Communist Leaders.

Star (Christchurch), Volume XLIV, Issue 191, 13 August 1931, Page 7

Communist Leaders.

To the Editor. Dear Sir,—l have perused with much amusement the letters published in your paper by those correspondents who have endeavoured to place the leaders of the late Communist procession on a pedestal of fame for again defying the law and order of our city. I notice where these writers use the returned soldiers, and the unemployed in their endeavour to solicit the sympathy of “Star” readers. Permit me to state my views of these processions—and my opinion of these wasters who would like to rule our city—but first let me state that I am a returned soldier who served in the South African War. also the late war. I am also one of the unemployed, earning £2 10s per week (week off excepted) to provide for my family of six. We cannot exist on these earnings, but if it were left to these wasters (who are imposers on the genuine unemployed) to obtain improved conditions for us by their blackguardly attacks on our members of Parliament, and “bur city councillors, also their peace-disturbing processions, then T am afraid we would be left to starve, because every right-thinking citizen and member of Parliament would turn against us—and rightly so. If these m’sehief-makers think the returned men and the unemployed are in sympathy with them they make a great mistake, for I have discussed the matter with manv of my fellow Diggers. also with the unemployed with whom I work (about 200) and we are all of the one opinion, viz., they should ; be deported—or never allowed out of; gaol. Speaking for myself, I would like to' know how much work one of these lead. e rt; Lpq riqnp in Christchurch before and since his release from prison— he is the

individual who first advocated the visits to the Council Chambers to abuse the Mayor (the Rev J. K. Archer) ; he also started these cranky processions. He has been howled down every time he has imposed himeelf upon genuine workers’ meetings, he has been put in his place by Labour members of Parliament on every opportunity, as also have his kindred brothers. But why single one man out in my criticism? These individuals as a whole are an eye-sore to any right-thinking returned man, also to even the most humble of the unemployed. The very fact of these individuals endeavouring to persuade the workers’ wives to make exhibitions of themselves by joining in their processions should be sufficient to show their few weak-minded followers little respect they have towards wives, mothers and sisters. As a returned soldier, and a husband I say that any person who sinks to be led by these men is not worthy of being called a man. I also think the Press owes it to the unemployed to cut out any, reference to them in the correspondence columns from the paltry two or three who support men who openly show their disrespect for law and ordei 4 and for our wives and mothers.— I am, etc., “8/3859 ” fl@@©®@©@©©©©©®©®®! ¥~S!a