INSULT TO PREMIER.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3357, 9 December 1919, Page 3

INSULT TO PREMIER.

REGRET EXPRESSEIJ ("BY PRES-S. CHR-IS’l‘Ca.l~lUß(f)H, Dec. 6. The morning p'apel's lay the blame for last night disturbance in connecI tion with the Prime Minister ’s meeting on difierent shoulders. Editorially the Press says:——- ‘ “The extraordinary.happenings at the‘ Coliseum last night were not creditable to Chl'istchur'_ch nor, we are sorry we must add, tovthe Mayor. If the crowd of people who burstyopen the already overcrowded hall had restrained themselves the Prime Minister would have had a successful meeting, although no doubt it would have had its lively passages, and been none ‘the worse for 'th.at.The erowd’s eagerness to hear Mr Massey, and his own skill as a public speaker, would have triumphed over the response of violent partisans of Liberalism to the incitement to and hos-tility contained in thel lmanner in which the Mayor, with a ‘ldeplorable want of underst|a.nding of his duties as the chief mavgistrate of the city, introduced the Prime Minister, who had come upon his invitation. One can never tell with Dr. Thacker whether he errs through lack of taste and judgment, or through excess of partisan zeal. One thing is eert'ain. Sir Joseph Ward is the only party leader who will ever accept an invitation from the Mayor again.” ‘The Lyttelton Times says:—— “Canterbuiy, as everybody l<now.~=, eralism, but it is not Liberalism to re—' U fusg an opponent. a. liearing. It is not , Liberalism to put an affront upon thel headof the Government such as was! put upon Mr Massey last evening. The t disgraceful demonstilation was the .‘ work of those wild t'ollowers '\\’llo.«-.7-i comrades in Wellington have caused them to be known as ‘the inierruption ,_ party.’ The great bulk of the l1ll§1"?‘ audience that attended the Coliseum’ comprised citizens who had assembled with the desire and intention of listen- 4 ing to the Prime 3:lini.ster politely and . patiently, qveu though they iiiiglit dis-r agree with the greater part of his spo'ecll. We sympathise with Mr Mas-l soy, and would like to assure him that 1 the interrupters totally misl'epresent.ed the temper of the Christchurch people as a Whole. The responsibility for the scene unquestionally rests with the small section of the community which has so plainly advertised during the last few weeks its intolerance and disrespect for anything but that peculiar brand of Labour polities‘ expounded by nominees of the Labour Represen-i tation Committee, whose leader is Mr‘ H. E. Holland, {the ‘;lIllf0rn'.1flO1lf1llSli3 Socialist.” , 1