LABOUR AND THE KING.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18354, 21 March 1923, Page 8

LABOUR AND THE KING.

The reply of Mr. J. H. Thomas at Liverpool to criticism of the Labour leader's action in accepting the invitation to Buckingham Falace is as sensible as it is vigorous. As part of the political organisation of the United Kingdom, the Labour Party, no less than His Majesty, owes unfailing courtesy to every other part. The Royal invitation was prompted by a sense of duty coupled with that sincere and undiscriminating affection for the people of the realm which is characteristic of His Majesty. It was accepted by Mr. Ramsay Macdonald in the spirit in which it was given, and as part of his constitutional duty. Mr. Thomas contends that until the Labour Party declares for republicanism, no other constitutional course was open to his leader, and, further, deplores the class antagonism, disastrous to the country, that would prevent Labour's friendship with those differing socially or politically from his party. That statement will be accorded wide approval outside the Labour Party, but there are indications that within the party it will not be so generally welcome. A number of Scottish Labour members have dissociated themselves from Mr. Ramsay Macdonald's action, and declared that they will not participate in such functions : it is not to be expected that Mr. Thomas' statement will satisfy them. They represent, it is to be feared, sections of the Labour Party in the Dominions. "No King" has been a platform cry of at least one responsible leader of Labour in this country, and it was not raised as a declaration of republican convictions : it was used in a context of irreligion and disloyalty, and was an entirely lawless utterance. Others have gone out of their way to heap i contumely upon the National Anthem and the national dag ; but it was their undisguised opposition to j "law and order," not any enthusiastic wish for a President, that prompted their disrespect of these national symbols. It is the fashion for republics to have national anthems and national flags, and, inciI dentally, official dinners to which j responsible politicians are invited. lAs for Mr. Thomas' sober view of j the folly of treating general managers as lepers, that is precisely I what many spokesmen of the Labour j Party outside of Britain have unequivocally done. Attacks upon i capitalism have degenerated fre- ' quently into undiluted hatred of the capitalist, and "class consciousness" .has been deliberately fomented into class antagonism. A strong tincture of Mr. Thomas' common sense i would do Labour thinking every - where no harm. Were that common [sense characteristic of Labour as a i whole there would be less fear of jits propaganda.