Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 4608x5632 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail

Article text

THE FEDERAL FUSION.
(To the Editor of "Tbe Daily Post")
Sir,—Noticing a letter signed "H.H.,"
Campbell Town, in Tuesday's issue, in
reply to Mr. GibHn'R letter ou 22nd
inst, I would ask for a little space to
deal with same.
By the general tone of bis remarks
"II. 13." is one of those who place Mr.
Deakin upon a pedestal aud worship
him as the saviour of Australia. All
his acts are wise, all bl,s devious .intrigue
and chameleon-like attitudes are
for the good of the country. His
great oratorical attainments, combined
with his personal magnetism, have
helped those who, like "H.H.." consider
he can do no wrong, to form
their opinion of him as a statesman.
But hero-worship is apt to blind
one's judgment and tbis fs perhaps
he reason your correspondent cauuot
nderstand Mr. Gibliu's action in joinng
the Labor ranks. Mr. G-Ibliu,
ike Mr. J. n. Edwards and other proinent
Liberals who have jollied us,
o doubt cannot reconcile true Liberalism
with fusion tactics; also they recognise
that the Labor platform is not
only a humanitarian, but a uecesfor
the development of Ausralia.
It does not seem strange to rae that
Mr. Giblin deserted the Liberal party
when it has allied itself with the re-
«et Iojmu-.v oppos i t i on wh o ba ve a I
ways championed vested interests
There is only one party for a true
liberal, In view of the recent fusion,
and that is the true party of democracy.
Your correspondent's innuendo
as to Mr. Giblin being "astute" will
not carry any great weight.
"H.IT.'' implies that Mr. Deakin was
responsible for passing "a series of the
most democratic and liberal measur
on earth." And witli whose ai
pray? Was it not with the aid of
the Labor party? He should know
that the truly liberal measures Mr.
Deakin assisted In putting on tlie statute
book were done so by a working
nirreement with the party that Mr.
Giblin has identified himself with, and
subject to the bitter opposition of
those reactionary gentlemen who now
sit check by jowl with Mr. Deakin.
Mr. Reid truly put It when he once
said in debate in tbe House: "Mr.
Deakin Is a political Mormon. Even
tbe ancient aborigine to whom he referred
has no predilection for that promiscuous
political intercourse which
Mr. Deakin enjoys."
Mr. Deakin. on Oetobcr 31, said: "I
shall look forward with the greatest
anxiety to see the action of those who
call themselves Liberal Protectionists
who are now associated with their abolute
enemy, the Free Trade renctinarv.
tlie leader of tbe Opposition
(Mr. Reidl."
Many Instances of similar speeches
f»y ijolli leaders can be given it your
correspondent wishes to bear more.
Deakin, in March last,
proposed a coalition with the Labor
This was to be a definite ooalitlon.
four portfolios to be allotted
to each party, aud either Mr. Deakin
or Mr. Kishcr lo lend. Mr. Deakin
was quite prepared to ally himself
with the "tied party." quite content
to be associated with men "whose
methods are subversive to liberty, and
which make democratic government in
the country impossible." And because
the Labor party would not contract
such an alliance, Mr. Deakin succeeds
In bringing a fusion about with the
former Opposition, whose policy be
had condemned again and again Jn the
past. This is political morality.
The Tasmanian public will not be
hoodwinked by their, representatives
nnd a section of the press, and Mr
Deakin is discredited by numbers wiic
at one time supported him.
The Labor party will not surrender
principle foi olfice. We will not adapt
our platform to suit good-as-Labor
men. or to meet the requirements of
a certain situation. We stand or fall by
our platform, aud are honestly supporters
of it
Little wonder that straightforward
Liberal Protectionists "have, had the
scale* taken from their eyes, and are
joining our ranks on all sides.
Even the newspapers feel the impossibility
of the present political tangle.
and are either dumb or utter forebodiugs
as to tlie lasting ability of
the fusion. Those who support It
qualify themselves, in a kind of "anything
but the Labor party" view of
affairs.
But through all fusions, compacts
r.nd alliances, tlie Labor party stands
out in a solid company, true to those
who elected theui, true to their own
principles, true to their platform
pledges, advocating their humanltarmeasures
for tlie uplifting of the
masses, and a truly national policy
for Australasia.—Yours, etc.,
R. K. READY.
Campbell Town.
Sir—In reply to Mr. Giblin, I shall
limit myself to one point—Is the Labor
platform so dangerous, on account of
its revolutionary Socialism, as to justify
a fusion of parties previously
antagonistic iu order to resist it?
The doctrine of modern collectivist
Socialists is the "nationalisation of the
means of production, distribution, and
exchange." Do people recognise what
this would mean if carried into
effect?
