PUBLIC OPINION “REDS” AND “REFORMERS”

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 8683, 17 March 1914, Page 3

PUBLIC OPINION

“REDS” AND “REFORMERS”

To the Editor “ N.Z. Times.” Sir, —Before indulging in wild and whirling statements against the “Red Feds” it would be much wiser if the “Times” was, first of all, sure of its facts. In your iss'ae of to-day an attempt is made to prove that on numerous occasions an unholy pact was entered into between the “Reformers” and the “Reds” with the object of injuring or discrediting the Liberals. How absurd is this contention wo “Reds” at least, know. Statement No. 1.: That “Reformers” and “Rod Feds” entered into an enthusiastic alliance upon the night of the general elections for the purpose of insulting Sir J. G. Ward. The answer is that at that time the federation had no adherents in this city—there was not a single organisation connected with it in existence locally. Obviously the “Reformers” could not enter into co-operation with the non-existent!. No ! That disgraceful scene was stage-managed and carried through by ,thoee now masquerading as political purists—the “Reformers.” Statement No. 2; “Reformers” and “Reds”, gave Sir .Joseph an unpleasant time at Dannevirke. Answer is—absolutely incorrect. The federation had not ‘then or now an organisation of any sort in Dannevirke. To the “Reformers” belongs all the honour attachable to the Dannevirke incident. So you see your efforts to marry “Red” to “Reform” is not' justifiable —there has not even been a flirtation between the two parties mentioned. It has been stated through the columns of various papers that in both lOtaki land Grey Lynn, the “Reformers” joined issue with the “Reds” in order to defeat the Liberals. It is a matter of common knowledge that in neither of these, two electorates were there any “Red” organisations. of any kind whatever. The flaxworkers’. union was not affiliated with the federation; in the whole of Grey Lynn there was not a. single organisation of any sort connected even remotely with the “Reds.” As a matter of fact, at the general elections there were only two candidates in the field that could in any way be said to be contesting as “Reds.” These were Mr Webb, now M.P. for Grey, who contested the constituency he now represents, and myself, contesting , Ohinemuri. In Grey the fight was decided on the first ballot. In Ohinemuri 'Mr Poland and.myself went to the second ballot. Now here was an opportunity for “Reform” to show its partiality for the “Reds” I But what happened? On the second ballot Mr Poland polled a majority of the votes, cast for the “Reformers” in the first ballot. Surely a remarkable occurrence if what you say is true, that “an enthusiastic alliance” existed between the party of “Square Deals” -and the workers! ’

As a matter of fact, minions of Masseyism did approach me, asking if I mould do this, that, and the other. I refused. The “Beds” behind mo were equally emphatic in their refusal, hence the preference of Liberalism to “Red Feddism.” Regarding the incident in St. Peter’s schoolroom the other evening, with you I deplore the fact that a hearing was not accorded Mr Fisher. It would have been much wiser, in my. opinion, to have heard what lie had t 6 say, and then, hy a resolution giving an expression of opinion on “Rainbows” and Governments that harbour them I But when one considers how overwhelmingly workingclass the Central constituency is, and how flagrantly the rights of the working class have been trampled upon hy Fisher and Co., one cannot for a single instant blame' those constituents for expressing their opinion of Mr Fisher in the manner in which they did'. The “Reds” did play a part at .that meeting—they may play a part at' future meetings—hut they never will, I venture to prophesy, be found, directly or indirectly, allying themselves with the political troglodytes whoso collective wail arises from some batch alley near Plimmer’s Steps.—l am, etc.. P. H. HICKEY. March 16th.