MORE LABOUR DISCOVERIES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22609, 28 June 1935, Page 14

MORE LABOUR DISCOVERIES

TO THE EDITOB

Sib, —I have been interested in the recent letters of Mr MacManus. I notice that he is concerned with the actions of the National Executive of the Labour Party respecting the Chalmers electorate. He writes: I know nothing about Dr M'Millan's selection beyond the fact that he was allowed to go into a selection ballot and the workers approved of him by giving him the greatest number of votes. On the other hand, when I was nominated for Chalmers I find an attempt is made to deny me the same right to go into the selection ballot. ..." Plain Bill " has scored a point and shown clearly there is a denial of democratic right. But I hope before the ballot is taken that the right of the workers to select their own • candidate will be conceded, though, whether it is or not, in the interests of Labour solidarity, I am not going to be used to run against a Labour man, no matter how unfair his selection may be."

Now, Sir, as one who has cause to know something of the inside working of the 'Labour Party, I wish to ask Mr MacManus whether he considers it fair to support a party which denies the right of its members to nominate one of the party for the selection ballot—Mr MacManus himself in this case. I ask him whether such a party can represent the working class. t On his own statement, he admits there is a denial of democratic right. As one who admires Mr MacManus for his work in the past on behalf of the workers, I cannot agree with him in his decision to support the party when he knows it is violating one of the most vital principles for which it professes to stand, viz., the right of the members to select their representative. Why .should Mr MacManus not be allowed to go in-the selection ballot? Is it because he is likely to be selected by the workers? If so, is it not an injustice to those workers who would support him? Surely such must be the case.

I suggest seriously to Mr MacManus that the time has arrived when this nonsense of sinking one's manhood and principles for a party when it is in the wrong should cease. Is there anything more pitiable than men preaching liberty when they know they have become nothing more than slaves of a political machine and seekers of jobs? Judged by thenactions, they are proving themselves to be mere talking machines. I suggest to Mr MacManus that New Zealand today is something like America must have been when R. W. Emerson wrote:—

Of the two parties, which, at this hour, almost share the nation between them, I should say that, one has tho best cause and the other contains the best men. The philosopher, the poet, or the religious man will, of course, wish to cast his vote with the Democrat, for freetrade, for wide suffrage, for the abolition of legal cruelties in the penal code, and for facilitating in every manner the access of the young and the poor to the sources of wealth and power. But he can rarely accept tho persons whom the so-called popular party proposes to him as representatives of these liberalities. They have not at heart the ends which give to the name of democracy what hope and virtue are in it. The spirit of our American radlca icm is destructive and aimless; It is not loving; it has no ulterior and divine ends, but is destructive only out of hatred and selfishness. I seriously suggest to Mr MacManus that the. above quotation is very applicable to our present Labour Party. So far as himself is concerned, I consider he would be doing a service to the working if- t e were to 6tand against the socalled Labour leaders,. It should be obvious to him that they long ceased to be a Socialist party. It would be interesting to know what most of them have done for the working class beyond talking during the last five years. 1 can assure him I am speaking from experience in Dunedin. In fact, no later .than within the last 14 days one of the Labour councillors was approached by an unemployed worker who had registered for relief, and although the man was in a very sad plight, having a wife and children, the councillor, who was chairman of a committee, passed him on to a member of the Unemployment Committee to see if anything could be done for him, in 6pite of the fact that- he must have known that the Unemployment Committee was not functioning owing to the professed love of hig Worship the Mayor for the worker. At any rate, something was done for the man, even though the committee did not meet. Perhaps some day the workers will understand the political game as well as they understand football. When that time arrives, no doubt they will have a more just and fair team to represent them than at present. I trust Mr MacManus will look a little more deeply into the working of the party machine. If he does, he will find that the Labour Party is not a Socialist party, but just another form of Tory party, that will be more tyrannical to the workers than the Tory of old. I suggest to Mr MacManus that the following verse of J. R. Lowell is very appropriate to the party at thia time:— So they march in percesslons, an* git up hooraws, An' tramp thru' the mud fer the good o' the cause, An' think they're a kind o' fulflllin' the prophecies, Wen they're on'y Jest changin' the holders of offices. Ware A sot afore, B is comfortably Beated, One humbug's victor'ous an' t'other defeated. Each honnable doughface gits Jest wut he axes, An' the people—their annool soft sodder an' taxes. I can assure Mr MacManus that I am extremely sorry to have to write concerning the party in the above strain, but 1 know from practical experience that there can be no more fitting-words at this time. May the workers some day have a party that will represent them. —I am, etc., C. M. Moss. N.E. Valley, June 26.