A SOCIALISTIC PROPOSAL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9210, 13 April 1908, Page 1

A SOCIALISTIC PROPOSAL.

RESUMPTION OF BLACKBALL MINE SUGGESTED. Mr H. M. Fitzgerald, who was th< principal speaker at the Socialist meeting in the Opera House last night, moved the following resolution : " That this meeting of Christchurch citizens demands that the Governor, as representing the Crown, shall resume possession of the lands and minerals at present held on sufferance by the Blackball Coal Company, Ltd., owing to the failure of that company to operate tho mines under fair conditions of labour,, and shall work the same under the conditions at present existing in the Seddon and other State mines." Mr Fitzgerald referred at some length to tho finances of the mine operation, which, he said, was paying well in spite of the assertions to the contrary. Regarding the recently published assurance by Mi Tregear that the men would be given the half-hour crib time if they returned to work, he said that had nothing to do with Mr Tregear. The assurance must come from the company or the mine manager. The papers had done nothing remarkable in publishing the telegram ; and the executive had been justified in suppressing correspondence which, in this instance, could fairly be said to have come, f rom an irresponsible source. Mr A. Paterso'n seconded the motion, and said that in 1907 Mr Massey, leader of the Opposition, had said that the Government did not " sell land," it mere- ( ly "sold tho freehold" on sufferance. ! The resolution, therefore, merely took what was believed by its framers to be the logical meaning of the laws of the country, and demanded compliance witt

, the condition that the Government could at any time resume or take it to any extent. He said that, if the reso- ; lution was carried, he and Mr Eckroyd . were going to Wellington shortly, and > would see that it got to the proper place. The resolution was carried without opposition.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — Kindly permit me to bring be fore the public one of the grossest in justices which has ever been, or pos sibly could be, perpetrated on a work ing community, and which conclusively proves the iniquity of allowing even i Minister of the Crown, too much lati tude. The following explanation i> necessary to clearly follow the issue. On the afternoon of Tuesday, Apri 7, considering zny mission practically fulfilled in the South Island, I tele graphed my executive advising them o: niy opinion, and also requesting furthei instructions how to proceed. On Wed nesclay morning, April 8, I received th< following reply : — " Pritchard, Posi Office, Christchurch. — Have a fre< hand, go where you choose. — Rodgers Blackball." Knowing full well I coulc do nothing more in the South Island J determined fco make a final effort tc bring about a settlement of the disputt before returning to Blackball. I therefore, on receipt of the above telegram, telegraphed Mr Loinas, Chief Factory Inspector, Wellington, ., as follows:— " Private.' Mr Lomas, Chief Factory Inspector, Wellington. — Unofficiallj coming to Wellington. Can you arrange jnterview with Minister of Labour or" Mines for Friday? Consideration of dispute. — Pritchard, Post Office, Christchurch." Early in the afternoon of the same day (Wednesday) I received the following reply : — ' ' Mr Pritchard, Post Office, Christchurch. — I am in communication with Minister, who is at present in Palmerston North. Can you state nature of business? Will arrange interview if at all possible. — Lomas, Wellington." To this my reply was as follows: — "Private. Mr Lomas, Chief Factory Inspector, Wellington. — Unofficially coming to Wellington to-night by Pateena. Will call your office tomorrow morning 11 a.m. Conversation regarding existing dispute. — Pritchard." At eleven o'clock on Thursday' forenoon, according to my appointment, I was received by Mr Lomas, and after talking the whole matter over -with him and Mr Tregear it was finally decided that, as Mr Lomas would be absent on Friday, Mr Tregear would accompany me to the office of the Minister of Labour and try to obtain for me an interview with. him. On Friday morning, accompanied by Mr Tregear I visited the office of the Minister or Labour, and I was not long kept in suspense, for in about three minutes Mr Tregear returned and informed me the Minister would not receive me as a private individual. Questioned by me as to his reasons for such hostility Mr Tregear informed me that the Minister said I had " said some hard things about him and he would not receive me as a pri.vate individual until I publicly withdrew and publicly apologised for saying same." I replied : "If Mr Millar will not receive me nntil I retract — publicly or privately — one word of what I have uttered concerning him you may tell him we will never meet." ■ By this action of his I feel doubly justified in everything I have said concerning him and his parliamentary conduct. Thanking Mr Tregear for his honest and conscientious endeavour to further, through me, th© possible chance of a settlement being arrived at I left the building in a, manner which, I fear, did not disguise my contempt for Ministerial autocracy. I may here state that my sole aim in attemptzing to gain an interview with Mr Millar was to obtain by letter of introduction or Ministerial influence an interview with Mr G. G. Stead, of Christchurch, concerning the strike. Allow me here to publicly thank Mr Lomas and Mr Tregear for the efforts they put forth on ipy behalf. In justification of what I said conperning Mr Millar I will reiterate the following two instances. In a public letter to the Press I said : " How can we hail Mr Millar as an emissary of peace? etc., etc." And I ask the eanae question to-day. If this statement does not exactly coincide with his action toward me to-day as an individual member 6f the Blackball Miners' Union then let him publicly justify this manifest superficiality of conduct, which plainly indicates that he puts his private sentiments before the v publio interests. While addressing a meeting in Dunedin I characterised Mr Millar as an " autocratic despot." If I am wrong, then I do not know what a "despot" is,' nor am I acquainted with the interpretation of an " autocrat." Does Mr Millar admit what I said concerning him is true ? And is that why he has taken this opportunity of insulting — through me — the members of the Union I have the honour to represent, and indirectly the whole of the workers of this dominion? For what is the real significance of this act of Mr Millar's? It is this: that if a member of any union dares to subject the Minister of Labour to adverse public criticism, and if that member ie placed in a position similar to my own, and is desirous of reconciling the contending parties to a dispute and also desirous of executing his operations without attracting the public gaze on him, he is going to be defeated and his union snubbed because he dared to speak what he thought was truth, and dared to adversely criticise Ministerial conduct. Evidently truth cuts deeper than the sword. To the workers of New Zealand and elsewhere I again reiterate what I have said from every platform I have spoken from during the present dispute: — "Trade unionists, adopt the caucus system in your unions and turn your industrial organisations into political organisations for . the purpose of capturing the political machinery, for then, and not till then, will you Obtain direct representation in the House of Parliament, and secure for yourselves what is due to you, namely, the results of his labour to the labourer." On behalf of the Blackball Miners' Union. — I am, etc., DAVID K. PRITCHARD. Trocadero Hotel, Wellington, April 11. 1908. (Surely Mr Pritchard is labouring under some misapprehension. The Minister's refusal to see him as " a private individual " can scarcely be regarded as an insult to the Union he represents or to " the whole of the workers , of the dominion."— Ed. "L. T.")