The Dominion. FRIDAY, APRIL 18, 1913. THE MUNICIPAL BATTLE.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1726, 18 April 1913, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, APRIL 18, 1913. THE MUNICIPAL BATTLE.

Most of the candidates who have taken to the platform to further their claims to the confidence of citizens at the coming municipal polls have been frankly outspoken in expressing their views on municipal questions of the moment. The "Labour" ticket is probably campaigning more actively, than anyone else, and it requires to ,do so. Most of those composing it are quite unknown to the public, though familiar enough figures in trades union and Radical circles, and are relying entirely on the "tickct" influence for support. The members of this "ticket" practically echo and re-echo one another's views—though they of course each present their case from their own particular point of view— and electors may form a very fair idea from their speeches what sort of consideration the general public outside of organised -Labour would receive if the "ticket" were elected. It has to be borne in mind in this connection that so far as those behind the "Labour ticket" are concerned they are pledged to vote for the whole ticket—not for individuals on it. The effort on which they arc concentrating their whole strength is to secure a solid Labour-Socialist vote which will carry the election in" favour of every man ori tho ticket. The very interesting speech delivered last evening by Mr. Mokiauty, and the disclosures made therein of

the efforts of those who control the. Labour-Socialist ticket to bring him into line or to frighten him out of the contest, leave no room for doubt as to the determination of the organisers of_ the ticket to use every means possible to win '51100083. Mit. Moriarty is himself a well-known Labour leader, though not standing a_s such, but he has refused to associate himself with tho Socialist syndicalist movement into which trades

unionism is being inveighed. He believes that trade unionism should not be confused with political organisation. He sums up the position very lucidly in the fjiiestion: "If a man was bound to join a union to got a job, was it fair for funds to be used to support principles he disagreed with?" That is really the crux of the matter. A man joins a union as a trade matter and pays his fees and levies, but he retains

his freedom of opinion on political .questions just as lie does on matters of religion. Why then should he be forced by a section of his fellowunionists to 'support political principles which they approve but with which he is in entire disagreement; and why should his funds contributed for trades union purposes bo used to further political cuds which he

disapproves? In the present municipal election it will probably be found that there are many members of trades unions who arc strongly opposed to the idea of the city's affairs 'falling into the hands of a

ixed ticket of Labour-Socialists

many of whom—apart from the evil of class government—arc quite unfitted for so heavy a responsibility. Why, then, should their funds, or any part of them, be used to place

thoso men in _ office 1 If Labour chooses to have its political organisations, well and good; but they should not bo .mixed with trades unionism which exists for other purposes than political strife. Those citizens who believe that it is a good thing in public affairs to have all classes represented on public bodies, but who realise the danger of votes, cast for any individual members of the La-bour-Socialist ticket leading to a majority of the ticket gaining control of fjhc- city's affairs may find in the candidature of Jin. Mokiakti" a reasonable solution of the difficulty in which they have beeu placed. Though not standing as a Labour candidate there is no one on the official "tickct" better qualified to voicc the views of that particular section of the community.