LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1130, 18 May 1911, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

MR. NORTH AND PICTURE SHOWS. Sir, —1 have to apologise to the Rev. J. J. North for calling him, in my article of yesterday, "the most prominent of our local agitators for tlia licensing of pictures." Ml. North, however, states in tho interview which you publish to-day (-May !)[: "I do not poso as an agitator en this question. The 'Lyttelton Times' asked for an interview, and picture shows came within the range of the chat." That almost amounts to saying lie is sorry he spoke. It is as much like a withdrawal as anything ono can hope for in sucli a controversy, and I should offer no further comment, on his remarks, had he not, at the close of his Dominion interview, made a specific reference to my article. He says: "Your contributed article on Milton is not very apropos. Laissezfaire is no longer the world's law, and even your contributor shoots Milton out of bis lee-scuppnrs in his final decision in favour of censorship after the event. Tho only question at issue is, Shall we prosecute after the damage is done, or shall we save both the public and tho showman by preventing the damage occurring? It is time that I expressed the opinion that Milton's "Areopagitica" unsatisfactory in bis treatment of tho question of what to do with objectionable books after publication, but the bulk of my article was devoted (like almost the whole of the "Areopagitica") to setting forth considerations which gfi to show the futility and harmfulncss of censorships. Mr. North ignores all , that, though it is the most important aspect of the subject. To speak of "censorship after the event" is, of course, a misuse of language. Censorship is not punishment for publishing, it is prevention of publishing. When Mr. North asks, "Shall wo prosecute after the damage «is done, or shall we save both the public and the showman by preventing tho damage occurring?" —ho begs tho whole question. Tho possibility of prosecution acts as a deterrent, and so the damage is not done. Censorship, on the other hand; is sure to suppress soino things which ought to bo allowed, and to pass some of those very things which it exists to stop— and so the damage is done. Prosecution means an open hearing in Court; censorship is a secret judgment without any hearing at all, and secret judgments are not so likely to be just judgments. The magistrate can only punish a man for an ofreuce actually committed ; the censor can virtually' fine a man (by confiscating a piece of his property) for an offence which if he were left alone, he might or might not commit. The magistrate punishes people for breaking the law; the censor punishes people for not pleasing him. Tho secrets of the censorship leak out; and the doubtful productions tho censor has suppressed are dowered with the fascination of mystery. Meanwhile, the equally doubtful productions he has authorised are used as critical bricks to throw at him. In these two ways tho alleged contamination is fostered by the very means intended to eradicate it. Fear of prosecution, on the other hand, causes the showman to quietly lay aside anything that might offend, and no more is heard of it. There may. be an occasional prosecution, but with no mystery to keep up the interest, it will bo soon over and done with. I do not think tho picture theatre managers are the kind of men who aro fond of improprieties; but, if they were, I believe the desire to please' their customers would cause them to keep their shows clean, even if the law could not punish them for doing otherwise. And I believe their show* are clean. If Mr. North has a contrary opinion, why does ho not obtain evidence, and lay an information? Under the Indecent Publications Act, 1910, a picture show proprietor can bo fined up to £100, or given three months' gaol, for doing what Mr. North thinks soino of them have done, or arc likely to do. Pending the enactment of the law, ho wants, why not make the best of the law wo have? Why not, indeed? Perhaps because Mr. North is not enough in earnest to be an agitator, nor even to pose as an agitator.—l am, etc., J.Q.X.

"TRIUMPHANT DEMOCRACY."

IN THE C4REAT AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH. Sir,—The enclosed clipping from the 'Sydney Daily Telegraph," April 21, 1911, will, I think, interest many of your readers, and throw a strong'light on tho "democracy", of tho Labour movement in Australia. Tho Federal Labour Ministers havo lived gloriously on the game ever since their advent as professional politicians, and aro now ''lording it" over the people of tho Commonwealth in a way that even tho Amg of England would not daro to do. —I am, etc., May 9, 1011. _^™^N. [Enclosure.] LACK OF REVERENCE FOR FEDERAL MINISTERS. Melbourne, Thursday.—lt is now bitterly complained that when tho Prime Minister, the Minister for Defence, and the P.M.G. went to Sydney to witness tho launching of the Warrego, no State Ministers assembled on the platform at the Sydney railway station to bid them welcome. There was not even a hand present. When, later, they returned to Melbourne, not a single State Minister hurried up to the train to sec them off. Even on that auspicious occasion tho band was absent. As Federal Ministers are accustomed to travel with an imposing retinue of colleagues and officials, this lack of reverence displayed by the Government of New South Wales was felt very keenly. Mr. Fisher is now proceeding to England surrounded with so many officials that his descent on London will bo like the inroad of an Asiatic potentate. It is hoped by his colleagues who have been left behind that his arrival in tlin great metropolis will be received with an adequate measure of respect.

