A MISLEADING ARTICLE

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2171, 9 June 1914, Page 4

A MISLEADING ARTICLE

"THE indiscretions of Mil. EdWard TmjbAr in voieifig opinions oh La-1 bonr and social (jiiestiofts are ffliaU-.j i.ar to iiiost of on).' readers. Mr,. Tre-I OKA!'., who is a Socialist. Was at one j time head of the Labour Department i hsi'fc, and had an unfortunate habit ! of airing _ partisan views out or keeping with his pfßee. New that be is out of the Public Smic, though drawing a State pension, he. naturally feels himself .entitled to an even greater latitude !n expressing his personal opinion: and, to this no exception ;i,vi! Ee taken. But he still sws things with a"' very distorted vision, and we have again, to mate protest tin iliat iU-eonni. It will i>c recalled that during the teat cti ihe late strike Ik gave rent to his feelings in -a milliner wlvkr. provoked strong WHidenniaiaon from tflose >vk> ajfpreciai'id the very great service which il;e spfieial ctinsiables from eountry rendered the community during that period of turmoil anil disorder. It- was perhaps possible' to uiidersfand that a gontlomjin of; Mr. TioiuK/u'.'s einoi!ou-,il tfinner't-1 inent and holding' his viev.'s flight, j bd carried av.-ay liy the eiteifeiaeht of j the irtOßient arid be led into error.! But there is no excuse fosr the inac- : curacies aad slighting referi-neiis which appear in an art-ids written by .liim on January 11 (after the strike was _over) and pu.hiishetl in T'.i-e Aeic StalesUuin ox Mawh J4. He, for instance in the eoiir-so of. a distorted account of tha strike eudrtivnurs to niake. it appeal- that tte question at iss-ue was tite payment of bigher wages by the shipping

companies to the car|o workers. Ha writes:—"ln the vei'y first week of I the dispute the Government or tfa i local authorities could have put the I butter, wool, <:to., on board the shi;>s if ttey'liad Said to the watersidoi's: 'We will see that you are .paid fair j wages to do the work, and if the shipping companies will jic-t load' the J ships, we wiM, and charge thorn the cost."' Gould anything be more grossly misleading than this? At jib stage ef the strike- was the' question raised of the payment of fair wages to waterside workers.. On the ennI irafy. the watofsidets. were rcceivj ing a ritte of pay higher proinbly ! th.ii.ri. that, paid is any other British | community, and with which they were well satisfied. In another port ioit of the article ho refers to the special constables from the country as "tho raiding farmers," and he! j adds tho , proper touch of colour to ■ | the story 'by declaring that 1 "the ] patty of the wealthy" had shown j that they were "ready to start a jcivil war and fill the streets of the ! ports with Mood if they /can only I bea.t clown the defiant ' spirit of ] trades unicinis'ni." After such utter I balderdash as this it probably will | j surprise 'no oiie to teai-a that tie specials were considered to have been j brought into, town .by the Govern- ! incut "not. to ship iiuUer, hat to set. the rm.im.ry against the town and to incite riot instead of to help to keep the peace," Knall,y, referring is the Buckle Street riots, Jin. Tntior\r nvakes this extraordinary assertion: 'The next night crowds began to assemble in tho streets near the bai'meks where the- 'specials 5 xt&ti quartered, so military forces with t)?!>.ek-jir>nr] {pifis made their appearance." Ihiring the whole of . the strike, and the Court proceedings arising out of the Buckle Street riots, not the slightest reference was made ttf these rjuiek-firing gnns, for the simple reason, thai; no such guns were ever brought out by- tho military or asyone else. Ma, 'fREB-Eiin, iiawefer, apparently has heard ihe story somewhere—we can hardly believe that.he tawmfed ifc—andl ■ivitiioitt tniubling to verify it seiids it out to the. world to support his strangely perverted ver>um of the Strike. The eorresportdent who brought Mr. TRKSEAii's nrticte u.helcF our n.ltice ifl. evlitriiely' indignant that such misleading and lmscl'.ievous rubbish Should be ■ circulnted itlirond by 6te signing himself "Late i'crmanc-nt Bead of the. Labour Bo* piiftment of New Zealand." No doubt' the majority csf tho public will he inclined to^ agree with hjni. Mr.. TkecjEak is entitled to his opin- : ions., but when he professes to reeount the history .of the strike for. the edification of his brother Soeiali=sts- abroad, Ite should at h,*ast Vemembflr that he owes it to his Mlow citizens here to nmkc himself atquaintei.l with the real facts and to present shriu fairly.