DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22354, 30 August 1934, Page 12

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

TO THE EDITOB Sib, —May I be allowed to record the sense of pleasure experienced when perusing the letter in Monday’s issue signed “ Plain Bill,” in which he writes ably deals with the pretensions of Dr D. G. M'Millan, of Kurow, in his crafty attempt to associate the sturdy individualism of Burke with the passivity and receptiveness demanded from those in the ranks of Labour. Our Labour members in New Zealand are merely coaches on gramophones for the trinity controlling the activities of the party, and woe betide any misguided member who at any time criticises the evanescent ideas of Messrs Savage, Cook, or Roberts. As a case in point, one recalls a lecture delivered in Christchurch about a couple of years ago by a strangely clever Labour supporter who ventured to point out; certain .weaknesses in the Labour position as he saw it. A virulent attack was at once launched by the Labour organ and he was quickly given to understand that any privileges enjoyed through membership of the party did not include free speech. “ Plain Bill ” says, and says well, that the political independence of Burke to the machine politics of the Labour Party are as wide apart as the poles. Burke, we know, and by bis influence we are impressively swayed. And Labour? Conferences angrily demand by resolution that legislation must be introduced to enable tlje means of production, distribution, and exchange to be taken over, but as a well-known Labour follower indulging in free speech puts it. “ it is certain that not merely have the members no idea of how the resolution could be put into practice, but also that any Government that attempted such a drastic change would be defeated.” Transforming grandiloquent resolutions into legislation is by no means an easy task.— I am, etc., Individualist. Dunedin, August 28. TO THE EDITOR. Sib, —Dr D. G. -M'Millan, of Kurow, is obviously displeased with what he politely calls my effusion. By a strange process of self-deception he has arrived at the conclusion that the omission of certain words from his quotation from Edmund Burke “makes no difference whatever to the meaning of the quotation.” Burke thought they were necessary to convey his meaning, and he included them. And Burke was a better judge of bis own meaning than Dr M'Millan can hope to be. When a man pretends to quote from

a political classic he should quote correctly. Dr M'Millan’s quotation in your columns is in the following words, those words within brackets having been omitted by him:— But his unbiased opinion, hie mature judgment, his enlightened conscience he ought not to sacrifice : to [you]* to any man [or to any set of men living].

Dr M'Millan did not wish to suggest to hie Labour comrades that a Parliamentary representative, or even a candidate for a Labour sjibuld not sacrifice “his unbiased;.opiiiioh, his mature, judgment, Jus .enlightened, "to any set, of men' living. Not oven to the “set of men” which, compose a Labour conference,. To; put. the matter mildly, such an affirmation of embodies a larger measure of intellectual liberty t.haii is considered wish to allow to Labour candidates or. Labour members. So there was, after all, some point in suppressing those words of Burke. ■ I also asked Dr M'Millan to give chapter and verse from Burke’s writings or speeches for three other sentences which I indicated. He ignored my polite request, which was prompted by a genuine desire for knowledge. Now I feel that if the doctor can misquote in one instance, on the ground that omitted, words "make no difference,” he might conceivably believe that it would “ make no difference” to attribute to Burke words whicluvere not On this point I reserve judgment until Dr M'Millan gives you chapter and verse .for his quotation. And later, with your permission', I may address a few friendly words to the doctor on the subject of real democracy and the “machine politics of the Labour Party.” . ■ Dr M‘Mi 11 an threatens to ignore any future “ thrust ” until I have the “ moral courage ” to sign my name. He has not previously exhibited this trait of modesty in respect to other anonymous correspondence. However, this is a free country, enjoying a free press, and within certain limits the doctor is a free agent. As I am not at present a candidate. for the Labour selection of any parlmnientary seat nor in need of any publicity (free or otherwise), —I am, etc.. ■ Dunedin, August 29. Plain Bill. ■