THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL ON INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14281, 1 August 1908, Page 14

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL ON INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS.

Sißj-In your columns you published Mr loni Mann's speech in reply to the ■Attornsy-gGHcrui s clcfcncc of existing conditione. i think you will admit that Mr Matin s reply was courteous and argumentative. You liave also published the Attorney-general's reply to Mr Mann from his placo in Parliament. By way of disproving Mr Mann's assertions the Attor-ney-general entered into a savage diatribe against Mi- Mann, and denounced him as a paid agitator who came to set up class against class. As I waded through the uiasa of verbiage thai surrounded these.' remarks 1 was unable to detect a.ny argument, in opposition to Mi Mann's 'contentions. The Attorney-general's attitude reminds me of an old maxim that wise men exchanged ideas and came to a. rational undemanding, and that savages children, or fools resort to brute force or abuse. I ask' permission to review the Attorney-general's charges. Tcm Mann is a paid agitator. Is that wrong? Is that, a crime? Since when has it been a crime? Is .it, wrong for the Y.M.C.A., the" Temperance party, the licensed victuallers,' or the employers' associations to have paid agitators? No! Then, why is it wrong for the Socialists? Ah! here comes the rub. The Socialists are to be abused and vilified, not because they have paid agitators but because those • paid agitators advocate Socialism. If the Socialists consented to amend their policy and to support the Government, they could have as many paid agitators as they Jiked-the more the better then. Now, if the Attorney-general objects to paid organise as such, then lie objects to t.he means adopted by a movement to 'maintain its organisation. And as ho objects to what is admittedly a most efficient means towards an end, to be of necessity consistent he must bo opposed to that end. It is sheer hypocrisy for the Attorney-general to say lie is in'favour of a movement and yet to bo opposed to tho advocacy or efficient maintenance of it. Not that I want to accuse the Attorneygeneral of being a Socialist: no one would have dreamed of associating liim with such a vulgar and disgraceful thing as the socialism of the Socialist party. The socialism the Attorney-general advocates must permit tho present privileged class to retain their privileges and to levy toll on industry to tho extent they are doing to-day If it docs not allow him to do that he'll have none of it: it is oonfisca;tion then. Tho second charge is that Tom Mann is teaching eta war, and setting class against class. Mr Mann did not create the class war. He merely pointed out its existence and the reasons for its existence which are to be, found in the fact that there aye two classes whose interests arc diametrically opposed to one another. Mr Mann did not create these classes; thov existed long before he was born. They are the product, as he has pointed out, of a. long process of evolution. And just as in the past the rule of the capitalist class superseded the rule of the lords and nobles, so in tho future, through the same evolutionary forces, the rule of the people as a whole must supersede the rule of the privileged few'. But we are told that Mr MaJili took sides with the bakers in the Wellington bakers' strike, and that lie is an Australian. Did not. the master bakers in Melbourne side with the master bakers in Wellington, and if it is right for them to stick to their own class is it not also right for Mr Maun to stick to his own olass? But we are told the bakers violated the decision of an Arbitration Court judge. To this we retort, that tho judge violated the_ Shops and the Factories Acts, which provide for 48 hours per week, the judge having awarded longer hours. And the question is, Is the will of a judge to be placed before the will of the people? Is it not hypocrisy for the, Attorneygeneral to eay to us we can make our own laws when he gives a judge supreme power to take those laws away again? Is it safe to give a judge such autocratic power? In the past autocracy created great unrest and injustice, and lmd to lie overthrown. The autocracy of the bench to-dav which lias violated statute laws, which has nlnced legal technicalities before the will of the !>eople, expre?=ed.in legal enactments, has also created industrial unrest and must be overthrown. The judges must be compelled to administer the laws as they find them, and not be allowed to violate statute law.—l am, etc., Equality.