“DIVIDED WE FALL”

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8365, 27 February 1913, Page 11

“DIVIDED WE FALL”

To the Editor “N.Z. Times.” Sir, —Your excellent article in Tuesday's paper (February 25th) deserves the thoughtful consideration of every Labour man, and especially of every Labour leader in the colony. To those who have not read it, 1 recommend it as a good pennyworth. As a Labour man who took a prominent part in the Otaki election, and who was threatened with various pains and penalties during the foolish boycott which .was practised upon Labour sympathisers in Levin, by the Liberals in their natural but unjustifiable wrath after the election, 1 recommend my fellows to bury the hatchet. 1 look upon your article not so much as the holding out of the olive branch of peace, as an invitation to sink our diileronces and unite for war against our common enemy, the trumpeted ‘ Tleformation.” I must disagree with you on one small matter. You say that “a section of the* 1 Labour party were responsible for placing them (Squatterdom and Co.) in power.” You will, lam sure,’ do us the justice of admitting that it was really a renegade section of the Liberals who performed the dastardly act in the end. .Nevertheless, we must accept a share of the blame, since the wish is father to the thought, and we were only saved by the much-discussecl action of our representatives in breaking their pledges to keep them, home of us have not yet forgiven them for this; but in the light of subsequent events, it is clear that tactically, at least, Messrs Payne, Robertson, and Hindmarsh were right; and ultimately we shall send them to Parliament again. This, however, is by-the-byo. What wo Labourites have to . note is that single-handed we have little chance of putting the “Dominion” out of ollice; and none whatever of keeping it out. (You will observe that it is really the “Dominion,” not Mr Massey, who is in power.) At the rate the “Dominion” and its servants, Massey, Fisher, and Co., are progressing, i make no doubt that in two more years they will have manufactured and rounded up a Labour party big enough to push them out. What then? Even then (and that is optimistic) we shall need the aid of the Liberals to keep them, out. Alone, neither Liberal nor Labour can cope with Power and Money. United wo can defy them, it is time for Labour to cast the scrutinising eye to right and. left, as you suggest. It is also time for Labour to decide whether a Liberal-Labour alliance is not now possible, 1 know 1 shall bo assailed immediately with questions as to what Labour got from the last alliance. Well, I can truthfully answer that at the least it got much more than it will ever get from Masseyism. Besides, times have changed. Liberalism was too heavy and Labour too light a partner for the team to pull straight. Now that Liberalism is reduced, and Labour has gained in strength, a working arrangement is quite another matter; and I see no reason why the alliance should fail. I would suggest, sir, that you keep that object well to the fore in your leading columns. I would further suggest that the Liberal party, as soon as possible, select a definite leader and lay down a definite programme or platform. ' At the big Labour meeting In. duly some of your party ifi Parliament should seek to come to a working arrangement with the Labour leaders ; by comparing programmes and arranging to agree as far as possible, leaving more contentious matters until one or other party is strong enough to play a Tone hand. The first point to agree bn is that *‘Deform” is the greatest enemy of either party; and that no sacrifice is too great if it will destroy the common foe. After that, the rest should be merely a matter of necessary debate. 1 I trust you will welcome letters from other Labour men on this matter. 1 should like to hear what tfiey. havo to say now of a Liberal-Labour alliance. In conclusion I may say that 1 ’ was a very staunch opponent of Liberalism, but, like the great Fisher, have discovered that “consistency is (sometimes) the refuge of fools.” Finally, 1 would ask both parties how they Would like to see again in the land the Symbol of the Squatter.—l am, etc., “THE GRIDIRON.” [lt‘ was certainly the Liberal “rats,” as our correspondent suggests, who were responsible for the defeat of the Mackenzie Government. But it was, at the same time, the extreme section of Labour that, at the general election, voted for Massey against Ward. —Ed. “N.Z.T.”]