Mr. Reardon Once More.

Maoriland Worker, Volume 3, Issue 79, 13 September 1912, Page 4

Mr. Reardon Once More.

Mr. Reardon's letter is disappointing. Yes, working-class solidarity is the thing. And we'll keep the issue to that. We might easily remind the complaining Koardon of his splenetic and vigorous onslaughts upon the Federation of Labor and upon Fcderationists, which would justify any castigation in rebuttal or resentment. Instead, we'll get straightway to the contents of his letter. "We have disposed of Mr. Eeardon's grievance anent Mr. Rickey's letter by giving him ample room for putting himself right with our readers, and expressing regret if he has been wronged. Mr. Hjckcy will doubtless do the sar.me if he has made a mistake. We shall hear from him, and do not propose to write to the Sydney Trades Council. On June 14 we published an official statement from the Freezing Works Federation signed by Messrs. Wallis (president), Falgar (vice-president), and Ellis (secretary). The official statement was in part an exposure of Mr. Reardon, and was published "by request. That it had been refused by the partisan and corrupt daily press was unknown to ns until Mr. Reardon so informed us—but the refusal seems all the more reason why we should find a place for an official statement from a big and representative working-class organisation, for duty of the kind is one justification for our existence. However, Mr. Reardon was offered space to reply to the statement. * He did not dp so, but now drags in the- matter three months later. The Freezing Works Federation will now know what sort of a daily press it trusted with its correspondence, seeing that said daily press told Mr. Reardon "all about it! •'Maiicious correspondents " as Messrs. Wallis, Falgar and Ellis may he called, wo wero not aware that they published extracts from "private and confidential" letters of Mr. Reardon's, though if the extracts were contemptible their private and confidential character would nbt lessen tlie contemptibility. This dispute is between the Freezing Works Federation and Mr. Reardon. Mr. Reardon's conduct in relation to strike and lock-out does brand him and is indefensible. He is president of the Trades Hall Council of Wellington, which Council "turned down" strike and lock-out both traitorously and hypocritically; and it not only did tin's, but it officially sent letters to Labor organisations in Australia designed to prevent financial aid being rendered to men on strike and locked-out. All that we have said in this connection bears upon that President who connived at the decisions and acts or kept silence about them. Our accusations against the Council covered some columns of analysis and comment upon the facts. The Council knows the nature of our charges. Mr. Reardon knows it also. Our readers know it. Trades Council deeds are our proofs. Trades Council resolutions and letters are our evidence. Our allegations were founded upon them. Our censures demanded Mr. Eeardon's defence or his acquiescence. Mr. Reardon remained silent. If ha is ready to. do. it, he is urged to uphold his Council as against this paper. Our case has,, been stated. Tha Council knows it. ' Mr. Reardon knows it. Our readers know it. Mr. Reardon has a splendid opportunity to expose our "malicious and false insinuations." Let him do sp. This is' the issue—furiously raging over side details will not blur it. We have presented facts and arguments. The facts are undeniable. Let Mr. Reardon refute the arguments. Let him defend his Council. Let him find it "worth while" to disprove his official association with renegade doings of darkness. Or let him pass into memory as vir-. tual strike-breaker, dishonored and blasted.

Away back in 1547 England passed a law prohibiting the taking of interest, because, to quote: "Tho taking of interest is a vice most odious and detestable. and contrary to the word of God." Rut it was to ihe interest of the few to exact this tribute, and the law.was very soon abrogated.