EDEN MIX-UP.

Hokitika Guardian, 29 June 1926, Page 4

EDEN MIX-UP.

DESCRIBED BY REFORAI AIEAIBER WELLINGTON, June 25. Another breeze from Eden livened up an otherwise dull afternoon in Parliament during tho Add.ress-in-Rcply debate to-day. Legislators having heard many Labour comments on the byelection, Air Potter, a Government member, who had taken the platform for Aliss Alelville*. Independent Reform candidate, declared that he felt bound to meet their assertions regarding bribery and corruption during the election/ He wished to unhesitatingly repeat what lie had said in Eden, that the Prime Minister and the party in Wellington had nothing to do with the mix-up which occurred. A 1 r P. Fraser: That’s right. AH Potter: Still 1 cannot hold the leader of our organisation in AYeilington free from the responsibility which be is bound to shoulder for matters in Eden. AW Potter said that be would have let the matter drop but for the fact that our party organisation’s news' paper stated decidedly that one member of the party (which could only menu himself) had fur personal reasons entered the campaign. He had no other method of repudiating this than by making a statement in the House and giving it an emphatic denial. “ Had it not been for the cool indifference of the Prime Minister and leader of our organisation the whole matter of Eden could have been discussed and settled amicably within the party ranks, but when the organiser appointed by our party came down to such tactics that caused some of the most loyal of our supporters in times of stress, when we did not know whether we were in the ascendant or descendant, to fool aggrieved, including Miss Alelville, who put up such a great fight against Al.r Bart rain in a Labour stronghold. I felt it my bounden duty to uphold the principles of Reform, not the party controlling Reform,. I am upholding the principles of the party laid down by our laic chief, tho square deal, and T maintain Aliss Melville never received at the hands of the Reform Party justice and the favour she deserved.” AN UNDERSTANDING ALLEGED. Air Potter went on to declare Fiat certain promises were made Miss .Melville at the general election that certain forces would be behind her, and this was decided at a meeting of tho Reform executive in Auckland and because they wanted to show the women of New Zealand that they wore in luvoitr of women entering Parliament. Thousands of votes were east at the election throughout New Zealand for the Government because of that decision. He could hardly he accused of disloyalty to his party. Ho was first loyal to its principles. “I regret what happened, and I don’t want any congratulations from the Labour lender on having loaned him a member for three years. 1 prefer to see that unknown candidate come out instead of someone who never assisted us by deed or word. I refused to see that person nominated and selected in an unauthorised way by the Reform Party. The selection was not carried out in accordance with its constitution, otherwise tho difficulty, would never l ave occurred. T am convinced that tho public are applauding the action of Aliss Melville in coming out to try and boat a vote-splitter. 1 am not the only member representative of the Reform Government who did not wont to see Sir .James Gunson nominated for the Reform Party.” SIB JAMES GUNSON’S POLITICS. Mr Potter asked the House to trace with him Sir James Gunscm’s political history from 1919 when, as he alleged, that gentleman issued large placards advocating “the Independent Progressive Party, new men and non methods.” That meant, be was absolutely opposed to the Reform policy and to its late leader. Tims lie remained up till 1925. lie was asked before the general election, but would not stand for tho party. Though he was told they needed men of calibre, lie definitely and distinctly turned down their offer. “If the Reform Party had given just dues to Aliss Alelville, that lady,” continued Air Potter, “would have been a member and a credit to this House. She is not an inexperienced politician. She is known the length and breadth of New Zealand, and nothing was more contemptible than the treatment meted out to her by certain supposed supporters ul the Reform Party ill Auckland. So far as I am concerned there is no disruption. 1 stand by Reform principles, but I do take exception to any clique or body as well known in Auckland as ‘ the Kelly Gang or the Folly Thieves.’ They occur in every town, Air Speaker, and I am convinced that this very section who supported Sir James Gunson in 1919, when he was ill strong opposition to the Government, wanted to form a new party. They got a sudden wave of conversion and became loyal Reformers. Mas their conversion in the interests of the people or our party or ill their own self-interest ?”