NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1347, 26 January 1912, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

AVe rlo not know whether Mn. Edwaiid Trkokak likes to be, reminded of bis strange cntli'iivours during Hit" la to- election campaign to pusb Labour under the wing of Wardism, but it is pretty clear Ibat sonic people are not disposed to forget bis unlucky intervention in the Otaki second ballot contest. This particular trouble began with a telegram sent by M». Trkoear to the Wardist candidate and read by him at one of his meetings. This telegram was as follows:—"Let the electors know that Hohehtsox has no .connection with the New Zealand Labour party." It will be noticed that this was a piece of advice to Mn. Field as to how he should proceed in his contest against Mr. Hodebtsok. Yet Mii, Teeoeae now says; "I never

used any interest for or against any candidate in Otaki district." This statement occurs in an open letter by Mh. Tregeak to Mb. Percy Roisixso.N, secretary of the _ Jlanawatu P'lnxniillcrs' Union of Workers. In further reference to the telegram, Mn. Tregear merely states that what it alleged was true, and that he had been asked whether the Labour party supported Mn. Eouektsox. The flaxmillers' secretary has replied in another open letter in the Manawatu Herald. He says, in part:

I ask you, as man to man, when yon icnt tint wire to field reading: "Let the electors know that Robertson has no connection with the Xew Zealand Labour party," whose candidature did you think it would benefit? Quit quibbling and abusing either party, and give me a straight-out answer to that query. It will be interesting to see whether Mr. Tregeak makes any further endeavour to prove that he did not wish to help Wardism against Labour. .The meeting held by the Reform partv in Auckland on Wednesday evening appears to have been a very impressive one both numerically and in point of enthusiasm. Naturally, with so many speakers, there was a tendency to generalise and to skim over the surface of things rather than attempt to deal at all analytically with the features of the political situation. Mr. Massey, of course, was the centre of enthusiasm .'and few people will begrudgc_ him the very handsome demonstration in his favour. It is not necessary to dwell on the fine courage and high public spirit he has displayed in the long up-hill fight for honest government. No man in public life here to-day would have shown quite the same cheerful good humour and steady persistence under the discouraging conditions he has had to face as Leader of the Reform party and he thoroughly deserves the success which has now come as a result of tho public awakening. Some of the speakers at the gathering appear to have stressed over-much the possibilities of a dissolution and fresh election. This would no doubt prove advantageous to the Reform party, but we dp not anticipate anything of the kind happening. No one really wants another election just now, least of all the general public. Everyone recognises that the country has decided against the Ward Administration and that any attempt to thwart public opinion in this respect by means of a makeshift Ministry will be bitterly resented. Such a contingency as a reconstructed Ministry is really so remote and hopeless as to be unworthy of serious consideration. The Ministerialists now know that Mr. Massey holds the winning position and that the public expect him to be given a fair chance to bring forward his programme and fulfil the pledges which his party has undertaken. He will have difficulties to rucct and overcome and he will require to proceed, cautiously, for his majority on occasions will not be a very large'one. But he will probably grow in strength as he demonstrates the sincerity of his professions and the dishonesty of the catchcries that have for so long been used to deceive the public as to the objects his party has in view.

The City Council is to be congratulated on its action last evening in determining to assort its right to manage the affairs of the city as the judgment of councillors decides and not at the dictates of the Tramways Union of employees. By ten votes to four the Council decided to refuse the demand of the union that Inspector Fuller should be dismissed from his office as inspector. The position with which the Council found itself confronted was a perfectly simple one. One of its employees (Inspector Fuller), in the execution of his duty, reported what appeared to him to be a questionable action on the part of a conductor in connection with the sale of a ticket to a passenger. As a result of the inspector's action the conductor was penalised by those responsible for the management of the tramways, hut on appeal it was found that there was, in the opinion of the Appeal Board, insufficient evidence to support the charge that had been laid. The next step was the demand of the tramway employees for the removal of the inspector who, so far as the evidence went to show, had only done his duty in reporting the seeming breach on the part of the conductor. Despite the report of the Tramways Manager, who declared Inspector Fuller to bo the most efficient inspector in the service .of the city, and who further stated that if the inspector were removed in the circumstances narrated it would be impossible to get inspectors to carry out their duties efficiently, the Council decided, on the casting vote of the Mayor (Mr. T. M. Wilford), to remove Fuller. Up to this time no attempt had been made to prove that Inspector Fuller was unfitted for the-position ho held, but as the result of further discussion between the Tramways Union and the Mayor the union laid specific charges against Fuller. Many of these were trivial or irrelevant so far as they affected his fitness for the post lie held. However, when the time came for proving the charges the union declined to proceed with them owing to the Council deciding that it was only fair and reasonable that Fuller should be permitted to employ counsel to appear for him, the union, of course, being granted the same privilege. Having thus abandoned their charges, in regard to which, by the way, Inspector Fuller made a very straightforward and satisfactory explanation, the union still persisted in its determination to secure the dismissal of the inspector. A ballot was taken, and it is freely stated that the men are determined to strike unless they get their way in the matter. The Council last evening by rescinding the previous resolution by 10 votes to 4 has very emphatically declared that it is not to be browbeaten by such threats and that it is very properly resolved to maintain the management of the city's affairs in its own hands. If the tramwaymen are unwise enough to strike the consequences will be on their own heads. They have not afforded the slightest proof that they have any real ground of grievance against Inspector Fullkr and their unreasonable attitude will not commend itself to the public. If the union is to say what ticket-in-spectors or other officers are to be retained in the, service or dismissed from it as suits the whim of the men whose work I hose officers supervise the whole control of the tramways might just as well be handed over to the union. The Tramways Manager, Mr Richardson, in his report on the Fuller matter some weeks ago, wrote: If Inspector V tiller is removed from the tiiikcl-iiispeftiiiK ski If il. will be impossible to !,ft inspectors to eon-v out their duties efficiently; indeed, I have no hesitation in saying thai unless (he tickot-inspeotiiiß staff are supported initio Committee, they might 1 ua well bo eliminated.

Of course this is merely stating what must be obvious to everyone. The public, we have not the least doubt, will give the Council any support it may require in preserving for the cily its right to manage its own affairs in the interests of citizens and refuse to submit to the domination of a union of its own employees however powerful that union may consider itself to be.