Boycott Threats

Waikato Times, Volume 124, Issue 20731, 15 February 1939, Page 8

Boycott Threats

ASTOUNDING STORY BUSINESS MAN VICTIMISED HOUNDED FROM HOTELS ALLEGED POLITICAL REASONS (By Telegraph.—Press Association) CHRISTCHURCH, Wednesday Threats that two hcltels would be boycotted if they gave him any service whatever have caused Mr Frank Goldberg, of Sydney, governing director of the Goldberg Advertising Agency, to move out of them. Mr Goldberg, who arrived in the city yesterday, said this morning the alleged reason for the boycott threats was that he had discouraged the Labour Party, that, he had assembled the staff of the Waterloo Hotel in Wellington and advised them to vote for the National Party and that lie had said that all who voted for Labour had received a “ bonus ” of £5 e-ach. After moving out of one hotel in the cfly to save the manager any embarrassment by his presence. Mr Goldberg is now ensconced in the vice-regal jsuite at another. Tn his efforts to find the cause of the actions directed against him Mr Goldberg has consulted the Prime Minister, the Right Hon. M. J. Savage, who said the matter would be adjusted. Mr Savage himself had agreed that Mr Goldberg was entitled to undertake publicity for the National Party, andthat everything he had done had been within his rights. Started Last September Tracing the history of the boycott threats Mr Goldberg said they had begun in Auckland last September. While at the Grand Hotel he had been called out by the manager who told him the secretary of the Hotel Workers’ Union, Mr F. G. Young, had threatened to declare the hotel “black” if Mr Goldberg received any service. His bags were not to be handled, he was not to receive any meals, in fact, he was not to stay at the hotel. “1 immediately had a conference with Mr Young,” continued Mr Goldberg, who said the secretary had explained his position fairly. The Seamen's Union and the Hotel Workers’ Unions in Wellington, said Mr Young, declared that Mr Goldberg was stated to have slighted the Labour Party and was supposed to have advised the staff of the Waterloo Hotel to vote National. lie told Mr Young how ridiculous the charges were and that he was entitled to make criticism. Mr Young said he would have to obtain proof of the charges. Shortly after Mr Goldberg left on his return to Sydney. Threat to Stop Bear Supply Returning on his present visit to New Zealand, Mr Goldberg passed through Auckland without incident. Reaching Wellington, he booked in at the Waterloo Hotel blit before breakfast the manager informed him that the see rotary of the Seamen’s Union, Mr F. Wals, and Mr 'Young had been into the hotel and told him they would h-eat it as a hostile act if Mr Goldberg stayed in the hotel. Mr Goldberg bad a long discussion with them and the manager ol’ the hotel. “ While the hotel people would not say that I had to go they put it up' to me that their beer supply would be stopped if I did not go,” continued Mr Goldberg. “This threat was actually put into effect.” The hotel manager asked Mr Goldberg to have a consultation with the Hon. W. Perry, M.L.G., and Mr David Maddon, of the ciirectorate of New Zealand Breweries. They told him they were in the workers’ hands and to save the hotel management any embarrassment Mr Goldberg left it quietly on Saturday. Moved to Another Hotel “In the meantime I saw my own legal people who said I had a wonderful case,” continued Mr Goldberg. “They said the people of this country would not stand for victimisation and interference with individual liberty.” On his arrival in the city yesterday morning Mr Goldberg went to the United Service Hotel and registered, but while he was having his breakfast he received an urgent message fom the licensee who told him he had received a message from Mr Walsh in Wellington that Mr Walsh had told the manager that if Mr Goldberg was in the hotel to get him out immediately or complications would occur. Mr Goldberg pointed out that could not be done but again to save the manager embarrassment he moved to Warner’s Hotel. “I don’t know if they are going to carry this thing through to Dunedin,” he said, “I doubt very much if Ministers of the Crown approve of it. Even if I had made the statements they accuse me of I have the right to make them but the statements attributed to me are ridiculous. Mr Savage agreed that I am entitled to express my opinion. He definitely agreed that it could not be tolerated. “I certainly did a fair amount of work for the National Party under the direction of its leaders and executive and criticised Labour. "It is definitely interference with individual liberty. It Is a flagrant boycott undertaken, I presume, to show the power of some men. I admit they have the power but they should not use it on individuals who bring money Into the country and spend it.”