George W. Cotton - Newspaper Reports

Newspaper Reports

Cotton's opinions attracted some contaversy,as extracts from newspapers of the day show.

"Mr Cotton and the Military" (the Chronicle, 25 June 1870): The belief is daily gaining ground that war is legalised murder, except in extreme self-defence, scientifically devised to kill the greatest number of persons in the shortest time, and that in times of peace a standing army is a great mischief, because it keeps men in enforced idleness...

Following spirited public debates on unemployment Thomas H. Smeaton, under the heading "Delusive Demagogues", fires the following shot across Mr Cotton's and a compatriot's bows: Dangerous men these at the present. Discard them working-men; they will fool you and nothing more... (Register, 31 March 1886)

A fortnight later another opinion was forthcoming: He is a secret enemy, not an open fee, and in future it is the duty of all right-thinking men to treat his wordy vapourizings with the select contempt they deserve... (Register, 13 April 1886)

The maligned politician sprang to defend himself on 13 April 1886, page 6f: Any man speaking of me as attempting to "gull" anybody can only be measuring me by some standard of his own to which course I respectfully demur to have judgments passed upon me...

Another correspondent to the Register on 16 September 1886 complained: If wishes his 300 to 400 pioneers on labourers' blocks to succeed he had better abstain from inflaming their zeal with misleading statements, but rather ought to preach to them uninterrupted industry (no eight-hours system), the strictest of economy and an unlimited amount of self-denial.

A further unsolicited opinion is given in the Register on 27 October 1886: a gentleman who works hard in writing and speaking to educate South Australians in finance, and yet every effort he makes seems to increase the fog through which we have to discover his meaning...

A letter from Rev Honner is in the Register, 15 February 1888: If I may judge of those blocks by some I have seen, then they must be intended blockheads, for no sane man would live on them, unless he was seeking a wilderness for the occupation of meditation.

This suggestion is castigated by Mr Cotton on 17 February 1888: I hope when the historian has to look back at the difficulties small holdings had to encounter... that there will not be "perils among false brethren" to be received as amongst the bitterest opposition.

Another citizen enters the fray on 22 February 1888: For some years past Mr Cotton has been energetically blowing his own trumpet from the homestead blocks. Some of us working men are growing tired of : Cotton's the man for all jobs, He scowls on all the nobs, He winks and shouts at the snobs, And he sighs for the Government's bobs.

In the heat of a public debate on the "land question" a correspondent to the Register on 31 July 1888 puts the following to Mr Cotton: Must a man be a landjobber before he can honestly propose land reform? And is the only honest politician the land agent who opposes land nationalisation? And, pray, what right have you to say that all but yourself are catering for the votes of the working men?... You may vaunt as much as you like your love for the "poor man"; there is one thing you dare not do... you dare not be an honest politician.

An editorial on the Block system is in the Register, 16 March 1888: Taken at its best it seems to us that it is more a hindrance than of a help to the establishment of a sound and rational system of land tenure... On 21 March a correspondent says: That he is sincere does not admit the question, but why the continual proclamations, why always clamour for the expected chorus of applause?...

Two correspondents to the Register on 28 August 1888 pass judgement on Mr Cotton: much more worthy of a man who is privileged to write the prefix Honourable to his name if he were as particular in retailing slanderous statements... You will have observed long ago that Mr Cotton never gives a straightforward answer however called for by nasty innuendoes, falsehoods and misrepresentations which he slips into his communications...

On the subject of "Workers" he said in the Register, 31 December 1889: I believe that the wage-receivers are quite as anxious for fair play as those who have to pay the wages. But who is to decide what is fair? Governments shirk the responsibility and cry delusively "It is a matter of open contract". and so it will remain... till it is realised that it is the function of every Government to be a great arbitration and conciliation Association - nothing more and nothing less. In the meantime Trades and Labour Councils must act for the workers...

His views on 10 February 1890 under the heading "The Parliament and the Adelaide Club": What I hold is wanted is a fair representation of each class and not a packed chamber that can only legislate for the country from the standpoint of its own class interests... For several years past South Australia has progressed in one direction only and that is in rapidly adding to its indebtedness to foreigners...

The following opinion is expressed in the Register, 4 August 1890: ...They distrust him; they do not know in what category of politicians to place him; he really stands alone. Sometimes he seems radical and appears is the advocate of thorough reform; at others he opposes the very things which would more than any other benefit the workers...