CLASS DIFFERENCE.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1952, 8 January 1914, Page 3

CLASS DIFFERENCE.

ENTIRELY DUE TO FORTUITOUS

CIRCUMSTANCES,

LABOUR PRESIDENT'S VIEW.

jln addressing a mooting of tho oxecu- j tivo of the Gonoral Labourers' Union last night,, Mr. J. 31. Campbell, the president,-returned thanks.ior his reelection, and expressed , pleasure at the ' election, on tho same tickotj of tho treasurer-(Mr. Jaa. Nicolson) and , the ( feneral;.socrctary (Mr. M. J. Reardon). 'iowed in conjunction with recent happonihgs, he said, tho re-election of Mr. Rcaidon furnished proof that an insignificant minority could sometimes make a- noise out or all proportion to its numerical. strength or moral influence. Although lie might offer somo ,little comment, on tho existing state, of affairs, ho had , neither the intention nor tho inclination to add to the number of sham economists and pseudo-Social-ists .with which this cdony ' was infest-' ed, and ho would decline'to be associated , with any party, whose principal argument was the incessant and unreasoning, abuse .of tho "other fellow." "It is perhaps to tho cultured and leisured class that Socialism; makes its strongest' appeal." So said l Philip Snowdon. It was evident that Snowden's conception, of Socialism was tho verv. antithesis of tho ribald Socialism with- which we had lately become so unpleasantly familiar—the one attracted ■ while tho other repelled. But perhaps this colony had not yet been long enough established to produce anything approaching a truly "cultured class." One had but to spend half an hour in our local "House of Commons".to realise, that it took more than one generation to'produce a' cultural class. Possibly Parliament was not quite the place in which to look for any marked evidence .of culture, since the most' cultured sons of. the Dominion could only gain admission ( to it through a kind of back door, known as the Legislative Council. All this forced-one to the conclusion that' industrial warfare in New Zealand simply meant Jack on foot fighting Jack onhorseback.' Each saw in each other , 3 nature the objectionable elements common to both, hence they quarrelled. And what a beastly, quarrel! Nearly all "Mr. Hyde" and but very little of "Dr. Jekjll." Their quarrel was that of dogs over' a bone, as Sir Oliver Lodge aptly put it; The quarrel of tho canaille of ■to-day on foot, and those of yesterday on horseback. In a moral sense, Mr. Campbell said he failed to see any essential difference between the rude mountebank of tho soap-box, who ruthlessly ronsigned all moral and legal obligations to tho .care of Minos, and the supposedly responsible Minister of the Crown who publicly affirmed that consistency was a proof of mental aberration'.; One was on foot, the other was in temporary possession of a kind of wooden "gesgee." Each was eminently successful in outraging the canons of prudence and ofVgood taste. He (Mr. Campbell) thought, it was highly desirable that we should appraise our fellows by a moral, rather thau by a political, etantlard: '. The difference fret ween one class and nncther was mainly, if not entirely, due to fortuitous circumstances. Surely it was grotesquely absurd to assume that an employer was bad for no reason otlier than that he was an employer. was equally, stupid to claim inherent virtue for the artisan'or labourer as such. In all cases in which right and wrong were in conflict, one should consider neither class nor party. Perspnnlly he had nothing but contempt foM'ho rt.ffionly de-' magogue who incited-his dupes to commit crime. Such a person could no sense' of shame,'' other '' than' to jdorr in it. hi conclusion, Mr. Campbell expressed himself-as exceedinelv* gratified that his union had Tepeatedly"repelled the ad/Alices' of thp oartv of anarchy, and had remained loyal to a party, the leaders of wluch -■would qivo no vicious counsels«to their followers—leaders who were men of probity and of calm judgment, and who were not at all likely to invoke the assistance of Mr. Young's phantom army.