TOWN v. COUNTRY

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 348, 8 October 1932, Page 5

TOWN v. COUNTRY

("Post" Special Commissioner.)

LABOUR PRESIDENT DENIES FQMENTING BAD . FEELING STATEMENT BY MR. JORDAN

Wellington, Friday. A definite denial that he had taken part in the town v. country controversy or had asserted that such a controversy existed in New Zealand, was made by Mr. W. J. Jordan, M.P., president of the Labour Party, in reply to a contention made in a resolution passed by the Southern Hawkes Bay Farmers' Union. :Owing to the ohscurity of the wording of the resolution as it appears in the Press Association ' message," said Mr. Jordan, "I am at a loss to understand what the union is driving at and I have taken it for granted that it refers to a reply I made some time ago when Hon. A. D. IvlcLeod alleged the Labour Party was taking advantage of the town v. country fceling* which it claimed had developed since* the general election. In my reply I stated that I did not knori just what the ex-Ministei* meant by the' words "advantage of city v. country feeling" but that it was a fact that the efforts to keep town and country at variances had now been recognised and that the small farmers rcalised that their interests and those of the town workers were identical. I also said that the contests of the future were more likoly to be hetween the hig landed interests of hoth town and country on one hand and the working farmers together with the city workers 011 the other hand. "irt is evident that th'e Farmers' Union was divided between the large run holders and the small farmers. I further added that I trusted the Labour Party would not descend to the tactics which had been resorted to by the parties who had used denominational and other prejudices to secure support, and that it was not our desire either to foster or to take advantage of any city versus country feeling.