THE PATEA SEAT.

Taranaki Daily News, 24 March 1921, Page 5

THE PATEA SEAT.

REPLY TO MR. O’DEA. Our Haw era correspondent writes:— I think Mr. O’Dea has got a point on to you, Mr. Editor, by persuading you to print three-quarters of a column of drivelling matter which is nothing more nor less than Labor propaganda. I only hope you are charging him the highest advertising rates for it. He firstly pretends to be annoyed over my observation that Labor is "queering the pitch” of the Liberal candidate. He must be a very deluded man indeed if he thinks Mr. Mellvride has any hope of winning the seat. His hope is about the same as Mr. O’Dea’s in 1911 when he stood in the interests of the Liberal Party, which he now affects to despise. The Labor candidate will only succeed in doing what Mr. Fitzherbert did on the last occasion, viz., spoil the chances of Mr. Morrison. lam not quarrelling with Labor over the matter; far from that. lam only stating an obvious fact. Nor do I feel inclined to justify the Liberal .Party in any action to which your super-sensitive correspondent has taken exception. I prefer to leave that to the ardent friends of the party, in which I cannot include myself. But I can state, as another simple fact, that whilst Labor was associated with the Liberals it did make progress and held the confidence, of the public. Now that Labor has gone on its own, and incidentally spurned those who did so much for its cause, and enunciated its extreme socialistic policy, it has only succeeded in alienating the support of all patriotic and reasonable minded men, who are determined that Labor’s pernicious doctrines shall never be practised in this fair land. Mr. O’Dea speaks very highly of Mr. Dixon. If he has this high opinion of him—which, I feel sure* is quite justified—why not support him instead of revolutionary Labor? It would be interesting to know the real reasons why he, manifestly a friend and well wisher of Mr. Dixon, is not supporting him instead of a stranger to the district, one who carries no weight, and is doomed to be beaten soundly at the polls. Mr. O’Dea affects concern over my references to Comrade Sim, the young man with a great future (according to Mr." O’Dea). All I can say is* that Comrade Sim may be a very estimable young man, but as he has. allied himself with the party whose avowed objects are to smash the constitution jand impose\some such system as Leninism upon the free and enlightened people of, this country, he must have a kink, and is better employed in his work at bratford than in wasting his time, and other people’s, in trying to get into Parliament. Mr. O’Dea has certainly scored one point, He corrects the spelling of “Carl” Marx, which, of course, in his opinion, is evidence of my ignorance. But the victory is, Mr. Editor, as you will have noticed, not over me, but over your compositor.

LIBERAL PARTY’S ACHIEVEMENTS Mr. W. T. Jennings, M.P., for Waitomo, writes:— Sir, —In your issue of yesterday Mr. P. O’Dea has a letter in which he attacks the principles and work of the Liberal thought in this Dominion, and what that party has done for Labor and self-determination for Ireland. The want of knowledge displayed by your correspondent is astounding. Has he forgotten what Sir George Grey in this land has done for Home Rule for Ireland and for Labor? Has he forgotten what an effort was made by Gladstone on behalf of Home Rule for Ireland? I pause for his reply. It'is incomprehensible to me to gauge what your correspondent is aiming at when he asked for information as to when Liberalism supported Labor in it.s aspirations. He asks for one important measure where Liberalism supported Labor. I can rapidly give him the answer. The workers’ claim for compensation for accidents, the Factory Act, which abolished the vile system of sweating females in the textile industry, the Workers* Home ’Act, the bettering of conditions for seamen and cq(il miners, the advances of money to small settlers on the land, the placing of men with their wives and their families on land under the Improved Farm Settlement Act (men who had no chance in this country of ohtaihing land until this Act was passed), and last but not least, the Old Age Pensions Act. Sir, I will not weary your readers with further quotations as to what the Liberal Party has done for Labor, both in industries and on the land, nor will I, like your correspondent, fill up a quarter of a column of your space with an extract from the Christchurch Sun, nor will I throw bouquets at Mr Dixon, the Reform candidate, albeit hey may deserve them; but I will conclude in the words of your correspondent, Mr. P. O’Dea: “Yes. I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prpnhet,” and he draws deductions from that expression. So will I. Like your correspondent, I am not a prophet, nor the son of one; but I can clearly analyse what your correspondent is aiming at. I advise bim to read Gavan Duffy’s “My Life in Two Hemispheres” for the interpretation of my analysis of his effusion in your issue of yesterday. The reference of Mr. O’Dea to the Liberal Party and the Marriage Amendment is somewhat unfortunate, in my opinion. All the members of the Liberal Party followed Mr. Wilford in the voting against that measure. The only defections from the Liberal Party were three gentlemen who belong to the honorable profession of Mr. I P. O’Dea, Esq., barrister and solicitor. Tn conclusion. is Mr. P. G’Dea the same person that stood for a seat in Parliament a few years ago as a Liberal candidate?