to proceed like a railway train. He challenged any social student to say that tlie Reform Government had not been tlie best friend the workers had ever had. Mr A. L. Monteith (Wellington East): “Don't be humorous.” r J he Minister said he -was in earnest, and asked the Labour members to be fair in their criticism

“MAKING PUPPETS AND PAWNS” The lion. J. A. Hanan (Invercargill) said that to make Mr Atmore’s amendment a no-confidence amendment exposed the greatest weaknesses of party Government. The Minister of Labour had agreed that a strong national Government, should be formed. It was not mandatory on a leader of a party to treat an amendment as one of want-ot-confidence. If a vote were taken, ami the party straight-jacket was removed then the first part of Mr Atmore s amendment would be carried. They knew that from expressions of opinion oi Reform members.. It was a monstrous proposition to say that every amendment should be regarded as one of noconfidence. If members upheld that view they would he making a. humitiat ing and pitiable spectacle. There members who favoured the amendmentand yet were going to be constrained to swallow their convictions and vote

against it. Party Government led to men becoming puppets and pawns in the political game. The Hon. \V. Nosworthy: “Not if you keep your pledges.” Continuing, Mr Hanan said that people were asking whether the fusion negotiations were a gesture of deception, or whether honesty of motives was at the back of them. Who was to blame if they were not- honest? Mr J. S. Dickson (Parnell): “You.”

Mr Hanan said that more publicity should be given to the fusion negotiations. He referred to the Reform overtures to the Liberals in 1923.

Mv Nosworlhv we got.?” Mr Ilanan: “Von know the reply \va got. Why does the Minister of. Agricul-, lure sit there and interrogate me if ha ha« the answer T.et him give it . .• The public will look to him to give the explanation. If he doesn’t he will be oordemned.” (Reform laughter).

What was the reply

THE PARTIES COMMITTED

“The Reform and Liberal Parties,” sn.id Mr Hanan, “have committed themselves by entering into negotiations in regard to fusion, vet members will be>

found going into the lobby and voting against the proposition. Thousands of people in this country arc backing up the proposition of the member for Neison ,recognising that a sound. National Government is better than make-shift party Government, or make-shift minority Government.” If there was to be an' increase of waning factions no Government' could ( funobion. A viciousr personal attack had’ Been made bn the member for Nelson, but he. stood ns high in the confidence of his electorate as any member in the House. There was every reason at the present time why a. National Government should be formed. The country was getting into deep water financially, and the best brains would be required to prevent it from going on to. the financial rocks. When there were such urgent problems to solve now was the time when tho best brains of the country should be brought together to deal with them. It there was no fusion, how was the Government to function? It would he held up time after time. If the reform did not take place, many conclusions would be drawn from the future and neglect, to bring it about. What was needed was a, sound progressive policy. People in the country would not tolerate n policy which adopted a standstill attitude. If was a matter for regret that the respect of people outside for Parliament, was diminishing. When the people ceased to inko an interest in politics such an institution as Parliament must perish. SUPPORT, BUT NO VOTE . Mr W. U. Lvsnar (Gisborne) stated that ho had been an advocate of fus ion. but. lie desired to make his position clear. There were three reasons why he would not vote for the amendment, while at the same time he did not intend to vote against, it. Labour cries of ‘‘Good-bye.’’ He agreed with the amendment* moved by Mr .Atmore, out- ins first reason for not voting for it was that the result oi 1 the fusion negotiations was not yec known by the House. Until that was known one way or the other he did nol. think it would be light for him to precipitate. the matter by his vote. Again, if the amendment were carried it might deprive the Dominion of the services of Air Coates, and until the Prime Minister had a. chance of making good he did not wish to lie a. party to putting Mr Coates out of office. Thirdly, lie thought it was tile duty of the leaders of the two partia-i to come to terms upon the question; if they could 1 ot he did not feel inclined to take the responsibility of so forcing matters that, they would he compelled to come to terms. If there was to be compulsion then it must come from the electors. Wliat was tile use of bringing the two parties together if they did not come cheerfully and agreeably? No fusion should he arranged unless an agreement was arrived at on certain matters of poiicy which were in the public interest. If the leaders did not agree on the terms of fusion then it might do harm to the Dominion to force the issue at. .the present moment. Should there be no fusion, .then the two leadersshould state the reasons. Air Corrigan : ‘‘The public will know about it.” Air Lysnar’s e'tlviec was that- if the parties could not come together in a free spirit it was inadvisable to have any fusion, but they should go to the country)! He thought the whole House was in favour of fusion, but there were honest differences of opinion that stopped members until they had gone to The electors. He would like to see a direct vote taken. ‘(The whip is going to be put on." remarked Air Holland. ‘‘it- is not going to be put on,” retorted Mr Lvsnar, who said there should be no driving like that". He would not be a party to driving, especially in view of the election coming on.

