LIBERALISM AND LABOR.

Taranaki Daily News, 4 April 1921, Page 7

LIBERALISM AND LABOR.

(To the (Editor.) Sir, —‘My experience in verbal debate is that when a man gets angry and excited it is because he is being soundly whipped, and Mr, W. T. Jennings is decidedly an angry man. Invective with him takes the place of argument, and all he can do is to yell out “rats,” “asses ” When the Liberal Party is squeezed out, as it assuredly will be, and there is a straight “go” between Labor and Reform, where will our angry friend be? Can there be any doubt that all the more advanced of the Liberal Party will join Labor, as so many have already done, and the old-timers and the political dead-beats will be found with the Tories? When you are then found voting Reform, Mr. Jennings (for no one wpuld accuse you of joining Labor), will you then be called a “rat”? Sir George Grey, we are told, brought tears to the eyes of his hearers when recounting the wrongs of Ireland. Yes, and you can bet your bottom dollar that William T. Jennings was among those who blubbered loudest and longest. But there has been too much of*this sickly sentimentality in the case of Ireland. What was wanted, and is wanted, is action, and this one does not expect from the Jennings type. When I asked him whether he had voted for Mr. Holland’s motion in favor of self-determination for Ireland, what does he.say? “I am a strong believer in selfdetermination for Ireland, but I did not vote for or against the motion.”. The man must be either a political bankrupt or a political coward; he believes in selfdetermination for Ireland, but he hasn’t the pluck to voice his belief! Could political degeneracy descend lower? And yet this political weakling prates about his democratic principles, about what he has done for Labor! It makes one sick.

But what about my other question, as to how the Liberals vote! as a body on the motion for Irish self-determination? Mr. Jennings is evidently ashamed of them, for he hasn’t even a kick left in him. to explain how it was that they either slunk out of the Chamber or voted against the motion. I asked our angry friend how many besides himself formed Mr. Wilford’s bodyguard, and we get this political gem: “Twenty-nine voted for Mr. Wilford’s motion of noconfidence.” I wish I could use language strong enough to describe such political ducking and twisting. Only that you, Mr. Jennings, have cried “Hold, enough,” and have said you were finished, I should ask you whether this 29 did not include Mr. Holland, Mr. Fraser, and the other Labor members. Labor voted with you, Mr. Jennings, on your no-confidence motion, but when Labor moved its motion were you and your party sports enough to support them? You were not. You voted with Massey, as you always do when you have to decide 'between Labor and Reform. And the brazen effrontery and cheek of it to say that Labor should be grateful for the few scraps thrown to it by Liberalism! Why, in the palmy days of Liberalism nine-tenths of their vote was of workers; the other tenth being of the professional type of Liberals, as W. T. Jennings and Co. Talk of the tail dictating to the dog! You voted against indentured labor, but you slur over the question as to how your party voted. You are ashamed of them, Mr. Jennings, and with good cause, but you can’t deny that your late leader (Mr. Macdonald) said, he was not going to embarrass the Massey Government by voting with Labor. They deserve the name of H.M. Opposition, don’t they, this spineless, punchless, crew, nakedly unashamed of their hostility to Labor? And yet our optimistic friend sees a glimmer of hope —Liberalism is looking up in the Old Country! Does this gentleman forget the figures quoted by Mr.'Lloyd George a few days ago, where he showed Labor and Coalition running neck and neck in the 1920 and Liberalism tailing up a bad last? Did Mr.‘ Lloyd George not say, and is it not true, that “Liberalism may harrow and sow, but Labor will reap”? Has not Labor won the majority of the recent byelections, and has Liberalism secured even one seat in the last seven or eight elections ?

In New Zealand the little bunfch of political sterilities and broken down Liberal hacks ie dying, and it is going to its grave “unwept, unhonored and unsung.” Mr. Jennings calls his apologies to my questions. Answers! It would give me the greatest pleasure in the world to have this gentleman in the witness box for even a quarter of an hour. Then, when he was asked how many formed Wilford’s bodyguard -besides himself he would not try to make out it was 29, when the whole of the doddering, decrepit, political crowd numbered a handful of 7 or 8. It’s a shame to have to castigate such an opponent, but never you again, Mr. Jennings, rush into a conflict for which you are fitted to participate neither by cultural attainments nor by temperamental characteristics (for no one who loses his temper as you do should engage in wordy warfare). It may be, as Bernard Shaw holds, that the politician in general is a reflex of only the average mentality of the electors who elected him, and if so you cannot be blamed for your mental shortcomings, but in future. Mr. a word of friendly advice—stick to the care of the roads and bridges of Waitomo, for which, no doubt, you are fitted, and leave the dying cause of Liberalism to others more capable of upholding it.—l am, etc., P. O’DEA. Hawera, March 31, 1921.