LABOUR AND LOYALTY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19407, 17 February 1925, Page 2

LABOUR AND LOYALTY.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —As was naturally to bo expected, the verbal attack on the Prince of Wales by certain Labour members of the House of Commons has brought down on their devoted heads the dignified wrath of the anti-Labour press, including the Otago Daily Times. Criticism of Royalty and its doings by Labourites can always bo relied on to be followed by yards of wrathful abuse from the Conservative press. If these papers put as much heat into their criticisms of the English Government’s attempts to solve social problems ns thov do to occasional outbursts by Labour members, they would do. Is it any wonder that some Labourites lose temporary control of themselves and launch out into strong language when they see the contemptuous indifference with which some of their opponents regard the appalling conditions under which thousands of their fellow-men and women live? Hark to the Morning Post: “It is certain that no one feels more keenly than the Prince of Wales the terrible conditions under which many human beings have to live, but no single individual con remove them, not even Mr Kirkwood.’’ Therefore, I suppose, as no single individual can remove them, these conditions are to remain. A fatuous argument surely, for a groat daily paper to put forth ! No one supposes for a moment that the Prince of Wales can single-handed improve the lot of his followbeings. But, supposing he showed the way personally, no doubt Conservative journals would lift their hands in horror at the spectacle of a Prince fighting for the improvement of the workers. But is the idea so appalling? There are thousands of rich men and women in England to-day who live lives of luxury and ease. They have their trips abroad, their country mansions, and their priceless jewels. If they turned their hands to useful work and their incomes to help the helpless who can doubt the result? And what chance would exponents of revolution have then? As things are at present, however, is it any wander that England is a hot-bed of revolutionary talk and a propagating machine for Bolshevists? In the last few years hundreds of suicides have taken place in England, brought about by starvation and want. In some cases starved and demented mothers have taken their helpless children with them. lam not exaggerating in any way, as any regular reader of English newspapers can testify. Can you imagine the effect, then, on a bereaved and workless father who sees before him the evidences of pomp and luxury, of flashing jewels and gorgeous clothes, and then thinks of his own broken home? Can you blame such a man for becoming a revolu-tionist-—you who have perhaps never known the fringe of want? And I would like to ask you, before you take these men to task for their words, put yourself in their place. They have seen want and misery existing before them for years. They have lived amongst it and in many cases experienced it themselves, and that is the cause of the bitterness they show when they criticise what they regard as a waste of public money.—l am, etc., Worker.