; MORE OF THE I’.AST Mr F. Lniigstone (Waimariiio) also delved into past- history to show the House wluit 'views Hr At more lield on the question of strikes in 1912. Now lie was seeking to unite with a party which had been his most bitter, antagonist in tbo past and which he ■had criticised in a most scathing manner. It was the same old Tory Party with which Mr Atmore wanted to fuse. The proper thing to do in regard to fusion was to leave the matter to the electors. IN FAVOUR, BUT PLEDGED , Mr A. R. Harris (Waitematn) said that possibly a division on the amendment would-prejudice the fusion negotiations. He bad given bis pledge to support the present Prime Minister, and Jie. had no alternative but to vote against the motion moved by Mr Atnioire. He would like to have a tree hand to- support- the motion, but be regretted lie nad not. This was the time for fusion, which he thought was very necessary, and lie knew no practical reasons whv the parties should not come together. He was sine that if negotiations failed there would be grave concern right throughout the Dominion, for 'he felt there was a genuine desire , for the two big part ies to come together. ; If fusion did not- take place before the j election, there would be a very delinite j erv at the polls that “this mimic, sham j party warfare” should cease. He asked members to ask their consciences whol her fusion was necessary, and be had no doubt bow their consciences, would answer. In conclusion, he com- j mended Mr Atmore for bringing for- ( ward bis motion. ■ TOLITICAL BILLINGSGATJT’ Pin regard to the political Billings- . gate which was poured out from the Labour Benches,” said Mr Atmore, hi speaking to Air Fraser’s amendment, “I hqye lone ago formed an opinion of the . member for Wellington Central and the '■other members of tlio Labour Parly, so '"that I do not care what their opinion of me might be.” It was only an indepen'kYleiit that . -could introduce such an amendment as he had introduced, and in introducing the amendment he had knot been out to secure the support of . the Socialist party. They had the stateLmcr.t. of the member for Wellington • Central that the Labour movement was part of a world-wide movement which .manifested itself in Russia, and they " had the statement from Air Holland that he was not a pacifist, but was a- revolutionary socialist who would fight when the time came. The Labour Party - bad gone back to 1873 and dragged forward a- dead man, when what- was needed was live economics. There wore 18 members of the Labour Party, or, at • least. 17 members, for one, the member ' for Mnnukau, dared to say what lie thought and received a “wigging” for it every time. He was the;- one member . who would sing “God Save the King.” . “Such criticism as these level at me is a. compliment,” declared Mr Atmore. The members of the Labour Party condoned with Russia, and to eucii an < extent that tile member for Lyttelton had to rebuke them. Bolshevism was - not an economic movement, but was a. war against- religion and everything that g was decent. Marxian principles were ’ only possible in Russia, the most ill- • educated country in the world, but it was not possible in New Zealand, where they bad a sixth standard education. Tlie Labour Party decried against. 7 capital, but capital had been proved to • be absolutely necessary. To say thatthey could establish a printing press and • turn out treasury notes without capital was to show a, colossal ignorance of the position. Mr Atmore said he objected to- the Labour Party putting on pale pink now because an

election was near, when, as a matter of fact. 11 icy were as read as ever. Wherever there was a, weak government. there would lie I'niinil a strong mob. and that was what- was happening in Australia. In conclusion, All' .union 1 said he was answerable only to the people of N--isrr. for his a.-' ions, and so long as lie could he would do what one man could to point out. tho •Lingers of Revolutionary ,Soci ilium Even at ‘his lr ■ hoar he hoped tii.it Him* would, be fusion. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) referred to the "wiki outburst of embittered hatred" which was descriptive of the I bade that had been directed against the Labour members anil the workers tiny represented by the previous speaker. lie traced as some length the progress of the Labour Party, and stated to it It ivas apparent it was rapidly commending itself to Lie people ol tho Dominion. Alernhers of the Labour l-’arty had declared that while they did m-i interfere with the al'iairs of Russia, at tlie same time they did not stand for the methods, and in many respects for the ideals, of the Russian people. Tf the opposing parties wanted to fuse, lot them do so without misrepresenting tho Labour Party. It was possible t<> defend every plank in the Labour Party’s platform ; it required no apology and ho claimed that the policy was in the In si interests if the people. He pro-" dieted that the Labour Party would cmue into power in the near future. I lie division «11 Mr Fraser's amendment was taken al 11.18 p.in., the aiiieiidaicnt lining defeated hy 61 votes to Jb. Si ML HARD SHUTS \fter Hie division had been taken tiic Leader of tho Labour Party (.Mr 11. E. Holland) said he wished to place the attitude of the Labour Party to Air At more's amendment, before the House, and lie hoped that .Mr Atmore worn Id not run away when sonic hard shots were being tired at him. Mr .Ainu re: "1 don’t run from duds.’ " Air Holland said he. was sorry Air Atmore diad been hurt, (‘(insistent with ils attitude, the J.ahour Parlv would vote for Air ‘.At more's anienllmeiil. because. if was being regarded as one of waul of ronliilenee. "It is unfortunate.” lie said, "that we slialMiavclo go into the lobby with the lu.-u. member for Xi'isoii. There is no member of the House we would iess prefer lo go into the lobby with.” M r A t tiioi-;* : "1 quit e believe il. "

