THE MANTLE OP SEDDON

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22514, 23 September 1938, Page 5

THE MANTLE OP SEDDON

TO TBB BDITOB OB TBB FBEIB. Sir, —F. W. Bourke’s methods are interesting. He has a knack of setting up something which was not said and of demolishing it, thus obscuring the awkward point made against his party. I did not say that Seddon’s legislation included nothing Socialistic. I inferred that some of his legislation was Socialistic, but pointed out that Seddon was not an avowed Socialist, aiming at the establishment of a Socialist State. My point was that Seddon was a Liberal, and the fundamental of the Liberal doctrine is individualism; the Labour Party is Socialist and the fundamental of its policy is the Socialist State. Therefore, Mr Savage and his colleagues cannot claim to have inherited Seddon’s mantle. I did not say that Adam Hamilton had inherited this mantle. What I did say was that he had more right to this claim than had Mr Savage, who has no right to it. It should be clear that Mr Bourke, as on some previous occasions, has pummelled an Aunt Sally of bis own manufacture in order to disguise the fact that he was side-stepping the actual. It really does not matter for tb* hbmw at bus spfc«t

“The Press” said of Soddon, any more than it would matter what the “Oshkosli Argus” said of Disraeli. Liberalism and Socialism are fundamentally different, and to claim that Mr Savage has a right to wear the mantle of a Liberal is like saying that Lenin wore the mantle of Kerensky. Actually, one could say that Mr Savage Is closer to Stalin than to Seddon. Mr Savage is heading for the Socialist State; Stalin announces that he has achieved the Socialist Slate as the first stage to real Communism. —Yours, et., LIBERALISM. September 22, 3938.