FARMERS’ UNION AND POLITICS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1589, 30 October 1905, Page 3

FARMERS’ UNION AND POLITICS.

KTo the Editor Gisborne Bir,—Mr A. R. Watson's’ moralising letter on this head to one who happens to know facts which are not disclosed, reminds one of the saying, “ Do as ihe parsod Bays, but not as he doas* If Mr Watson had boon candid ho might have told you a candidate has been practically selected before the questions were askedi let alone answered, for he moved a motion at the meeting of delegates the other evening, selecting a certain oandidato as the Farmers’ Union candidate, conditional only on this select candidate aoswering the three union queationa satisfactorily. When this motion wbb moved and seconded, it was qaito apparent from the remarks that followed, that the whole 'thing was cat and dried before the meeting started, and it was merely for the look of things that he afterwards withdrew his motion, so that the form of asking the questions could first be gone through. Not only that, two of tho delegates at that

meeting, stated their branches had ( held no meeting on the questions, and they had appointed themselves as the i delegates. Two others present olaimed to be delegates oi branches, one of whioh was defunot if the rules of the union are to be respected; the other olaims to represent a new-born branch of which there is no official record; and still another olaimed to represent a braueh oi which - there is no official record, and supposed to be out off from,another parent branch decided that it was inadvisable to make any selection of a political candi- " L-v. date, and, I Understand, for this reason ' ' refused to send a delegate. Now, at this meeting of delegates there

was a total of nine so-called delegates. Oi those nine I have shown that five wore either self'appointad or represented branches whioh had no existence according to the rules of the union, Is there any wonder that a meeting constituted in this way, and having things out and dried to support a particular candidate, should decide to excludo tho press? I for one, in the intorosts of the union, will protest egaiust such tactics, and will havo no hesitation in asking others to absolutely disregard any conclusion they may come to. 1 deplore that suob an I.) Bifcempt should bo mado to moke uso of i ■ the union for party purposes in this way. Tboro is much good and useful work to be done by the unioD, but no good ean come from tactics of this kind.—l am, etc., ‘ W. DOUGLAS LYSNAR,