UNITY CONGRESS REPORTING

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8481, 16 July 1913, Page 2

UNITY CONGRESS REPORTING

To the Editor " N.Z. Times." fclu - , — i.ii your jssuo ol to-uay juiubijiv L. i)i. A. itearden and Vv. J±. tianii; ton have tne following statement attributed to them as part oi tutir report to toe Wellington main brunch ui the United La/boux party:— vlio olUcial reporting oi eonit=renoe pio oeedings was garbled and one-SKicci, and tiiat this was due to the Unit} committee having appointed reporter >vho manipulated the report 60 as to present only one side oi the position." Now, sir, 1 this accusation is as unfounded as it is childish and silly. The Unity committee appointed two reporters, Mr B. F. Way to furu.sii t»ie press with a neccesariij oondenstsi Account ,of congress proceedings, anu Miss E. T. Rout, an expert stenographer, to report, practically verbatim, for the omciai report which will be published in due course. Miss Rout's report hoe not yet appeared, but those who know anything about hor work have the utmost faitli in her competency and impartiality. Besides, she has her professional reputation to consider, and that is of more importance to her than any number of congresses, or acrimonious microscopic sections of congresses. Mr R. F. Way's work was superintended by a press committee endowed with full powers of censorship. The press committee, not the reporter, was responsible for the reports as they appeared in the press. On tnat. press pommibtee were four members of the United Labour party, Messrs J. T. Paul. M.L.0., M. J. Forde, D. G. Sullivan, Arthur Rosser, and one member of tine Federation of Labour, the present writer. The charge preferred bv Messrs Hampton and Rearden _ is not against the reporters, or the Unity committee, but against the press committee, including Messrs Paul and Forde, who have since announced their rlisagreement with the work of the Unity Congress and have joined Messft.

Hampton, Reardon, and McLaren in Uieir opposition to the United Federation of Labour and the Social Democratic party. If Messrs Hampton and It c ordon are correct, these gentlemen .vere either guilty of conduct flagrantly dishonourable, or were so incompetent and innocent as to fall easy victims to some diabolically clever scheming on the part of the one federation representative. This latter is absurd. The personnel of the press committee is sufficient refutation of the former. Will Messrs Hampton and Rearden still persist in their charge of dishonesty against their colleagues?—l am. ot>C., P. FRASER, Press Committee Unity Congress.