PARTY DISSENSIONS

Taranaki Daily News, 29 September 1930, Page 3

PARTY DISSENSIONS

MR. HUGHES AND MR. MARKS. -4 CAUSE OF THE BREAKAWAY '•• •• J T Sydney, Sept. IS. . . There were many who predicted that Mr. Walter Marks, one of the breakaway's from the Nationalists before the last Federal election, would, not for long be content with the leadership of the former' Primo Minister, Mr. W. M. Hughes, who brought into being tire Australian Party. This party, according to its founder, would; sweep the polls because of its non-party character, which sounds as paradoxical as it really is. Petty jealousies and disputes which have crept into its counsels make it appear erroneous to suggest that it stood for Australia first. Mr. Hughes is still as “fiery” as ever. Advancing ago has not slowed down his brain or made him any the / less willing for a fight. He showed that when he issued a booklet condemning all the home truths 'that had been uttered by Sir Otto Niehreyer. It was because of this book that he lost his right-hand man, Mr. Walter Marks, and the loss has come at a time when stalwarts can ill be spared, for the Australian Party, is just entering on its first .., real fight with the commencement of the New South Wales general election campaign. The defection will have, serious .. .. results for the party, for above all things there was need for it to show that it wars united and in earnest., ' The following statement has been is-’ ■. <.. sued by Mr. Marks:—“l voted against - the Bruce-Page Government because it i intended to evacuate the field of Fed- ' - . eral Arbitration without a mandate from the people, and also because tins' L matter was not brought before the party. The same applies to the prosecution of the late Mr. John Broyvn and also to the withdrawal of that prose.-, cution. They did not'come before the party. Mr. ‘ Hughes has erred in the . same manner. As one of the founders of the Australian Party 1 had no know- ‘ ledge whatsoever of the advent of his . booklet, ‘Bond or Free.’ ? '■; . “Though I was with Mr. Hughes in Melbourne throughout last week at the Australian Party's finst Victorian conference, and when the booklet was being published in Sydney, he never mentioned the matter to myself or to the con- <,;■ ferehee. While agreeing with many of his contentions, there are several others on which I cannot follow him, more. especially the bitter, satirical, personal attack on Sir Otto Niemeyer, a distinguished guest of our Commonwealth. “I do not agree with all of Sir Ottos, .■ contentions, but he wat> our guest. The same applies to certain references in the booklet to England. herself and to the Bank of England. It is not sporting, and without a doubt it is nonAustralian. In short the position is not of my making. I was in no way conferred with, and so I cannot be bound to follow the lead set. I will still continue as in the past to work for all the people and not for any one section.’ Mr. Marks said he had not considered whether he would rejoin the National Party. . 4