.Mr Holland said the Labour Party lik-l to go inlo the lobby with mem hors who had smile reputation for innsi.deiiev. Air .-VI more had twice voted confidence in the Government within the last few days, and now lie had vo! id against file very principle embodied in Ins own motion. .Mr Atmore had demanded that- the three-party system should go. anil that personal ambitions should not stand in the way of fusion between the Liberals anil the Conservatives, and when a motion was pul vchii : \va» clearer and much hotter expressed than his own, then Air Atmore voted against that idea; therefore he voted in favour of the continuance of the thi—o-

parly system. Now the lourUi vote of the session was to he taken, and Air Atmore was going to vote lin-eniiiiilcneo in the Government. That was the mess in which Air Atmore had lauded liinis.'lf. Tiie class war (hat the member of Nelson had referred to in alluding to tllio Labour Party was one of the bees he had m his bonnet. In 1912. the member for Nelson, attacking the member for Waitemaia, bad declared that he was one of those who was supporting the Government it: its class legislation. And now he wanted to go across and fuse with him I In the beginning of his speech that day Air Atmore had charged the Government Parly with sha-p practice anil subterfuge. .Where was his consistency.? Air AI more had wasted the time of the House in his two speeches, the second speech being a repetition of the Jiist. '‘For want ol ideas," put in AH’ \V. I). Lvsnar (Gisborne). Mr Holland (laughingly): "The only lion, gentleman ip this House to speak in defence of Hie- member for Nelson is the member fev Gisborne. There you have the two extremes meeting—the extrines of unreasonableness.” (Laughter.) Air Atmore had defended the Fascist i of Italy, and attempted to justify their methods. Only recently we had read how the Fascists murdered AI at - tintti. Was that the sort of thing lie would approve in New Zealand?

DURING THE WAR 1 The speaker went on to attack the member for Nelson severely for the fact that he took no part in tiie war. While others wore fighting at the front the hon. gentleman was out in the buslh out Nelson way, “ten thousand miles behind the gun." Yet the lion, gentleman had urged the young men to go to the war. He had suggested that tiie members on the Labour benches were disloyal. "Imagine a gentleman,” he said, "fit, of military age, who went up into the- hush and sat snugly in his whare throwing slurs of suggested disloyally at men who fought through all

the hell and damnation of that war. II I were in tne lion, gentlemans place I would blush with shame for ever.

Mr Speaker called upon -Mr Holland to withdraw these remarks, which he did. .Mr Atmore : "I shea 1,1 thin!: so.” Mr Holland : 'lmagine a gentleman who could have gone t-o t.lie war, who bad roithe'.' wife, nor child, who boasts be was physically (it, who boasts Of Uie long walks he takes, imagine Iran away up in the beautiful valley—l know >t is beautiful because of a Revolutionary Socialist he takes up there sometimes, fu you .see lie not consistent even in regard to associating with Socialists — imagine him throwing out slurs at other men who saw the actual lighting. .Mr Atmore had attacked Alarxianism, of the first principles of which he was ignorant. However, the Labour Party was prepared to join with the member for Nelson in attempting to uefeat the < fnvernnient. .Mr Holland then turned Ills attention to the Liberal Party, and referred to past history when lie said they were prepared to join with the ><y .inlistr against the. same Government with which they now wanted to fuse. 1 lie Labour Party would be glad to bring the Reform and Liberal Parties together, because there was no line if di'inarea.t ion between them, notwithstanding the iticonsisirneir,s and the political gymnastics ot ttie Leader of the Opposition. .Mr Atmore replied to tho point about his war service dealt with hy Mr Holland. "Let me (i'll him,” said Air Atmore, “that 1 have brought up a larger family Ilian he has. that I did not dodgi the war. and if I had been ot the age conscription would have taken me had I not volunteered. I did volunteer, as a reference lr- the files will show, and I further tried when I wag free oi my responsibilities to get to the Old Country. The High Commissioner. Sir Thomas Alackenzie, will tell you i f the lot’cr 1 wrote. As far as my whare in the mountain is concerned, it is a week-end resort where some of my friends, go, and as far as dodging is concerned, it. is quite alongside the town.” SIR JOHN LUKE’S ATTITUDE Sir John Luke (Wellington .North) referred to the interviews he gave to the Press in favour of fusion, but- said that he would vote against Mr At more’s amendment, which lie considered had been brought forward at the wrong time—that was. while the two leaders were still negotiating.

The division on Mr At more's, amend liienl- was taken at 12.25 a.in. The amendment was defeated bv 34 votes to JO.