DUNEDIN CENTRAL ELECTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 16288, 22 January 1915, Page 7

DUNEDIN CENTRAL ELECTION

TO THE BDITOB. Sin,—At present the political eyes of Now Zealand are iocussed on the contest in JJunedin Central between Messrs Munro' and Statham. Had it not been lor a blundering mistake on the part of a Government official, Mr Munro would have been > elected, and all necessity lor a by-election avoided. Your attempts to brand Mr' Munro as a "fled Fed." have coma too. late 111 the day to be taken tserioualy, and _, no sensible elector will be caught napping "?' by this "red herring." What we want in' I'arliament now is a progressive man who ! will assist Sir Joseph Ward and Mr 6. W. Russell to break up the wheat ring tnat is t ruining Now Zealand. Mr Massey and' his colleagues have had their chance, and • despite their best endeavours, wheat is as hard to lind ae diamonds in Princes street. The price of bread (our staple food) is higher; than ever, and is still rising, and the elec-' tion of Mr Statham will mean the ex- . ploiters who support the present Government will continue to enrich themselves at the expense of the workers. By working with a will for Mr Munro's return, the' workers of Dunedin Will end the all too' long reign of this Conservative Government, whose legislation has all been in ' the direction of benefiting themselves.:— I am, etc., Chbistchubch Beadkb. [Bread is not dearer now than it has ever before been in New Zealand. Even if it •. were, tho unprecedented conditions of the . present time would account for the circumstance. The statement that the legislation 1 of the Keform Party has ail been in the direction of benefiting its own members it? v so silly as to merit nothing but' contempt. —Ed. O.D.T.] •

Sir,— At the recent election you andothers bitterly denounced us for not voting at all or for purposely casting informal' votes. When the time came to punish Mr Statham you wanted us to desist' and vote for a man who did his best to injure - our cause! In fact, you wanted us to show tho white feather and substitute dieloyalty for ;nte£rity. Perhaps you thought ' this was better thwi electing a. " Red Fed."' " Well, you forgot that the supreme question' ' with us was tho moral training of thechildren of this oountry. Indeed, the t longer I livo tho lees I care for party. The responsibilities of life, especially of political life, invariibly modiry our view*. The extreme Labourite o£ to-day becomes the* ; Liberal or eo-called Conservative of to-mor-row. Mr J. A. Millar, of this country, and Mr John Burns, of England, are strik- <' ing instances of this. Though I lean to Masseyism I think Mr Munro will vet ]' make a more practical politician than Mr 't" Statham. Ho has a better grasp of our >• later political economy. Time and -experi- 1 ence will modify his cruder notions. ' With you, I regret, mixing up politics and religion, but Mr Statham, and others, in refusing the Bible-in-echools referendum, are to blame. Besides, by a political act; ■ Parliament took the Bible out of the schools, * r ! and only by a political act can it be restored, so that it is both a political and *' religious question. Then the highest authorative bodies representing the Anglicans, Presbyterians, v Methodists, and Salvationists almost unani-' - mously and repeatedly declared for referendum. Hence the league, which repre&entd them, had a right to exert its in- . fiuence, against Mr Statham, otherwise there was no reason for its existence. It is said that Mr Munro neither believes in tho Bible-in-schools nor the referendum,, and therefore we should have voted for Mr i Statham. On the contrary, it will be time to punish Mr Munro when he votes in. • Parliament, as Mr Statham did, to depriv*' the parents of this country of a direct vote upon the Bible-in-echools question. • ".5' Then there is a mental twist in those who say that "the' league oolv wants the-/, priest ajid not tho Bible in the aohools.'"' <<'■' and in the same breath say they Want tha l '.. Nelson system. Now, nobody at the pre^"'' sent moment but priests or clergymen carry out the Nelson system in our public schools,- ' and. who, as moral leaders of the people,' have a better right or could do it better f In either system then the priest is in the school, and in both systems he takes the - ' whole Bible. Of course, in the league sys- ■ tern, he teaches those of his tion only, while in thfr Nelson syKem he t teaches a class of children belonging to dif- • ■' ferent denominations. I believe the league' !: ' system is the fairest and best, an'd I hope f at the forthcoming election its members mil" '' L ,' again mark their disapproval of Statham's undemocratic action.—l am, etc~,'• Lay Member of the Lxagcb. [We are not going to open our columns again, at the present tune, to a discussion 01 the platform of the Bible in State Schools League. Our correspondent's reference to "a mental twist" is, however, . . distinctly interesting in view of his own . confused reasoning. Ue expresses. opposi- 4 \ tion to Mr Statham because that candidate, j has voted against the league's plebiscite . proposal. Mr Munro, like Mr Statham,. , is opposed to this proposal. But our cor-, respondent says it will be time to vote, ,j, against Mr Munro when the latter has.; voted in Parliament against the plebiscite. Apparently he doed not believe that Sir Munro will be true to his pledges. ever flattering this Day be to Mr Munro, ; . the mental twist betrayed in an effort thw.V to discriminate between the candidates «s , . apparent.—Ed. O.D.T.] Sin,—l see a long letter in your columns„ signed toy Mr Alex. M. Dalrymple. the writer please explain what he means owhen he say* "if Reformer, .Liberal, and , , Labourite unite against the common foe by returning the Government candidate?"—1 7 am, etc., . T. WHITB. Dunedin, January 20.

