IRRESPONS! BLE LEADERS

Wanganui Herald, Volume LI, Issue 15196, 17 April 1917, Page 4

IRRESPONS! BLE LEADERS

Whiting to the Post, a correspondent who signs himself “Fresh from the Mines,” points out that the "conscription strike,” the objective of which the miners of the East Coast have taken pains to make plain to the public, and have so foolishly decided to embark upon, risking the very existence of their organisation, has, in fact, taken nearly twelve months silent activity to reach the present point of eruption. Run*, anga Union passed a resolution in May, 1916, demanding a strike of the whole miners of the Dominion against the Military Service Bill, which was then before Parliament, Good counsel, from the Central Executive, at that time prevailed against sue k socialistic striking

methods. It was advised that a plebiscite vote be taken upon the question. Up to the present date no such vote has been taken. Resolutions at. union meetings, where few members attend, have been taken, hut no referendum of the organisation. Why was it not done? asks the correspondent, who proceeds; Was it because they could not trust the rank and file to use their franchise upon so important a matter, or was it because they feared the unmistakable result? Anyhow, such was the mode of procedure adopted by a section of men professing to possess and promulgate advanced ideas of democracy. The Government has been condemned from the housetops of Australasia for not extending the referendum to the electors of New Zealand by those very men that have failed to apply the principle to their own organisation. Re Mr R. Gempie’s mission to Australia to organise the anti-conscription forces during the referendum campaign, the same principle of autocracy was exercised. The seven delegates representing the miners of the Dominion at the October, 1916, Wellington Conference had no mandate from the men to discuss conscription at all, much less to authorise Mr Semple to visit Australia upon the question. Mr Semple carried out the principles of his mission with all the fiery zeal of his nature; assumed the role of representing the Labour vote of New Zealand, and forcibly described how the workers of this Dominion had been imposed upon, and deprived of the privilege of a vote upon the issue. His mission was misleading from a representation point of view to the Australian. The truth is he only represented seven delegates, because there was no mandate given to authorise anyone to represent the collective political vote of the miners, neither in New Zealand or Australia. The same truth is applicable to the present strike. The organisation as a body has not been constitutionally consulted. The East Coast, of the South Island, it seems, are out of the arena, and are not prepared to sacrifice their work/ home, or country to oblige any autocratic body, however democratic they may assume to be. How ridiculous the'whole thing appears to me—a small, disorganised mining section of the Dominion forcibly attempting to dictate and control the political and legislative forces of the whole country. Were it not for the serious consequences to the whole country arising from such actions, I would liberate a laugh. Perhaps the Newcastle “T.L. Peers’ ’ resolution is the root of all this turmoil.”