PRE-SESSIONAL.

Hokitika Guardian, 17 June 1924, Page 4

PRE-SESSIONAL.

(New Zealand Tillies)

As usual lie loir a session of Pnrlia»<•’lit politicians are much in evidence on platforms in various places, talking of many things they regard as twuchi/ic; the political iiitoro'., for which they .stand. The ti’-0.-t notable among these demonsUa.inVls is the agVcClnent between members of the Reform and Labour parties that T“jeralism is a spool force. The utterances of the members of the Reform Party mostly take the shape of eulogies of their party us the only one that lias khutors alio have proved hy their acts t.o he the only people capable of administering the affairs of this four. try. On the Labour vide live claim is laughed to scorn., -find the scorn is coupled with the statement that the Liberals, having nearly all joined Lie Reform Party, no longer emy.i't, as a force in politics. But neither party has attempted to. deal "with outstanding main facts Hint Liberal principles are. both by their foundations and their practical application here and c’.-.ea hero, endowed wh h perennial Vigour and ol indestructible power. In opposition to the Reform Party theory, we note the members of the Liberal Party repeatedly denying the Reform leaders’ claim to any initiative whatever, and denouncing them for conspicuous failures at all the points of their administration. Wo have also the declaration of many members of the Parliamentary Liberal Party— Messrs Forbes, of Tlnrumii, end .McPherson of OaumviV, supplying the mo-t recent instances—that the Reformers are a 'minority Government which parades us Its own tile Liberal measures which they spent years in vainly opposing. As signs fboC Lilwralism »s asserting itself ri. a living force these statements ’.We important. On the other hand, the host reply to the f.a----1/0111 Leader's idea that Liberalism is dead is that the expression of that iib'h is gross ingratitude. The lopic ot hostile and interested speech is, in lact. that Liberalism bar, by ir< results, proved the righteous strength of its principles, and the beneficial ilfect of their application. Doubly they represent tlie truth, which must prevail because it is great.

The next notable incident ot this piesessional campaigning is the clash between .Mr Atmnre and Lite Leader of Parliamentary Labour. Mr Atmnre preferred tut indictment against individual members of that party and its organs as representing the who e, Jo this Mr Holland has replied. But he hj. not replied categorically, merely confining himself to one charge only, the charge that lie* mentioned two alternatives for the triumph of the proletariat—constitutional or revolutionary procedure. The charge was, of course, hy implication that the Labour Leader wivs ready for either. -Mr Hollands reply made much ol the omission of certain words, hut those words cannot bo said to be material, because they do not affect the fact of the alternative. Air Holland’s implication that lie is aver so to the revolutiomirv alternative, which he only mentioned because it is obviously in the picture, ol course not In; bis means, is entitled to consideration. But his answer would have been stronger if ho had met distinctly tho other implication hy a. declaration of rooted hostility to the revoltiti ui.uy method. The rest of the Atmore charges he took no notice of in his reply—those of hostility to the Empiro and expressions of sympathy • ith .Marxian Sovietism, and the political character of the Alliance oJ Labour. II nothing further is heard in defence, tile public will certainly regard the charges as proved bv default.

Tho railway strike was no, passed over in this campaign. It was referred to by Air Holland, so far as a portion of its aftermath is conorued. Mo mean the compulsory sevcrancei of tnu uililiatioii of the A.S.R.t’L to the Alliance of Labour. This he criticised as a breach by Air .Massey of the Versailles Treaty—signed hy himself, securing to Labour all over flic world the unrestricted right of organisation. It i» true that the treaty gives: fall right o! organisaiou. Blit the treaty dues not commit any Government to be politically coerced by a political orgi.n.-a-

lion, which the Labour Alliance has been proved to lie, as .Air Aiinure lias pointed oat. That would lie an abrogation ol I lie rights of Gnwrnutcnl.s which no asseii'.i.'lv of statesmen ennbi possibly have agreed to. 'I lie treaty mii-t'he read as .savin;; exist ini', rijtlits. sneli, at all eionls. as are not spmiically aholidied in the treaty. flic treaty eertainiy d ies not support Air Holland's complaint.

We eonelnde with the conviction that Liberalism in New Zealand—whieh has strong .support everywhere—lias easily survived the ‘hock of unfounded assault: that the Parliamentary l.alunr Party lias not yet elearod itself from the At more charges of hostility to tile Kill pi rc and the design of using industrial organisation for political purposes; that the treaty claim of the right of Government services to :tl!iliate with the Alliance of Labour is luLile. So holding, we await the session undisturlicd liy fear of anv possible happening, electoral or otherwise.