HUNNISHNESS.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 17 July 1916, Page 2

HUNNISHNESS.

(To .The Editor.) Wir, —J oh 13 -Robertson ~in his Lateist admonition sayc>, ''And ii - lie has v kind of defence lie will trot it out." 1 intend to do so, and to stick to the point as well; the idea was, in iny first letter, stated, definitely; and in my second letter; and 1 will now try again to so clearly define the point that it cannot be dodged, side-Kteppi;:l oi' bluffed, but must" be squarely met. It is this, "That the dairy-work.'re had no right in tfie A.1M1., as they were not pastoral workers." John Robertson can read it in The ilanri'ainl Worker, so he will know it is tine, and Resides, it its also the interpretation of the law by the Labour Deportment of the relative positions of the A.P.IT. and the dairy workers. How can an agreement be arrived at between' two parties when one party >s ineligibleP John Robertson talks, and talts. and talks aSout an agrcmie it —amd there wae no valid agreement whatever. His argument evidon.lv runs on the line followed 'by Amy Boct.: slip desired matrimonial union, and got safely through, not only the preliminaries, but also secured complete registration. By John Robertson's reasoning, this would mean that Because it was a registered union' the marriage should .bold good, Hut everyone else knows that because the enterprising Amy was ineligible to take a wife the action of the parties was set aside. But the A.P.U. did not get as far as Amy before they were blocked by the law and told that they were ineligible to receive the dairy workers into the uu-

The representative delegates of the Levin Dairy Company to the Palmerston 'North meeting attended in their lawful capacity, and when it was demonstrated clearly that the action of the committee who met the representatives of the A.P.O. was not in order they did the only proper thing for them to do—voted out the action of the committee. There are other points 1 could refer to, but this is the main point (the Verdun of the campaign) and your readers will be interested in the means John Hobertson will employ to attack it. There are other defences in the rear, but tlie ineligibility of the parties to be united (and proved up to the hilt) is my main defetfee and it is impregnable against the assaults oi' John Robertson. T therefore await his onslaught with equanimity, after which I hope to have a turn in tlhe firing line again.—l am, etc., JAMES PBOUSE.