THE FRIENDS OF LABOUR-WHERE ARE THEY?

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1587, 2 November 1912, Page 3

THE FRIENDS OF LABOUR-WHERE ARE THEY?

Sir,—With! your settlement -of- controversial, accounts in the Spence-cum-Paul entanglement, I have no desiro- to intrude, but other thoughts occur. Who are the friends of Labour-?, l{ot: tho .leaders—they are only the.-leeches; .not the -self-ordained agitators—they are the ■ real "scabs"; as J logically proved'eise- ; where, that is the outward manifestation of the inward mortification, The timo is not opportune for a Jong disquisition on the point, but it is transparently -patent that Labour is losing' faith in its leaders, and -Messrs. Paul and Spence's. reniiueia.tibii shows that the leading leaders liave .sighted the revulsion. The regeneration of labour conditions must succeed, and not precede, the regeneration of Labour. The destructive armaments of discontent are not going to bring victory, to improved, conditions, The most pressing danger at the present time is that the quondam leaders should have the chance to trim their sails .to. the changing wind. The revolt-of -Labour must-overthrow them absolutely, and start anew. The friends of Labour, where are they? Echo answers .Where-? ' But they are in the near distance: now; and their doctrine -Wilt bo "Honour-Labour first, and then demand the reward' of honoured' Labour. •'• Dishonour Labpur and the reward will bo commensurate."—l am,' etc., . HENRY BODLEt. October 31, 1912, ' '•;•••.'" MR. ISITT SHOULDERS THE RESPONSIBILITY, . Sir,—More honest Journalism! Yesterday afternoon I'moied-nn amendment to the Railway Bill that the House recommend the.Minister for Railways-to! grant the First Division the advances thov asked for, as from August 1, 1913, i moved that amendment' because, in. ' my opinion, when.once the' Minister had admitted that the men were justlv; entitled to- the advance the Government had no. right to withhold it on the plea that, if granted, the railways would not pay 3£ percent. My action is open to fail criticism, but what followed? I was at once accused by Government members of a cunning .political trick in. the interest of, the Opposition. -In response, I definitely stated that I had consulted with no one. Despite that declaration you, in to-day's- leader, state that Mr. Isitt was' put up by' the Opposition to move the amendment, Now, sir, so soon as I hey. knew I was moving the amendment three of the Opposition leaders remonstrated strongly. I replied that I was not, officially, a nrember of their party, and held myself at liberty to do as I thought right. As a consequence another Liberal leader did not vote.' , I leave you to explain if-you can', this,most' recent illustration, of the dishonest treatment you habitually mete out to me.—l am; etc.. LEONARD 'M.'ISITT. Ootober 31. [It is a. matter of- jio conse'quence whether Mr, Isitt;.moved his motion at the instance of the. Opposition or on his' own account.' In either ease, it was f>lainly a- piece of political trickery, designed to ombarrass the Government. Wo were not aware that Mr. Isitt had disclaimed any association with the Opposition in the matter. So far ,as we aro aware, not one of tho three local papers reported his disclaimer, the renprtors apparently not hearing it or regarding it as immaterial to the real point.at issue. It is amusing to note that Mr. Isitt still persists in proclaiming his independence. It is a standing joko in the House.]