Wharf Lumper’s Reply.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXXXV, Issue 12978, 20 January 1910, Page 3

Wharf Lumper’s Reply.

.. Sir,-* have for pullishin? my-letter of the But I cannot let thejeeeretary's to you pass without giving an emphatic first, lie classes me with, what

be, is. pleased to term certain malcontents who refused, to pay their ‘ subscriptions, whereupon he says the Union decided to issue badges to the financial members when these alleged malcontents (with the exception of myself) began to pay off their arrears. Now, Mr Editor, this is pure ffc-, tibn; for I can show you my receipt'boot with the secretary’s signature for subscriptions of 6s, 2s 6d 'for, November, and 2s 6d for December last. I did say I would not pay my subscriptions on one occasion, and that was about last October, when the secretary himself refused to work with me in the hold of the s.s. Moa, because I was in arrears with my payments, and I think you will agree with me that it was about time, although I did not carry out my intention, as my hook will prove. Yet he coolly says they have never refused me work. There is only one occasion upon which I have refused work; and that is the only true statement he has made concerning myself, and t will explain. Last Monday, after earning 3s 7d on one of the boats, I went home to - lunch and. had a wash, when he offered me one hour’s w ; ork coaling on the s.s. Regulus,' which meant- a complete change of clothing. - Much more could be said were I moreafluent with the pen. I realise, however, the difficulty in contending with those in authority.—l am, etc., H. ROBINSON. 11 Dublin Street, January 19, 1910. TO THE EDITOR. ■ Sir, —With reference to Mr Robinson’s letter in your issue of the 18th inst.. I feel compelled, as a member of the Union, referred to, to refute the whole, of the accusations made therein. , Only last Saturday, in my hearing,, and. in the hearing of others, Mr Robinsoni absolutely refused to work on the s.s. Moa, saying that he would not work if requested to do so by a Unionist, but that he would turn to, solely to oblige the mate, which he ultimately did. Now, Mr Robinson has had exactly the same chances as other workers in the Union, and when he joined he did so with the full knowledge of what was expected from him in accordance with the rules, which arc properly registered in accordance with the Act. But he allowed himself to become unfinancial on the books, and finally defied the Union, and repudiated any liability thereto. Now, Mr Editor, is this the action of a man who has the smallest spark of unity in him? And does he expect to get the same privileges as men who keep themselves clear on the books? I may state that our Union wants to starve no man out, its object being to assist a fellow-worker, not to crush him. “Man’s inhumanity to man, etc.,” is a good, sound, old quotation, whon'properly applied, hut in this instance it is, I think, going from the sublime to the ridiculous. I can assure you that our executive will be only too pleased to supnly any pressman with full particulars concerning Mr Robinson’s supposed grievance, as statements such as these, that have no particle of foundation -in fact, tend to bring Labour Unions into disrepute.—l am, etc., A. F. G. Wanganui wharf, January 19, 1910.