SIR JOSEPH WARD AND LABOUR,

Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 4 March 1915, Page 2

SIR JOSEPH WARD AND LABOUR,

THE REJECTION OF

MEMBERS

A NUT TO CRACK LATER O:

[FROM THE " DOMINION "]

It is very plain that the Labour- <\ Socialists, who, to suit their 1 plans, took Sir Joseph Ward to \ their bosom and promised hrm i their assistance against the Re- j form Government, have no . illusions concerning their future^ relations with the Wardists. That fire-eating moutjygkse of - the Social Democra/^? cause, "■ "The Maoriland Worker," in a recent issue went to some pains" to make it quite clear to the Leader of the Oppposition That in the matter of fundament- * alo Labour and Liberalism have ..'- ---nothing in common; that the difference between the Reform Party and the Liberal Party is only a factional difference of degree; that the economic interests which foundation the politics of both the Liberal and Reform Parties are : that Labour in Parliament will fight its own battles nr its own way, and that Labour members in Parliament will not take part., in the Liberal caucus or line up : at the crack of the Liberal whip. The passage quoted above from the official organ of the Social ' Democratic Party is by way of rebuke to Sir Joseph Ward for presuming to assume the role of interpreter of Labour's aims and aspirations, and more especially by way of contradiction of certain of the utterances of the Leader of the Opposition in his* desperate endeavour to persuade the electors of Dunedin Central to return the Labour-Socialist candidate. It savours somewhat of ingratitude on the part of the Labour-Socialists to find their

newspaper denouncing Sir Joseph Ward's well-meant efforts to persuade the public that Mr Munro

was neither "Red Fed" nor "Socialist." The "Maorilarid Worker," however, is not at all inclined to permit the Leader of the Opposition to deceive either himself or the public as to the objective of his new allies. Labour," it states, "has nothing to hide and nothing to apologise for. Its objective in all countries is frankly Socialism. To attempt to smother up the fact \«ould not be politic neither would it be honest." But the iinkindest cut of all is the suggestion tlu& instead of helping Mr Munr<J Sir Joseph Ward's advocacy really injured his candidature.' We really do not think," com*' tnents the journal before quoted,? that Sir Joseph's apologetic?propaganda and inaccurate J#' terances greatly helped iS Munro. On the contrary, we fear that the effect was 'otherwise. Sir Joseph's unhappy attempt to convince the electors that it was not straight-out Labour that was making the fight was both unfortunate and^ demoralising." The point ot chief interest to the public in this outspoken criticism of the Leader of the Opposition by the official organ of the Labour Socialists, is the confirmation itaffords of the unpleasant fact which Sjr Joseph Ward is so loth to recognise : That is, that the Labour-Socialists do not trust him, and that they desire merely to use him as their politioaj tool lhey had hoped to create a' situation which would place Sir j Joseph Ward in office, dependent ! on some half-dozen Labour- " Socialist votes, and that they would thus be able to squeeze out of him those revolutionary changes to be found in what is ! known as their " fighting plat" j torm. The plans of tlje allies j Having miscarried, the qbJactive ' of the Labour-S,ocialistsJ*lqon-tessed with the utmost and without the slightest regard tor the feelings of those wb,q -;-; nave been endeavouring tQ keen -# this unpleasant aspect of the alliance in the background. Sir >X Joseph Ward must find his '% Labour-Socialist allies a great }\