Solidarity

*THE WORKER*

Brisbane, February 23, 1895.

Close Up Your Ranks.

As an onlooker one has often to deplore the short sightedness of the average worker in wasting his energy in fighting his fellow worker in order that he may satisfy pique, or an he terms it, “getting level with the other fellow.” Perhaps it may be a union official who has told a member some unpalatable truths regarding his (the member's) duty to the union, or it may be some unofficial fellow member who may have opposed some scheme which was brought up by member No.1, and in doing so has raised his ire by too caustic criticism, but whatever the cause of the misunderstanding there is no gain saying the fact that a great deal of the wage earners' power is wasted in squabbling among themselves which would do a deal of good (if expended against their opponents) in helping on the cause of Labour. That the capitalistic classes, especially through the machines with which they manufacture public opinion, do not waste their energy in like manner is often apparent. On the contrary they are prepared to sink all their pique and rancour if by so doing they are only able to further their own class interests and defeat the aims of the workers whom they too often despise on account of their lack of cohesiveness and their want of trust in each other.

* * *

To give an illustration. In the Courier of Feb.16 appeared an interview with Mr. Nelson on the subject of federation, in the course of which the advisability of the Chief Justice being eligible for a seat on the Federal Convention was touched on, and in an editorial of the same date we find the following; “Should the Premier's scheme succeed so far as to make the Convention a certainty, and should Queensland be in this arrangement, we trust that the Chief Justice will be one of Queensland's representative, and that the ex-Chief Justice will be another. Queensland’s share in the great task of framing a Federal constitution should as far as possible be entrusted to the men who have proved their capacity and devotion to her interests by long periods of distinguished public service.”

* * *

The above evidently relates to Sir Charles Lilley. Now what did the same journal say of him less than two years ago. On April 24^th , 1893, the Courier in an editorial said: “We have specifically accused him (Sir Charles) of misconduct when he last held Ministerial office in unconstitutionally encroaching upon the exclusive functions of the representatives of the people . . . and as to Sir Charles's judicial career – have we not shown that under his presidency confidence in the administration of justice had become impaired.” After declaring that Sir Charles had not taken advantage of the columns of the Courier, which we are told were open to him to defend himself against the aspersions cast upon him by that journal, it says: “Instead of that, however, he declares that a year since he challenged Parliament to lay down a definite accusation against him in order that he might meet it, well knowing that had not the four doctors opportunely come to his aid a few months ago the definite accusation he now invites would have been embodied in an incriminatory address from both Houses to Her Majesty the Queen.”

* * *

Mark the difference. Less than two years ago this man was not fit to be sent as a representative to a provincial Parliament, because he had usurped the power of Parliament; he had polluted the fountain of justice, and only by the advice of four doctors saved himself from being the subject of an incriminatory address from Parliament to the Queen (which, according to the Courier, would have been carried by both Houses, although it is hard to conceive how the writer could have known this if it was an honest Parliament) yet now he is not only fit, but it is highly advisable that he should be on the Federal Convention an account of his “long period of public serviced”.

* * *

Surely here is an object lesson. In the interests of boodle it is necessary to have a federated Australia, as in the event of another bank crisis it will be easier to deal with one Parliament than with five. And immediately we see how they will try to solidify their ranks by trying to nobble any person who may be likely to oppose their plan. Then again it may enable their “tried friend,” the apostate ex-Premier and present overpaid Chief Justice to be present to look after their interests, a job which he managed so well in 1892.

WATCHMAN.