THE UNITY CAMPAIGN.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VII, Issue 551, 19 March 1913, Page 6

THE UNITY CAMPAIGN.

By J. A. McCullougb. Workers' Representative, Arbitration Court. Giant Labour, truest emblem there is of God, the World Worker, Demiurgue, and Eternal Maker; noble Labour, which is yet to be King of this earth, and sit in on the highest throne—staggering hitherto like a blind irrational giant, hardly allowed to have his common place on the street pavements; idle Dilettantism, Dead Sea Apism crying out, "Down with him; he is dangerous!" Labour must become a seeing rational giant, with a soul in the body of him, and take his place on the throne of things, leaving bis Mammonism and several other adjuncts on the lower steps of said throne: "Past and Present"— Thomas Carlyle. Those of us who had not the privilege of being present at the Trade Union Congress at Wellington in January evidently missed an inspiring time; and may as a consequence be pardoned if they fail to display the same, enthusiasm that distinguishes all those whom I have met who were present. The result was glorious—marvellous, if you choose. But, taking this for granted, all that has happened up to the present is that a number of very important resolutions were carried unanimously, and with enthusiasm. This is not the first congress where such things have happened. Well do I remember with what wild enthusiasm the Socialists of Britain greeted the fact that the Trades Union Congress had carried a resolution endorsing "the nationalisation of the means of production, distribution, and exchange." If my memory serves me right, John Burns and Tom Mann were responsible for the resolution; Now, Burns is a Right Honourable and a Minister in a Liberal Cabinet, our old friend Mann a Syndicalist who discounts political action; and the British trades union movement, accused —quite wrongly in my opinion—of only being a wing of. the Liberal Party. So in New ealand we have year after year carried resolutions at our Trades Council Conferences, in favour of closer federation. Our first Trades and Labour Conference was held in Dunedin in Jnauary 1885, with 43 delegates attending. The first avowed object this congress had was "To promote the better oragnsation of the working classes." Conference after conference, year after year, has continued to carry resolutions in favour of "closer organisation" and a "Federation of all unions." This sort of work cannot be accomplished without resolutions, I admit, but contend very earnestly neither can it be accomplished by resolutions alone. These are not the times when the citadels of capitalism can be thrown down as were the walls of Jericho, by the sounding of a ram's horn. The writer has assisted at the birth and the obsequies of a number of working class organisations. He was one of those who assisted Professor Mills in his Unity Campaign. He was fortunate enough to be one of the 75 delegates attending the Unity Conference when the United Labour Party was brought into existence. It was somewhat of a wrench xo see the "Trades Council Federation"—which had tak«n years to secure—absorbed, and his beloved Labour Party merged into the U.L.P. It was a much greater trial to him to find that not only was the Federation of Labour and the Socialist Party not prepared to take the place for them and assist in the building up of a United Labour Party, but worse than all this to find that both these organisations went out of their way to denounce and malign those who had agreed on a basis of Unity. Thpse are the trials that shake our faith in human nature and leave the fear that perhaps after all it is his Satanic Majesty that controls our destinies. All the above will appear pessirhistic and discouraging to the enthusiast who attended the recent conference and returned believing that we were now on the eve of the millenium. The writer's age and experience forbid him believing this, and yet he is young and enthusiastic enough to believe that as a result of the conference a revolution may be achieved. I was struck by the remark of one of the most prominent of the Federationists at t.ie conference when he declared that until the conference he had no idea that the New Zealand Labour movement possessed so many men of marked ability. He declared that after a long and intimate acquaintance with the Australian Labour movement that our men were more than the equal of the best men in the Australian movement. To one who has had special opportunities of associating with the "front rankers" in both camps this estrangement and misunderstanding—not to say animosity has been a bitter experience. The ability displayed by men on one side has been discounted by men on the other side; worse than this even was the fact that many on both sides were not prepared to give one another 'credit even for common honesty. Slight differences of opinion with regard to tactics were magnified into a sacrifice of principle, with the resultant denunciation and vindictive personal attack These personal quarrels have been a curse to our movement. Let us hope that we are on the eve of a better understanding. For years I have thought and taught that the emancipation of the wageearner and final overthrow : of what is known as the capitalist system could

only be accomplished by securing control of the parliamentary machine, and that this could be most effectively accomplished by a judicious use of th* industrial organisations for political purposes. I thought, and think now, that so closely interwoven are the in dustrial and political problems that it is a waste of time, money and energy to duplicate the machinery for dealing with them. As a result of so many others agreeing with me in this, the U.L.P. was founded and built up. There were 175 delegates present at the conference that evolved the U.L.P. with its Objective and Platform and its national executive council containing a chosen representative from each of the thirteen groups which constituted the organisation There were over 100 delegates at the recent conference, and they have decided that to secure practically the same objective, two organisations with apparently two national executives are essential. I don't believe this is necessary—but Ido believe it is necessary, nay absolutely essential, that we should have unity of purpose, and whatever solidarity is possible. Therefore, if to secure unity it is necessary to have two national parties I have neither time nor inclination to quarrel with those who have declared for two. This, after all, is only a question of tactics, and not one of principle.