THE GENERAL STRIKE

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2828, 20 July 1916, Page 6

THE GENERAL STRIKE

NO PLEBISCITE PROPOSED

•■REFERENCE IN- THE COUNCIL

PRESS COMMENT REPUDIATED

When the report of the managers upon the Military Service Bill was received in the Legislative Council yesterday afi ternoon the Hon. J. T. Paul rose to , speak on the general aspects of tho • Bill., " ; ... . • " . Sir Francis Bell: I hope tho hon. member will wait for the report of the second conference. Discussion at the present time ivill only complicate matters. Mr. Paiil : I desiro to discuss a question which is causing much public interest'at the present time in. connection ■with this Bill, and that is in part relat«l to those portions of ..tho Bill which <nro.tlie subject of discussion. -Sir' Francis Bell: It is very inconveni•®nt, but of coureo if you'liko to do it ■ Bo one can stop yon. Mr. Paul said the matter he referred to was the alleged proposal of tho United ' federation of Labour to declare a_ general ' ' strike when tho Military .Service. Bill '' came into operation. "I have had a con- ; 'fliderable.experience in this country and . in Australia with the Press, and it is, I , " think, particularly dangerous to the interests of the community in a crisis like "tliis," and likely to be particularly embarrassing to the Government of this .'country, if the Pressdeliberately—because : there is no other word that fits'.the posi- . ..tion—begins and continues, a campaign which puts obstacles in the way of the s fair working of ;i measure, of this description. Now it is alleged _that at tho recent, conference of the United Federai tion of Labour —- ' Sir Francis Bell: Ido submit that this is not relevant. (Hear, heaT.) . The Speaker: The hon. gentleman must . . ilimit his remarks to the special matters 'referred to in the Message.' The hon. „ gentleman's remarks do not refer to any ,of the. clauses mentioned, nor to any cognate matters. Mr. Paul said he did not "desire to contest tlie ruling. Ho would find another : opportunity to make his remarks. An Explanation.' . The Hon. J. T. Paul subsequently explained to, a reporter how the iniscon- ■;; " caption arose regarding the Federation of Labour's alleged proposal for a plebis-, . ' cite of unions on the question of a genoral strike to prevent the ' vice Act being put into operation. "The position is; shortly, this," said Mr. Paul, "that the recent conference of. the.United Federation of Labour considered tho Military Service . Bill and the -report of u committee in connection therewith. ; . -Whilst considering the . report of the , committee several proposals in' opposi- . tion to tho Bill were made. One of ' -'these was the proposal for a plebiscite of the unions on the question of a general strike when the Military Service Bill came into'operation.' In committeo that proposal was carried, and inadvert- .. . cntly supplied to'the'Press. . The conference then adjourned, and the follow- . ing morning the remainder of the report of the committee was considered. The 1 strike proposal was defeated when tho ..: matter was considered in open oonfer- ■ once, and the official declaration of tho . conference was then supplied to the Press.' In the official'report no mention is made of the plebiscite on the • - proposal for a general strike, the only - matter to be referred, to the ,"unions ' ■ being the, question "Are you in favour • of conscription of men as imposed in the Military Service Act?" •

Reply to "The Dominion." Further interviewed; the Hon. J. T. Paul! made the following statement: "My intention was to enter an emphatic protest against the ' unfairness of; tlio criticism of The . Dominion and the Christchurch 'Press 1 newspapers in connection with the'alleged decision of the Federation to vtake a plebiscite vote of the unions on. the question of a general strike. The of The Dominion is particularly unpardonable, because on turning to its own columns I find that the only report of the conference deci- ; sions on the Military Service Bill contains no reference to any proposal relating to a general strike. It, -there-, fore, built its: leading article on a report which appeared elsewhere. My particular-. complaint refers to the' leading , article in The Dominion on 'Tuesday ast, headed "Die Labour Extremists.' It is a particularly violent and vitriolic ' eondemnatioa of the United Federation of Labour. Tho first half of its article refers to - the-reported decision' of tho Greymouth Waterside "Workers' Union oil 1 a letter from the United Federation of Labour, with re- . ferenco to tho alleged general strike proposal. The second part of the leader is • a glorification of , Mr. Isitt for his cas■Kgation of-'tho Labour members in the House of Representatives, about which I bavo nothing to say. But it is more ■ than ; "remarkable—and in my opinion , fitarapsTnE Dominion as deliberately unVfair in its treatment of Labour—when it .is pointed out that in its own columns of : the samo day is an official denial by the secretary of the United Federation of Labour that any letter had been sent to • tho Greymouth Union. One might liavo expected that at least'a word might have been found in its leading columns pointing out that this official denial had been made. I conclude—and I think my conclusion is justifiable—that The Dominion maliciously misled its readers by Vrand- : ing the Federation as disloyal, and suppressed in the same article any -reference to tho fact that -an official denial had been given; to the Press. The Practice of "Gentlemen." "With reference to the Christchurch' . 'Tress,' its attitude is somewhat different. It finds much, to commend in the ; reported notion of-the'waterside workers 'of Greymouth,' but it. does mention that a Federation, official bad-declared that the Federation had not asked any union : any question di the senrral strike. But it. also shows unjustifiable bias when it comments on the denial by saying "This is probably, true.' The standard among gentlemen—and a lower" standard ought ■not to be practised by a reputable newspaper—is to accept, a gentleman's denial. The. Christchurch - 'Press? - accepted the secretary's-denial by saying it was 'probably true.' | ■ ' "This," said Mr. Paul in conclusion, "is in no senso a personal complaint. My only desire to refer to it-at all is to seo that all unnecessary, friction may bo eliminated in these hours of national 'trial. If ever it was necessary to have a nation united it is ' necessary now, and in my opinion such comments as have appeared in these two influential newspapers are likely to create difficulties for those who bare responsibilities in comietion with the Lalxjur organisation in this country."