The Wanganui Chronicle "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." TUESDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1907. AN ANGRY AGITATOR.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12145, 31 December 1907, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." TUESDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1907. AN ANGRY AGITATOR.

Mr. Keir Hahdie has a very poor opinion of editors, and of New Zeaand editors in particular, that is if wei are to judge by the angry declaration which ho is said to 2iave made to an interviewer sit Palmerstom North. "Your editors," ho is reported toi have said, "ought to be ashamed of themselves. They are unscrupulous cads." Having unburdened himself to* this effect, the distinguished (we were vei-y nearly writing "notorious") Mr. Hardio angrily intimated' to the astonished pressman that he could publish the statement ip he liked to' <l'o go. This outburst of ill-temper and1 bad manners was apparently occasioned by a simple, pertinent, and perfectly reasonable question, i.e., as to whether he ■was pre~

pared to say anything about his Indian tour. This question appeal's to liave much about the same effect on the member iffor Merthyr Tydvil as a red rag is supposed to Have oni a bull. He dodged it at Auckland, he bluffed it offensively at Palmerston North, but if he has any desire to stand well in the estimation of the people of this Dominion he will liavo to answer it before he leaves our shores. Mr. Keir Hardie says lie is not on his trial. Perhaps not. On the other hand, perhaps he is, and doesn't know it, and in that case his undignified exhibition of bad-temper at Palmerston North will not stand him in good stead beforo the tribunal of popular opinion. Tt is useless for him to abuse the editors. They have simply acted on information' received, and, on the whole, they have acted calmly, dispassionately, and with" scrupulous fairness. The most that has been urged is that Mr. Keir Hardie should receive: no public recognition until he has satisfactorily disproved the statements made as to his allegedly disloyal and inflammatory utterances in India. The "Chronicle," for instance, suggested that possibly Mr. Keir Hardie had" been inisrepci-tod, and that he should be afforded the earliest possible opportunity of placing his'side of the case before the public. Thetre was, surely, nothing unscrupulous in such a suggestion? For some reason best known to himself our Socialistic! visitor has declined to avail himself of the opportunities he has had1 to give his version of what he said' and did in India. When asked in Auckland whether he had been correctly reported, Mr. Keir Hardie evaded the question* by asking the questioner if ho could! state just what had been reported. We do not Enow what they call that sort of thing in Merthyr Tydvil; o<ut here avo call it shuffling. Mr. Keir Hardie knew perfectly well what it Wias that his. questioner wanted to know. He knew thiat he had been reported to have done his best to stir up the feeling of ill-will to British rule by telling the inflammable population of Bengal that the conditions, prevailing there "are worse than those of Russia" ; that the atrocities cbmniitted by British officials would '"evoke more horror- than the Turkish outrages in Armenia" ; and! that he and Iris friends would do their 'best to- "make India a self-governing' colony like Canada." In short, he was charged with having encouraged the Bengalis to rebellion and turbulence, 'thus imperilling the safety of the British population in India, and endangering the stability of . British rule. Wordis such as Mr. Keir Hardie was reported to have used, remembering that he spoke ■as a member of the British House of Commons., were, under the circumstances, far more serious than the utterances for which Indian editors and agitators had been, punished severely. Mr. Thanawalla, the editor of the "Inirlian Home Ruler," was sent to gaol for publishing incendiary articles which only said what Mr. Keir Hardio is supposed to tove said. Mr. ttajpab Itai, a Hindu barrister, was deported for conduct Certainly little worse. As Britishers, we are rather too ready to assume that excessive, violence of speech defeats its own ends, and only brings discredit on the speaker. This may bo s<v in Great Britain, among a people which has learnt by heredity and by practising self-restraint to use the right of free speech wisely. It is not the case among an excitable Eastern population. In October last the Hon. M. de P. Webb, the Chairman of the Karachi Chamber of Commerce, drew the attention of th© British public to the mischief caused in India by violent and ignorant speeches such as Mr. Keir Hardie was then, reported to be delivering. Mr. Webb showed that the plea that such atterances could be safely disregarded! because of their very violence and ignorance was not a sound one ; because it assmmed that the people of India possess the critical faculty of distinguishing between folly and sanity, wiiich Britons have only slowly acquired by long years of political discipline. The people of New Zealand want to know whether these accusations are true or false. If Mr. Keir Hardie will confess them true, the loyal citizens of this Dominion will show him that they place national duty and patriotism before class sympathies and party interests, and that they have no time for traitors of any colour or creed. If, on the contrary, Mr. Keir Hardie will prove the accusations false, he will, de- | spite his Socialistic proclivities., be warmly welcomed and hospitably entertained. M, however, he elects to maintain an attitude of sullen silence, relieved only by outbursts of intemperate abuse, h.o must not complain if he finds tSat the great majority of patriotic New Zealandcrs continue to> regard hint with suspicion and conteirpt.