THE INDUSTRIAL WORLD

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19475, 9 May 1925, Page 18

THE INDUSTRIAL WORLD

NEWS AND NOTES

By J. T. PAOfc. THE BISECTIONS IN AUCKLAND. Discussing the position of Labour on local bodies in the northern city, ‘‘lndustrial Tramp’’ says: “So far as. the City Council elections are concerned, Labour has advanced in representation from one to two members, and Mr E. Phelan will be able to support Mr Bloodworth in keeping; a watchful eye on behalf of the workers in the council. One Labour councillor is in a peculiar position in. the council, for if he desires to bring forward some motion, he is dependent on some person outside his party to second his resolution, before it is properly discussed. Auckland has only retrieved the position of some years ago when Mr M. J. Savage and Mr T. Bloodworth were elected Then Mr Savage was promoted to Parliament and Mr G. Davis took his -place. But last term, Mr Bloodworth was a lonely Labourite in the council; he will now have the aid of Mr Phelan. It is a high honour to Mr Bloodworth to be returned at the top of the poll, and it is no discredit to Mr Phelan to be at the bottom of the list of successful councillors, as in that position they might be termed the Alpha and Omega of Labour in the council. Labour has every reason to be proud of the position of the other eight of its ticket on the list, and though not successful this time, they are cot disgraced. Their turn will come. On the Hospital Board, Labour was unsuccessful in getting representation, but its candidates polled very good, and very evenly, showing that the party voted the ticket, for the Harbour Board, only two candidates were run by the party for four seats. Mi Bloodworth lopped the poll, and Mr Oscar M'Brine only missod success by 350 votes. And even this is not final, owing *To the unfortunate mistake in printing the ballot papers. However, Labour has no reason to be downcast at the result of the elections.”

THE MYSTERY OF “SPARE TIME.’ “All adults may be divided into three, classes First, those who are very keen on the work by which they earn their living, who run to this work as the bridegroom to the bride, and leave it with even more reluctance than the bridegroom leaves tna bride,” writes Mr Arnold Bennett, the wellknown novelist, in the Sunday Pictorial. “Second, those who arc not keen on their work, starting it with reluctance and quitting It with a sigh of relief. Third, those who do not have to work regularly for a living—a large class The first class, con centratiiifT on their master-passion, dotes 1 - spare 'time and become narrow through over-concentration. The second class have usually plenty of spare time, but usually fritter it away as spendthrifts fritter away money. The third class arc often the busiest and the most rushed of the three, and find it the most difficult to organise simply because they have had no discipline.”

THE USE OF WEALTH. A definition o t Socialism and nationalisation was given by Mr llamsay MacDonald in a speech lu his constituency recently. He declared that if humanity was going to progress it must not be crushed out by materialistic considerations. Ho liked to hear the attacks sometimes made from the Church that they were too materialistic. He wishes the Churches had their eyes open more to materialism in modern society. That was not a question of creed, but of practice, and the sort of stuff now tilling the newspapers made every decent man and woman blush and wonder whut wes coining over society. Could they not see that It, was r. sign of deterioration of those who were not doing decent work? He would bo the last man to say that all these things were confined to one class, but if society were healthier in its capacity for sacrifice and for thinking and acting honestly, fewer of those tilings would happen than apparently -was the case "ow. Was it not fur better that, instead of humanity being lulcd by the material possessions of man or by his pocket, they should by common effort properly organised, using the wealth and capital already created, make move wealth, more riches, but instead of raking them all into a great heap at one end, distribute them so that those who produce the wealth by brains and by hand should enjoy that wealth ? That was Socialism, and when they talked about nationalisation that was what they meant.

CLEAVAGE IX LABOUR PARTY. Discussing the numerous quarrels within the British Labour Party, the Weekly Westminster says:— “The plain truth is, that a broach is coming nearer every day between thosmembers of the Labour Party who are honestly Socialist, and those who are not. This cleavage has always existed in the Labour Party, which is, in fact, more heterogeneous, and includes more discordant elements than either of the other parties; because it lacks any genuine jirinciplc of unity. Mr MacDonald became leader because he seemed likely to hold the party together; ho was put in by the Reds, because ihey thought he was really red. but his term of office has alienated that wing of his followers. In theory the Labour # Party is a Socialist Party; all its members have swallowed tho famous formula embodied in the party constitution, and have been willing to draw such electoral strength as they could from the sentimental appeal of popular Socialism as it is presented at the street corner. In practice a very large proportion of the ablest leaders of the party are no more Socialists than Mr Baldwin; or at most, they accept the Socialist dogma in the same way in which the average churchgoing man of business accepts the Sermon on the Mount, as a beautiful expression of nn impracticable ideal; while others tif Ihey w-ould be honest with themselves) are definitely antl-Socialists. Sooner or inter thq breach must come. , The period of Labour government has accelerated it. Mr Wheatley; and probably Mr Thomas, want to precipitate it, and get it over.”

