The Dominion. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1913. CLASS HATRED.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1676, 17 February 1913, Page 6

The Dominion. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1913. CLASS HATRED.

It was a very poor compliment that tho Methodist Conference paid to the workers on Saturday, when it decided to shelve a general affirmation of the evil of class bitterness and tho social value and desirableness of toleranoo, justice, charity, and fair play. What the Conference . was called upon to do was to give its approval to the following clause in 'tho report of tho Conference's Committee on Temperance and Public Morals:

"We deplore the rapid growth of a spirit of antagonism, suspicion, and even of hato between different sections of tho community over social questions. The old spirit of fair-play for all sides, and the capacity to differ without quarrelling, which has been, the boast of our race, seems.to be passing away. In its place is arising a most un-Christian and un-English party and class spirit, which is most injurious to social well-being and good neighbourship, as well as destructive of Church life. Wo advise conference to direct its ministers to inculcate, especially in dealing with the young, moderation in temper and speech-, and. charity in judgment." '

In this clause! there iB no imputation against any individual or class; it is merely a\ wise and temperate protest against the' encouragement of antagonism, suspicion and hate between sections and classes, and a warning as to the manifestly injurious result of class bitterness. It is as.sound and impersonal as one of the 'Cotamandments, and one might have .been excused for supposing that it would have been unanimously supported by the Conference. Yet the Conference refused to adopt the clause, owing to the opposition of those who held that it was "a reflection on Labour" to recommend a good, social spirit to everybody. Mr. L. M. Isitt and those who supported him in. opposing tho clause paid Labour, as, we have said, a very poor compliment by arguing that a motion in favour 6f decency and order is in itself a rebuke to "Labour." They implied by their attitude that organised Labour is guilty of stirring up class bitterness. Now,, it is not true that the' general body of workers are bitterly "class-con-scious" (to use, the demagogue's own word), but it is unhappily true that "Labour's"- leaders and organisers are ceaselessly sowing, the seeds 'of hatred and bitterness. And it is ah amusing fact. that these gentlemen will bo anything _ but grateful" to their defenders; since most of them take no. litfclo pride in the success with which they perform tho only work of which.somo of them are capable, namely,'the creation'of bitter, vengeful,; and; violent sentiments in such thoughtless men !as will listen to- them.

Mr. L, M;' Isirr's attitude 'supplied a touch of humour to a discussion which would otherwise have been simply' deplorable. Ho_ "absolutely denied" that class feeling was grow;ng : worse, and he said lie remembered when farm labourers entertained.'themselves by "singing ■songs reflecting on their employers." It is a muc,h easier thing to remember.'that Mr. L.-M. Isitt has defaced scores of- pages of Hansard with bittef speeches of which the only purpose and the only effect could have been •to - brand some classes of-the community: as proper subjects for the. hatred, of , other classes. His methods were not precisely like .the mothods' of Mr. Semple' and the other "Labour" leaders who take pride in their skill in feeding "the class war" .with fronzicd vituperations. But ho. has in Parliament devoted his one talent —his gift of rough and fluent abuse —to a whole-hearted denunciation of those who own land. Wc do not think any other member of Parliament, not even the. member for. L.vttalton, has striven quite so energetically as Mr. Isitt. to create class bitNot unaniusing also' was the attitude of that member of the Conference who objected to the motion because "the workers had never received fair play." Surely nothing could be more irrelevant as a reason for rejecting a'mild and general' affirmation of the principles of mdderation, charity, and justico. In other countries than New Zealand there is room -.for-legitimate oomplaint that'many working people, and somo wholo classes of working people, are not treated, with that justice which 'is a$ desirable from the viewpoint of society as a whole as from the viewpoint of those work-' ers themselves. But surely, the ordinary Christian and human virtues of truth, charity, and justice must not be left unpraised simply because in other" lands than thissome people are unfairly treated. ,Wo can tnink of nothing which is more likely to injure the hopes of a generous treatment of organised Labour than the Rev. J. J. Mather's doctrino that any set of*'- circumstances can prohibit subscription to a general statement of the value, of temporance, charity and justice. The net upshot of the Conference's rojection oi tho clause for the reasons given in the discussion is that Labour is tacitly declared by tho Conference to be of spreading the gospel^of hate and. injustice and of outraging the principles of fair play. True enough of many, of the leadors of "Labour," this charge cannot reasonably be brought against the wage-earners as a whole or any very considerable section of them. It is difficult to sco how the Conference can be excused for having lacked the courage to stand by a doctrine of which not ono of them would us an individual or as a clergyman dare to question tho valub and the wholesomeness. But we had not suspected that'at a Methodist Conference we should find righteousness afraid of tho misrepresentations of those to whom righteousness and justice are .not convonicnt things.