WORKER REPLIES TO E. G. MARTIN.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXV, Issue 1078, 20 March 1913, Page 3

WORKER REPLIES TO E. G. MARTIN.

(To the Editor.) Sir.—Kindly allow me to again reply to E. G. Martin. He still imagines he is right in reference to t’;o points at issue, aud says he will stand by his statement that he was within hearing of Holland when he was speaking about Evans and the revolver in Main Street on Sunday, March 9th. I am willing to stake my lile that the said E. G. Martin was neither present nor within hearing when the statement I refer to was uttered. Now, sir, I am quite satisfied that E. G. Martin must have dreamt he was there, or else he is suffering from a severe spasm of imagination. But I suppose he thinks he is correct. Well, there’s no harm in him thinking he was there, but his conscience, and he says he has got one, must prick him, as he wants to convince your readers that he is correct. But, could you tell, Mr Editor, if a man was speaking at the triangle would it be possible for you to hear him if you were standing at Dr. Mandl’s corner ? lam quite sure nobody could, unless of course, he had extraordinary hearing ability. This, sir, is what my argument is, as the said E. G. Martin was fully that distance away when the statements referred to were made. I will let your readers judge for themselves as to that point. The question I asked him re the bullet has got him in a corner, as he apparently can’t answer it, but puts it off by saying that it verifies his argument against my tacts and its for me to answer. I think, sir, that it was a fair question, but seeing he has failed to answer it, proves that I have him cornered. Your correspondent says it _is significant that out of a population of over 6,000 only 894 signed that petition and insinuates that they were my class of “workers or shirkers.” Apparently he does not know that they were the business people of that town, who were compelled to appeal tor protection on account of the dastardly and cowardly action ot the strikers, who, towards the later stages of the strike resorted to violence when they found they were defeated. E. G. Martin is very amusing in his phase of “the stamp of workers to which I belong—the genuine sort.” If he is a genuine one, then, sir, I would rather not join his ranks, as it was these “genuine ones,” as he terms it, that caused all the trouble at Waihi. He also says that his reason for writing over his name is because he has nothing to be ashamed of. Well, sir, some individuals have no idea of what the “truth” is, bat so long as they think they are right they are quite satisfied, but let me inform E. G. Martin that my grounds are more solid than his, it is his that is letting him down, but he can’t see it. Perhaps he doesn’t want to. I am sorry I am annoying him by choosing to write under a nom-de-plume, but because I won’t let him into the know, he claims my statements to be unreliable, but when all comes to all he will find that mine are more reliable than his. And, this would-be “big gun” states that he will combat any misleading statements made by me or anyone else, either through the press or at the street corner. Does he think the public want his version of the affairs ? Everyone knows the real truth of Waihi as they know E. G. Martin, and don’t want his “solid truth” as be calls it. Now, Mr Editor, I appeal to you that this great E. G. Martin, who apparently thinks he knows a lot, has gone completely away from the point at issue. Ido not want to know what he did when he went to Waihi. nor do I want any of his correct records of the strike from start to finish, we are not discussing the Waihi strike. The argument I hold is that Holland contradicted himself when he was speaking here about Evans not having a revolver, and then saying that the bullet would not fit his (Evans') revolver. I admit, sir, I mentioned Waihi, but that was because this individual so misrepresented the police force, who, everybody will admit, carried out their duties faithfully. But, sir, unless E. G. Martin keeps to the point and discontinues to dodge as he is doing now, I will not waste any more of my time trying to convince him that he is in the wrong. The rest of his letter as tar as I can see is “twaddle,” but let him keep to my argument and some day he may have enough sense to see through the foolish statements he has made. Hoping, sir, I have not taken too much liberty in your valuable columns. — l am, etc., Worker.