1. There would be no private property
whatever;
all lands, minerals,
arehouses,
machinery,
dwellings,
clothes, food products would be owned
by the Government.
2. There would be no private
employers
or employment.
The Government
bosses would
distribute Jabor,
food, clothing, etc.
The Acting Governor
might be ordered to discharge
shingles at the wharf, or the lion, the
Speaker to sweep the streets.
These
new "bosses" would be worse tyrants
than our preseut private employers—
and w-th tins significant difference,
there would be no escape from them.
Is our Labor party connected with
this pollcvV
It can be proved up to"
the hilt.
1. It appears upon the Queenslaud
Labor
platform.
Mr. Fisher
is a.
member
of
the
Queensland Labor
party.
At the Labor party confer-
ence for the Commonwealth, held in.
Melbourne
In
3004, 'speech
after
speech was made in favor of a socialistic
policy for the Commonwealth.
The hypocritical phrase, "nationalisation
of monopolies" was adopted
so
as not to frighten people.
One of the
speakers described It as "playing
to
the gallery."
(Vide official report
Labor Conference,)
2. Mr. J. C. Watson writes ("Both
Sides of Australian
Socialism"):—"E
should define Socialism as aiming at
the abolition of the present competitive
.
.
.
industrialism, with'
the object of substituting the collective
ownership of
land and capital,
etc."
Note.—He does not say how he is
going
to
compensate
the persons
whose land and capital are to be confiscated.
3. Mr. Henry E. Boote. editor Brisbane
"Worker,"
gives
a
simliar
reply.
Note.—This is the paper wherein It
was written that where labor peopta
are
congregated
together
"neither
gods nor dogs are admitted."
4. Mr. Tom Mann repeats Watson,
and
adds:—"All
tlie
essentials
to
wealth production will be vested
in
the community, and all industrial and
trading transactions will be organised
upon a co-operative basis."
Let us glance at the English Socialistic
party, from which our Labor
party obtains Its ideas. These all
hold tlie Karl Marx socialistic principle
of the "nationalisation of the
means of production, distribution, and
exchange." The bodies are (1) the
Fabian Society. (2) the Independent
Labor party. (3) the Labor party, (4)
the Clarion Organisation. (5) the So-
cial Democratic Federation, (0) the
Socialist party of Great Britain.
The Fabian Society (see rules)'
"works for the extinction of private
property in land.'' The Independent
Labor party has been thus described:
—"It is to large extent a party of
clever opportunists and trimmers,"
just like our Labor party here, who
tliomseivs admit that they "play to
the gallery." The "New Age," the
organ of this party, writes:—"It must
be frankly admitted that a certain
amount of policy is necessary. Everybody
knows that the majority of the
Labor party are Socialists."
I must pass on, but might mention'
that the platform of the Social Democratic
Federation includes "abolition
of the monarchy." "repudiation of the
national debt,' "abolition of standing
armies."
As I have already said, our Labor
party here Inherits the ideas of these
English bodies—it welcomes Macdonald.
Tom Mann. Ben Tillett. or any
other revolutionary extremist who
comes here.
The revolutionary character of
Labor-party Socialism cannot be
doubted. How can they compensate
the people dispossessed of their farms
and shops? M. Jaurez. the great
French Socialist, in a speech delivered
in the Chamber of Deputies on .Tune
14. 1806. began by admitting: "It is
Impossible to tell with certainty whether
the general"—mark the word
"general"—"expropriation will be carried
out with or without compensation."
"Our goal," continued M.
Jaurez, "will always be the revolution."
Do our Tasmanian Labor leaders
mean revolution? Not one of them.
But did the Indians who rowed in
their birch-bark canoe upou the placid
surface of the Niagara eVer Intend
to rush headlong over the falls? The
Labor party Is engaged upon a course
which will be full of danger, when,
general strikes and disturbances force'
them to bring Into action their revolutionary
principles.—Yours, etc.,
WILLIAM CROOKE.
The Arctic and Explorers' Clubs of
merica will organi.se an expedition
o go north in scarch of Dr. Frederick
lbert Cook, the polar explorer, who
as not been heard from in over ai
ear. Dr. Cook has no means of coming
back. It is possible that be win*
tercd somewhere with tlie Eskimos,
where he could get plenty of food, but
there is an unccrtaiuty about It. A<n
cording to the prearranged plans, Dr.
Cook was to return to headquarters
at Annoloak, Greenland: down Kennedy
Channel, through Smith Sound,
and in case no ship arrived lie would
move to Cape York aud thence to
Upemavlk. expecting to return ho'mci
not later than September, 100S.
$