LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 58, 2 December 1919, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

FARMERS' DNIONAND POLITICS , Sir,—Your report under (he above heading in to-day's issue is not comet in stating that E "issued the policy in the shape of a manifesto" (as a candidate for Otaki), and signpd the document for the committee of thp. iJanavatu Sub-Provin-cial Executive of the Farmers' Union. Doubtless eonio will be pleased to keep me going repudiating these, false statements. Your report is aiso incorrect in (several other less important matters that peiihfljis I need noli waste time over, i'or the twentieth time I give briefly the facts: At a Bitting: of the Farmers' Union Sub-Provincial Executive at Levin in September last, my suggestion to formulate a fannerfi' political policy was warmly supported, particularly by 11 r. C. J. Harkness. I was asked* to nominate a committee for this purpose, ami did so, and was appointed convener. Tho only member of tlie committee who al> tended at tho time' appointed was II r. A. Monk, to whom I trubmitted the policy I had drawn up, and wilio approved name. Mr, Harkness appeared two hours late. He also staled Miat there was nothing in tho policy he objected to. I informed both these gentlemen Hint I intended then to become a candidate, and would make the policy given the basis of my own a? a candidate,, Subsequently a further attempt to meet tho committee) failed, Mr. Harkness .absenting, hut I mado the same statements to and placed the policy before several other members, who also made no objections. Finally, a meeting of the committee was held while the confprenco im? sitiing- at Palmerston North, in :i small room adjoining lihe conference room. Again I informed members (Mr. Harkness again absent) of my intention to become a candidate, before presenting , the policy, which so far received only praise, and tho committee recommended (in their report to tho conference immediately handed in (o our president) that the policy bo adopted and printed mid circulated to branches and other executives in tlis North Island. Luter in the day I moved tho adoption of tho report in the usual wny, and it was again' carried without dissent. Before doing so, however, I made the same preliminary remark of my intention to become a, candidate and use tlie policy. Perhaps had Mr. Field been willing lo accept and support the policy, we Hliould not have heard tho subsequent snorts. On being confronted by tho minute book (the minutes having I)cen read and confirmed) to prove the use of the word "adopt" and not tho word "approve," Mr. Harkness (who was absent when t'iiu minute was made) immediately jumped up and said tho minute was wrong and should bo resciud;d. Whedher "adopted' , or "approved," however, tho intention was the same, viz., to go to branches as a. "remit" in the usual way. beforo finally bjing passed. In referring to it, I have always explained this. Yet mis-skitement is persisted in. If you will in justice please insert the foregoing, I can forgive your reporter for "condensing" these things out.—l am, EVELYN MACDONALD. Te Horo, December 1, 1919. r\Y'e are pleased to give Mr. Macdonaid's version of bis differences with other members of (iho Fanners' Union.— Editor, Dominion'.] LIQUOR POUSJORY DISTRICTS Sir,—ln the event of continuance being carried at the licensing poll r.t the general election, will the "dry" districts become "wet," or what ell'ect will it have, as liiero will bo no local option poll? Many of us are deeply interested in this question and would like a definite statement about it.—l an., etc.. A SOLDIER'S MOTfIEH. [It is provided it. fecliou 57 of the Licensing Amendment Act of IMS (hat in nb-licenso districts the. questions relating to local restoration may bo submitted at the next general licensing poll, and if there h a three-fifths majority in favour of local restoration in any nohcenso district tho licenses shall be restored.—Editor, Dominion.]