Sib, —It evidently both pleases and suits "Elector's" purpose to evade the questions which I submitted to his kind consideration. It grieves me to notice a tone of bitterness in his argument. Both Mr Munro and "Mr Statham aro excellent men, men to be * proud of, but certainly that's not the crux" * 1 of the question. Some months before the' 1 general election several dear friends of' rnino suggested to me to support Mr Statham. My idea at that time was not ' , to take any part -whatsoever in' politics of any kind. At last, however, I consented 'to support Mr Statham right heartily, which, in all good conscience I have done, , strictly keeping my word of honour without much thought, and gaining a few votes for him. Now, as we all know, /the election' v took place, and what do we find? Mr f Munro was honestly and fairly returned by v, a good majority. But an official made a - mistake of stamping some of the voting , papers wrong. So we know the result. Mr Munro is a supporter of the bar® "• majority in all things. Democratic; Mr Editor. And all of us, who have faith ' ' in God and in our fellow men will, with * the writer, gladly admit and realise that this is a fair-minded and democratic oom- v . munity. Let my esteemed friend "Elector" think again, and in doing so pass these few humble thoughts through his mind.. It was with a glow of pride and a .thrill of delight that I read and re-read in "your " • issue of present date a letter by the Rev. Alex. M. Dalrymple, M.A.—a very dear old friend and highly respected and loved/' acquaintance of mine. Needless to say, I' ' highly admire tho sweet and gentle tone ' and touch in his letter. But' I am very much afraid that Mr Dalrymple does not fully grasp • the situation. With regard to . the war lot him with his beautiful, judicial,' and highly matured mind, go back tp first causes and then reflect a while. With regard to patriotism; who are fighting our. battles at .the front? Why, mostly labouring men, of course! - Who fought' our battles in tho past? Mostly labouring men, ' of course. I am proud to say' that ifly, brothers are at the war; all my relations are at the war, and it is not my fault that '"' J I am not at the war myself. Yet we are" "' l ''' only poor struggling crofters, or small farmers. Our dear forefathers of happy memory, fought for liberty, freedom, and - justice before this lovely country was ever heard of. Is not all labour honourable? Will the rev. gentleman read Carlyle on labour? While the war is in full swing Australia, in her wisdom, returned a Labour '• Government. Now all the foregoing being true, let us be just and fair. I am quite ; sure we all delight in British fair play. •»' Now Zealand has done nobly in this war, and if required New Zealand will do more. -stiii* Then it will be readily admitted that we - -- 1 ' owe a great deal to labour. That beinjr so, are we to try to keep these horny- " fisted eons of honest toil from being repre- > sented in Parliament? That, indexed, would ' < be likp building on the sand. Labour is ' the very life blood of the Empire. If we ' would bp Empire builders, let us take hoed what we do. Men of vision know this. • Wo cannot afford to slip our cables and ' let the ship of State drift on to tho rocks. •• This is a time, Sir, in our national history * when wo must stand united shoulder to shoulder. This is a time in the hieiory > of tho Emipro when justice must reign supreme, showing a good example to our subtle and strong foe, tho German. But < this is certainly no tine when an honourable patriotic fellow citisen should bo foisted 1 out of parliamentary seat by legal ■ technicalities, and not by the voice of fte peoiri<i.—l am, etc., A. C. Robertson. Bafkiknowes, January 20 •