ATTITUDE OF SIR J. G. WARD.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1896, 3 November 1913, Page 8

ATTITUDE OF SIR J. G. WARD.

DEPLORED IN AUCKLAND. "NOT IN NATIONAL INTEREST." (By Telegraph— Presn Asßooiutfin.) Auckland, November 1. ' A tolegram, largely signed by Auckland business men, was sent to Sir Joseph Ward, as follows' "The undersigned merchants of Auckland doplore tho attitude you havo adopted, as reported in tho Press, concerning the waterside workers' strike. Your remarks can only bo characterised as political, and not in tho national interests. We look to your whole-hearted support of tho Prime Minister which tho gravo situation demands, and your assistance to prevent tho innocent peoplo of the Dominion suffering, as there is great distress hero already." Sir J. Ward's Reply. Tho following Teply was received from Sir Joseph Ward:—"l have no knowledge of the nature of the report upon which you base your telegram. The tono of tho latter rather surprises mo, as I am in entire' sympathy with the maintenance of law and order. I stated that clearly in the House. At the urgent request of reputable citizens and other law-abiding spectators of the incident —not members of any union nor supporters of the strike—l brought under tho notice of tho Prime Minister the allegations of recklessness made t-o mo regarding the action of tho mounted special constables in whooling round und galloping through some thousands of private citizens, in order that he might havo such allegations _ inquired into. This the Prime Minister agreed to. One satisfactory result is that the mounted constables have been withdrawn. To-day Wellington is absolutely quiet. When you read the full re-, port of my remarks, the erroneous opinion you apparently entertain will bo made manifest. If politics has been introduced, it has not been by me."

POINTED COMMENT. BY A' LIBERAL JOURNAL. The Duncdin "Star," which is an Opposition 'journal, stated editorially on- October 31 as follows:—"It is much to be regretted that the Leader of tho Opposition took up tho attitudo which ho did in Parliament yesterday. No sensible or loyal person can bo anything but grieved that force should have to bo employed in the settlement 'of trouble arising out of industrial disputes, but it is the weapon which tho strikers, fomented by their leaders, have chosen, and it is only too clear that if tho authorities are to do their duty to the country they must ho prepared to oppose lawless forces by lawful force, where law and order are endangered. Had Sir Joseph Ward been in power at tho present moment, he would have failed in his duty, unless, he had taken reasonable st«ps to preserve law and order. It surely cannot bo merely because he is not in.- power that he sees fit virtually to condemn the Government for taking such steps. It is with considerable astonishment that, one reads his declaration that he, would not stand quietly by while such incidents occurred. Relief from the responsibilities of office does not also imply release from tho obligations of a member of Parliament, or oven of an ordinary oitlsoa. It ig mere ohaiiUiblo to as-

I F,urne that Sir Joseph Ward had been misinformed as to what had really taken place." ALLEGATION DENIED. The statement made by Sir J. Ward in tho House of Representatives on Thursday night, about the conduct of a party of mounted police who had suppressed a disturbance in tho Post Ofiico Square that afternoon, was adversely criticised by a number of Auckland merchants and business men. Replying to their criticism in a statement which has bgen published in the Press, Sir Joseph Ward stated, inter alia, that: "One satisfactory result of his action in bringing the matter up was that the mounted constables had been withdrawn." This statement is absolutely incorrect. Patrols of mounted polico have been constantly on duty during tho past few days, and have traversed the streets at all hours. So far from any mounted polico having been withdrawn, their numbers have bc-en considerably augmonted day by day.