REPUDIATION

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXII, Issue 19439, 27 October 1925, Page 6

REPUDIATION

POLITICAL PAMPHLET LIBERAL SECRET REVEALED EX-ORGANISEB TELLS A STORY (Special to "Chronicle”) . OAMARU, Oct. 26. , lhe political contest for the Oamaru seat has taken a rather sensational turn. The “North Otago Times” ha, been severely criticising the Nationalists and the public action of Mr J A Macpherson tho sitting member. This criticism appears to have created a mild panic among the Nationalists, and the "Oamaru Mail” on Saturday published a letter, in which extracts were made from a pamphlet, printed three years ago, entitled "Weighed in the Balance,” which was an impeachmen' of Reform. This pamphlet was written by Mr A. H. Vile, editor of the "North Otago Times,” during the short period ho was organiser for the LiberalLabour Party. The publication of .he extracts has afforded opportunity for Mr \ do to make rather sensational disclosures in tho course of an open letter, which is published in the "North Otago Times.” Mr A iio says: "A little more than three years ago the loader of the Lib-eral-Labour Party induced me to become organiser for the partv for the Dominion. One of the first ‘things he suggested I should do was to issue propaganda. I submitted to the executive of the party a type-written copy of a pamphlet entitled ‘Weighed in the Balance.’ The pamphlet was approved by Mr Wilford in writing, and I was instructed to proceed with its printing.

"Mr Veitch, the member for Wan ganui, who was one of the executive, led mo to understand that the executive as a whole was delighted with the production. An order was placed with Messrs J. L. Young, Ltd., of Palmerston North, for the printing of a thousand copies to start with, and the cost was charged up to the account of the Liberal-Labour Party. A few advance copies were sent out to members of the House, and Mr Wilford secured a number.

“A day or two later a member of the House (now a Minister of the Crown) challenged the Liberal-Labour Party with the responsibility for th-* pamphlet and its contents. * To n y amazement the Leader of the Opposition repudiated the document from his place in the House, alleging that it was published without his knowledge or authority. Other members of the executive appear to have acquiesced in the repudiation, for they made no demur at the time of the repudiation. Mr Wilford sent me a very lengthy win . stating that ho had been compelled to pursue the extraordinary course he did because certain references in the pamphlet to the wheat subsidy might .jeopardise the scat of Air George Witty. 1 thereupon wired my resigna tion as organiser and refused to be further identified with a political organisation the loaders of which could be capable of such things. “ Could any self-respecting person have pursued a course other than that taken by myself? But this is not all. In spite of the fact that the pamphlet was repudiated by the Opposition, the leader had the hardihood to distribute copies of it among his candidates, and certain candidates approached me and offered to pay me for supplies. 1 refused to allow it to go into circulation, however, and had 700 or 800 copies of it destroyed. “I regret exceedingly that I should be compelled in my own defence to make these disclosures, the more so as Air Wilford, the erstwhile leader of the party, is at present out of the Dorn inion. I hold Alessrs Forbes and Veitch, who were members of the executive, equally responsible with Air Wilford for the repudiation of the pamphlet and for the authority for its publication. I have hitherto remained silent concerning the unsavoury transaction out of consideration for the feelings of those candidates and other friends of mine who honestly thought the Liberal Labour Party w T as led by men whoso word was their bond; but when the contents of a pamphlet that has never been in general circulation, and which has been withdrawn by myself, arc be ing employed for the purpose of casting doubts upon the bona tides of my position as a journalist critic, 1 have no option but to expose the whole shameless proceedings, and J will forfeit £5O to the Oamaru Hospital if it can be shown that the statements X have made are contrary to fact.”