LABOUR REPRESENTATION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5733, 28 November 1896, Page 6

LABOUR REPRESENTATION.

«, ME CULLEN'S CANDIDATUEE. The following letters are reprinted from the Lyttelton Times -. — TO THE EDITOR. Sir,— ln your issue of Friday appears a letter from W. Williams, Secretary to the Bootmakers' Union, in which he takes exception to Messrs Simpson, Jones and others extolling Mr Cullen as the bond fide Labour candidate, and wishing to know what organisation they belong "to. Three of the gentlemen wlio spoke on Saturday evening are members of Trades Unions, and the fact that Mr Cullen has been nominated by the Trades ' Council, representing nearly all tho Labour Unions in Christchurch, would naturally be a guide to any person whose mental vision was not so dense as Mr' Williams's appears to be. He then goes on to say that the Trades Council has the power of selecting a candidate, but that it had relegated this power to the Central Labour and Liberal Council, a child of its own creation. Well, let us see how that child has behaved itself. When the Central Council was formed ail the Trades Unions, with the exception of_ tliree, were prevented by their constitutions from taking any part in political matters except in and through the Trades Council, and the Central Council only consisted of the Progressive Liberal Association, Women's Institute, Plumbers' Union, Bootmakers' Union and the Tailoresses and Pressers' Union. As a delegate from the Tailoreases' Union, I was a member of the Central Council from its formation up to a few weeks ago, and I now speak of what I have full knowledge of. Some time ago, the Central Council received a communication from the Prohibition League, informing them that the League's candidates were going to stand against all comers, and that their candidates would not abide by the selection of the Central Council. Mr H. G. Ell, who was a member of the Central Council at this time, also brought in a verbal report from the League to the same effect, and in answerto a question (put to him .by myself) he stated tliat Messrs Smith and Taylor would not retire if not selected, in accordance with a clause in tho constitution, viz., "That any candidate, before being put to the ballot, would have to give a written pledge agreeing to retire if not selected." Mr Ell at that meeting suggested that the Council would have to let that clause slide or stand over. At that meeting nothing was done, but a couple of meetings after that, in discussing the attitude taken up by the Prohibition League, the President of the Council stated that it would be necessary to alter the constitution. Later on a motion was | moved to that effect. When this motion j earue up for discussion, it was opposed by the delegates from the Tailoresses and Pressers' Union, and it was pointed out that the Council had no right to alter tho constitution for the benefit of any particular parly. Well, tho amendment was carried, and copies sent out to each affiliated society for their approval. As in duty bound, the delegates from our society gave in their report, and the Union endorsed the action taken by its delegates. In sending the proposed amendment to tho various societies, no reason was given for the proposed alteration, and I am convinced that the Tailoresses' Union was the only society that had the true position placed before them. After this the ballot ivas taken, and the only bodies taking -part in that ballot were the Progressive Libei-al Association and the Women's Institute. My own Union did not take any part, ;■<■> they were convinced thafc the Council | was only working in the interests of a par- I ticular party. The members of the Bootmakers' and Plumbers' Unions did; not j take the trouble to record their votes, :.- j most of them considered it was only a j sham. * * * Mr Williams, in claimi7><_* that Mr Ell was selected as tho labour candidate by the Central Council, is labour ; ing under a delusion. Mr Ell was r. on. i- i riated to the Council by the Progrc-saivo ] Liberals and tlie Women's Institute, and | Mr Ell cannot ckiini the non.inat.cr. 'J ;■ any labour organisation. Mr Williauis j also forgets that Mr Cullen was nomii_.-::te7 previous to Mr Ell, and if thore h aay j splitting of votes it is Mr Ell's doiriV I not Mr Cullen's.— l am, &c, ° j *J. M'LAREN. . i i TO THE EDITOR. » j Sib,— Your correspondent W. Williams -i is decidedly unfair in his remarks ■>*) AhCullen splitting the labour vote, l *.;._ informed that no official protest has ever been received by the Trades and Labour Council from the Bootmakers' Union regarding Mr Cullen's nomination. Nor was Mr Ell's name ever mentioned at the time as a candidate of any description. I defy any Labour Party to be united where faddists have only one idea. I admit that the Central Political Council was instituted by the Trades and Labour Council, but what was its aim ? " Clean hands." When the Central Council became the puppets of the Prohibition League all unity seemed to be at an end. How could any Trades and Labour Council stand by a forced ballot ? There was plenty of time, but some of the chosen ones were rather anxious to be on the market. Mr Williams .knows perfectly well that his Union is anything but united in its selection. As to Mr Cullen being surreptitiously nominated, it is au entire fabrication.— l am, &c, TOILING ON. TO THE EDITOR. Sik, — I have been requested by my fellow-unionists to state that your correspondent signing himself W. Williams, secretary of Bootmakers' Union, is not authorised by his union or their committee to make any of tho statements contained therein, but has done so on his own account, and without their knowledge. — I am, &c, C. LAFFERTY AND SIX OTHEES. W. Stbange jlnd Co.'s good tailoring far fit, style andvalue is unecfoalled.