MR HASELDEN AND THE "RAILWAY REVIEW."

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9916, 3 August 1910, Page 1

MR HASELDEN AND THE "RAILWAY REVIEW."

[Pjjb Press Association.] WELLINGTON, August 2. During the hearing of a recent appeal before the North Islajid Railway Appeal Board, the chairman (Mr W. R.. Haselden, S.M.) took strong exception to an article published m the " Railway Review " commenting upon his method of conducting appeal cases. Mr Haselden asked the president of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, the owners of the " Review," to disavow the article, and an undertaking was given that the matter would bo considered at the next meeting of the Society's exooutivo body. To-day the executive dealt with the question, and. unanimously passed the following resolution:—" That tho editor's 'report and all correspondence concerning the complaints of Mr W. R. Haselden having been road to the Executive Council, they are of opinion that the article complained of was fully justified and that they have the fullest confidence in the editor of the 'Railway Review.' " Mr W. A. Veitoh, president 0 f the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, stated to a " New Zealand Times" representative, who sought further information regarding the resolution,-, that it was passed because the Executive Council was satisfied, and its belief was corroborated by a legal opinion, thas the article which had been so much debated was not defamatory, and that it was within the limits of fair comment. "We had always found our editor to bo a moderate writer," continued Mr Veitch, "and a man who, while he realised that it was sometimes his duty to criticise others, had always done ■so in a gentlemanly and reasonable way. His attitude on this occasion was no exception to the rule. Comparing the public statement made by Mr Haselden with tho article complained of by him, we could not come to any other conclusion than that the article was couched in. much more reasonable and moderate language than Mr Haselden.'s public comment upon it." Mr 'Veitch proceeded to take exception to tho Magistrate's method of ventilating his grievance. '" The | liailway Review' is a paper that is not banded indiscriminately to the public," he remarked, "and therefore it would have boon far more reasonable had Mr Haselden sent a letter to the Executive Council complaining of the article, rather than making a statement which must in some measure have prejudiced the public mind against the railway men. Wo could only accept his attitude as one of hostility to our Society." " The Council approached the matter with an open mind," continuod Mr Veitch, " in no way prejudiced against Mr Haselden, but, in view of all the circumstances, wo felt that we must take exception to his attitude in. making a public statement at a timo and in a place which gave me no opportunity of replying on equal terms. Had I used language of the same nature as Mr Haseldeii's, it is quite possible an indignant chairman of the Appeal Board would have charged me with contempt of Court. 1 was appearing before the Board not as president of tho Society (which has no standing in that Court), but as an ordinary member of the railway service. The attack on. the editor was made without previous intimation, and I had no personal knowledge of the facts at the time. 1 have, therefore, felt it my duty, in justice to the editor, to make this explanation .'' '