REV. HOWARD ELLIOTT IN REPLY

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 117, 4 February 1918, Page 7

REV. HOWARD ELLIOTT IN REPLY

■■ . .—» ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND LABOUR. . (To.the Editor.) Sir,—l have been unabla to find time to reply to Mr. Gilmore's letter of the 24th ult. until now. Ido not propose to follow my opponent further into the waste and howling wilderness or words | in which he delights to find refuge. This shall be my final reply to him. If Mr. Gilmore thinks that he can get from'me what many a. more clever man. than he has failed to got, he is much mistaken. Confidential information is civen to me, and the very, fact that I treat it as such enables, me to get information: lam every day in receipt of information upon many and diverse matters, and while the public know that' their confidences are not betrayed information will continue to come to me. Many another beside Mr. Galmore would give much to obtain soma of the documents and information which I hold. Ido not, therefore intend to furnish your correspondent with the names of my informants ■ The statement which I made that the Labour seats in . the present Parliament are held by the vote of tho Roman political machine rests upon tho testimony of men whoso knowledge an characters are unimpeachable. Then votes in the House supports the statement, whilst Mr. Gilmore has failed to respond to my invitation to. name a Labour man who holds bis seat in <M face of Rome's opposition, the reason being that there is not one. Mr. Gnmore's confession that he took part as a waterside worker iii tho 1913 strike will furnish jour readers information by the light of which, all Wellingtcnians at least, will be assisted to form a judgment on this controversy, ine fact that a rebel flag was used to call tho strike committee together (if that was its purpose as alleged) -coufnns the ■statements I have made as to Roman influence in the ranks of some sections of Labour, even as far back as 1913. And notwithstanding Mr. Arbuckle s denial that the rebel flag of Ireland was displayed whilst Mr. Webb returned thanks for his election, the fact is vouched for by many eye-witnesses. I j would assure my opponent that 1 am in no danger of being confused by the green lights of Wellington. It is the' !<rcen flag without the crown that is creating confusion in these days. Mr. Gilmore has unwittingly, and, I am sure, unwillingly, supplied confirmation of my contention that the Romanists put Mr. Webb into Parliament by his admission that the colours of Mr. Hannah, the Romanist candidate, were intertwined with thoee of Mr Webb at the time of the second ballot. The' colours tell the whole story. If Mr. Gilmore writes many rnoro letters he will furnish confiimation to every one of my contentions instead of refuting them, but then he had influenza wheh he wrote, and that militates agaiiist clear-headedneßS. _ The ground has been changed with reference to the Paruell election. First of all I supported Mr. J. J. Sullivan, iiow the' National School? Dofenoe League 'supported him, and I was a member that league. It remains the fact nevertheless that I did not take an ,, part whatever in ' assisting Mr. Sullivan's candidature.

I am assured that fkere is no necessity for me to intimate to the tramwaymen of Wellington that Mr. Gilmore's insinuation that I reflected upon the men and the uniform in my previous letter is entirely unwarrantable and unworthy. No reflection rf»s intend ed, and I am sure none will be linden stood by the men concerned. I conclude by reiterating the hope that Protestant Labour men will see to it that tho great cause of Labour is not sacrificed by intrigue to alien interests, and that the leadership resides in the hands of men who are loyal, patriotio, and Protestant.—l am, etc., HOWARD ELLIOTT. Wellington, February S, 1918.