CHARGES DENIED

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24607, 15 May 1941, Page 6

CHARGES DENIED

ELECTION INCIDENT TRADES COUNCIL VERSION AN INQUIRY WELCOMED (P.A.) WELLINGTON, May 14. Commenting on the allegations by Mr H L. Nathan, a Citizens’ candidate for the Harbour Board, that he had been intimidated by five trades union officials, the Wellington Trades Council to-day gave its version of the affair. It said that on Friday morning Mr Nathan was reported as having made a suggestion to the effect that Labour candidates who were also trades union secretaries would not carry out their duties impartially, as they had to bow to the dictates of the unions. Mr Nathan was exceedingly careful not to refer to any individual candidate, the council stated; Had he done so, the necessary steps would have been promptly taken. Only a baseless and ambiguous charge was made. The utter unfairness of Mr Nathan's statement and its complete absurdity would be apparent to every fair-minded person when the important part that trades unionists and officials were taking in the present conflict was borne in mind. Resentment Among Unionists The statement had caused considerable resentment among trades unionists, the council continued. The matter went beyond local politics, and was a grave reflection on the integrity of a large section of the community. It was felt that if the statement had been made without fully realising the unfairness of it and without due regard to the actual facts an opportunity should be given to Mr Nathan to act uprightly after hearing the representations. With Mr Nathan’s consent, an interview was arranged to suit his convenience, the council further stated. Two delegates were to have seen him, but in the interim the resentment had grown, and three others attended. Mr Nathan told the interviewers that he would not listen to any comment on the report nor any protest regarding it. He imperiously ordered the representatives from the room and acted in a most high-handed manner. In anticipation of the fact that Mr Nathan might probably act in this manner, a written protest had been prepared, and this was read to him in spite of his repeated interruptions. He then calmed down sufficientlv to enable the representatives to attempt to reason with him. He was requested either honestly to admit that he had spoken hastily or unfairly or to accuse openly and publicity any Labour candidate of malpractice so that the matter could be cleared up in a court of law. Mr Nathan refused to adopt either course. He was then thanked for the interview, and the delegation left. There were no threats of violence made. It was felt that a sense of propriety and fair play would lead Mr Nathan to right a palpable wrong, but. unfortunately, this was not so. Facts Distorted Apparently the episode had been circulated in a distorted form. It was obvious that it was to this interview that the Mayor of Wellington, Mr T. C. A. Hislop, referred in a rather sensational darksome manner. It was apparent that he desired to cloak the matter in an air of mystery, withholding the facts and placing an entirely wrong construction on the affair. The statement adds: “We will welcome any inquiry. We suggest that Mr Hislop should concern himself with correcting the untrue and frictionmaking statements of a colleague rather than attempt to use it to his advantage. Since Friday he has had an opportunity of checking up on the facts, but he has failed to do so. He chooses rather to make capital from unfounded rumours and use them by innuendo.” “ Hardly Credible ” The Labour Representation Committee made the following statement today:— “It is hardly credible, in view of the Labour Representation Committee’s attitude to freedom of expression and speech, that supporters of the Labour Party would adopt the tactics alleged in the statements referred to. “It is regretted that the Mayor and the other Citizens’ candidates were not more specific in their statements. The Labour Representation Committee could then have investigated the matter and replied. In view of the circumstances the Labour Representation Committee cannot answer the statements, as its members are not aware of the circumstances. “If the statements made are correct and the facts as stated, then the Wellington Labour Representation Committee definitely dissociates itself from the actions of the persons concerned. We have, and do. stand for the freedom of the individual, and would not tolerate the alleged actions for one moment.”