COMMUNISM AND LABOUR IN DUNEDIN. Mr G. S. Thomson has forwarded the following letter to Labour sympathisers in various centres in Now Zealand: — “The Labour Party’s Easter Conference at Wellington has decided to prevent not only Communists, but all those holding and advocating Communist principles, from becoming members of the Labour Party. Comrade Sid Fournier put our case before the conference, but the decision by 103 votes to 9 votes was overwhelming against us. You will probably knew also that some weeks ago the writer was refused as a delegate to the • Otago Labour Representation Committee. As a result the members of the Otago Hotel and Restaurant Workers’ Union were very much inclined to cancel our union’s affiliation to the O.L.R.C. A good many in Dunedin who hold Communist views have recently been elected as delegates to the Otago Trades and Labour Council (oin industrial body), and they hope to do good work there. Again, on the afternoon of Sunday, April 5, 1925, a fair number of militants and left-wingers met together and decided to form a. “workers’ group.” We understand the same is being done in other parts of New Zealand also. There is good work to bo done, but it is evident we cannot hope for any recognition from the too respectable, semi-bourgeois New Zealand Labour Party. Such a party has shown that it prefers capitalists and employers as members rather than genuine Socialists and Communists. This being the case, and taking all the circumstances into consideration, I am fully convinced that the New Zealand Labour Party is no longer of any use tp us, and that if we wish to do any good among the genuine working class, wo must unite together, even though it be as an opposite party to the New Zeal ami Labour Party. “The time has come when we require a genuine workers’ party, through which we can organise and capture the New Zealand workers for real Socialism and Communism, and I therefore lake this opportunity of asking for nn expression of opinion from your district.”

‘“WHY NOT?’ SAID THE MARCH HARE” Under this heading Christchurch Sim comments as follows on the much-discustcfl meeting held there on Sunday evening last:— “The Communists who were,turned adrift in a cold world by the Labour Party at Easter held a rally last evening. It was attended by ‘supporters’ holding strangely divergent views. ‘Among those present’ were men who have no faith in kings, men who become hot under the collar at the mention of the word “Capitalist,” men who seek peace at all costs, others who are prepared to wage war (under certain circumstances). old gaol comrades and tenderhearted fellows who, like one of Leacock's heroines, grieve even to see a cabbage suffer when out from its stalk. It was a political Mad Hatters’ Tea Party, “All the familiar glib phrases, so cruelly

overworked, passed trippingly from lip to lip. The chairman explained that the meeting had been called to discuss the possibility of the workers presenting a united front. He added that where any industrial fight was in progress Communists were to bo found ‘on the stump’; a remark which rather loses point by its ambiguity. Comrade Chappie, who classes kings with weasels, was at the ‘party,’ and reiterated his belief that workers of all shades of opinion should % be at one in their abhorrence of kingship and Imperialism. Everything could be accomplished by pacifism, and Gandhi’s non-co-operation methods wore to lie commended. Mr Archer was taken to task for his ‘weak May Day declaration,’ and one speaker urged his hearers to believe that only with the assistance of the Communists could the Now Zealand worker be as ‘free’—and happy’'—as his comrades in' Russia. This remark is effectively answered in our correspondence column to-day. “The bright spot of the evening was Mr H. T. Armstrong, M.P., who, in enunciating Labour’s ambitions, pointed out that the mooting itself was far from presenting the ‘united front’ it sought, and that a man could not logically belong to both the Labour and Communist Parlies. It is fortunate that there is some inhibition which prevents those Red folk from presenting an undivided front for 4ny length of time. They remind us of the notorious prison gang which escaped to the bush in’ Tasmania. There were eight prisoners “with a single thought’ when the party set out; there was one at the end of the journey—a cannibalistic follow who carried inside him the essential goodness (or badness) of his seven companions.”