ALLEGED THREATS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23966, 16 May 1941, Page 5

ALLEGED THREATS

WELLINGTON ELECTION TRADES COUNCIL'S VERSION INTERVIEW WITH MR. NATHAN (BY TKI.KGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION] WELLINGTON, Thursday Commenting on allegations by Mr. H. I/. Nathan that he had been intimidated bv five trades union officials, the Wellington Trades Council has given its version of the affair. It said that on Friday morning Mr. Nathan was reported as having made a very vicious suggestion to the effect thai Labour candidates who were also trades union secretaries would not carry out their duties impartially as they had to bow to the dictates of their unions. N1 r. Nathan was exceedingly careful not to refer to any individual candidate. Had he done so the necessary steps would have been promptly taken, but only a baseless and ambiguous charge was made. The utter unfairness of Mr. Nathan's statement and the complete absurdity would bo apparent to every fair-minded person. when it was borne in mind the important part that trades unionists and officials were taking in the present conflict. Resentment Caused The statement had caused considerable resentment among trades unionists. The matter wont beyond local politics, and was a grave reflection on the integrity of a large section of the community. It was felt that if the statement had been made without fully realising the unfairness of it, and without due regard to the actual facts, an opportunity should be given to Mr. Nathan to act uprightly after hearing representations.

With his consent an interview was | arranged to suit his convenience. Two delegates were to have seen him, but, in the interim, the resentment had grown, and three others attended. Mr. Nathan told the interviews that he would not listen to any comment on the report, nor to any protest regarding it. He imperiously ordered the representatives from the room and acted, i* was alleged, in a most high-handed manner. In anticipation of the fact t!i.it Mr. Nathan might probably act in this maimer, a written protest had been prepared, and this was read to_ him, in suite of his repeated interruptions. He then calmed down sufficiently to enable the representatives to attempt to reason with him. Tie was requested ( either honestly to admit that ho had spoken hastily or unfairly, or to openly and publicly* accuse any Labour candi-! date of malpractice in order the matter could he cleared up in a Court law. Threats of Force Denied Mr. Nathan refused to adopt either course, the statement continues. He was then thanked for the interview, and ihe delegation left. There were no threats of force made. It was felt that a f use of propriety and fair plav would lead Mr. Nathan to right a palpable wrong, but, unfortunately, this was not so. Apparently the episode had been circulated in a form. It was obvious it was to this interview that Mr. Hislop referred in a rather sensational and darksome manner. It was apparent that he desired to cloak the matter in an air of mystery, withholding facts, and to place an entirely wrong construction on the affair. The statement says; "We welcome any inquiry. We suggest that Mr. Hislop should concern himself with correcting untrue and friction-making statements of a colleague, rather than attempt to use it to his own advantage. Since Friday he has had an opportunity of checking up 011 facts, but he has failed to do so. He rather chooses to make capital of it from unfounded rumours, and use them by innuendo."