HOME RULE. Sir,—Tho letters ,of your correspondents, _ from "Lictor" clown to "Union Jack/' appear to mo to be most erratic. They remind me forcibly of a iormer correspondent—ono T. 11. Milligan, who, in explaining the* threat "to kick the Crown into tho Boyne " attributed tho cause to a suspicion that Wellington, intended to usurp the Throne, at the instigation of Napoleon Bonaparte, who was in his grave at least fourteen years before the occurrence, and had spent six years on a desolate island from which 'he was debarred any communication with the outside world, especially those in power! What rot; what subterfuge; what inconsistency on the part of ono posing as an authority I Such is the manner in which anti-nationalists set forth their sentiments in the columns of tho Australasian newspapers! As to the various and numerous quotations given by'your correspondents in recent issues of Tin-: Dominion, I will give a sample which I cull from the "Irish Weekly Independent," of February 11, 1911. anil which will .suflieo to show the unreliability of such dastardly effusions. It is headed "Wholesale Calumny.—Mr. John .Redmond's Denial of Lying Story," and rends: "Mr. J. \V. henno'tt, of 4o Wliippcmdnlo Road, Watford, on Thursday ivro!e to Mr. John Redmond, direct in;. , , his attention to the. fact that at a meeting of the Wat-

ford Local Parliament last week, during a debate on Home Ilule, it was stated that during a visit to Manchester or Livoreool, in January, 1010, Mr. ltedmond, after a public meeting, went on to an Irish Club, where ho mado a speech, in which ho gave his hearers to understand that the.v were to take no notice of what he said in public as to Home Rule meaning the management of purely Irish affairs only, but that nothing less than absolute independence would satisfy him. Mr. Redmond has addressed the following .letter to Mr. Bennett:— "The incident to which you refer is a pretty good .example of the systcMf of wholesale calumny, misrepresentation, and falsehood which is being carried on throughout Great Britain with reference to the Irish cause. During the last elections, innumerable falsehoods about myself personally were circulated, and quotations put into my mouth which had never been uttered by inc. Other quotations from my speeches were altered so as to give them an altogether unwarrantable complexion. The story you tell mo is an instance of this kind of political blackguardism which is very interesting. I need not say the whole story of your friend is, from beginning to end, an absolute falsehood." Such, Mr. Editor, is a specimen of iho machinations of the enemy, and such a modicum of the extent to which they will go to attain their nefarious purposes. In reference to the. remarks about the Irish at Home, and in America, I can only say I have been born and bred in Ireland, lived several years in America, Jiavc been a resident in New Zealand and the Australian colonies for nearly forty years, and a more peaceable, law-abiding, and moral people I liavo never come in contact with. Aiid as to Ireland, of course their morality has become proverbial, being freest from crime of any people on tho face of the earth. Your correspondent, "Union Jack," sets down the Irish population of America at ten millions. But he would be nearer tho mark had he enumerated them and their descendants at twenty-five millions—nearly one-fourth of the entire population. And he fears the danger arising to the British Empire from that fact. Now, there cannot be the. shadow of a suspicion from that point of view,for even the extremists—the Fenians, have recently thrown in their lot with tho Nationalists, who are, totally against tho disintegration of the Empire, all they want being, as you aro aware, tho management of their own internal affairs. This should put an end to the vapourings of those few individuals who set up their own opinions against that of the majority of people of tho British Empire and America. In conclusion, iiat justica, mat coo him, and thanking you for formei courtesies and indulgences.—l am, etc. R.D.

Wellington, May 10, 1011

THE IMPERIAL MISSION

Sir, —Hay I trespass upon your space to cordially invite those who intend visiting the Mother Country during tho coming season to get in touch with tho Imperial Mission? This organisation, o£ which his Grace tho Duke of Argyll is hon. president, is essentially Imperial in its conception, and during the twelve months which havo elapsed sines its formation, it has done invaluable work. Whilst .carefully avoiding tho discussion of purely domestic questions, the Imperial Mission concentrates its attention upon demonstrating the real significance of the great self-governing Dominions, their products anil illimitable possibilities, and in urging upon the people of tho United Kingdom the imperative necessity for Imperial solidarity in commerce and defence, froin the point of view of the overtea Dominions. There are few of "the blood" whoso homes aro in the raoro distant parts of the Empire, who are not staunch Imperialists, and who do not earnestly look forward to the realisation of the great and very practical ideal of Imperial consolidation. Britishers throughout the Empire are eligible for membership, and I shall be most happy to send particulars, and to hear from experienced colonial speakers, who would be willing to help us during their stay in England, now or at some future date.—l am, etc.,' J. ENGLEDEW, Secretary. 117 Piccadilly, London, W., April 3, 1911.

KILT OR KHAKI?

Sir, —Allow me to encroach a littlo on your space in your valuable paper. In a recent issue of a local paper it was stated that in Auckland they wero organising two Roman Catholic companies. Now, sir, if this thing is going to bo allowed by the Defence Department to one section of the community, why not treat all alike and no one could say anything against the proposed ideah But when it came to tho Highland regiments they tried lo do away with it altogether. I am not against the Catholics having their own companies for it will bo a great deal to our own interest as well as to theirs; but I do not see why one should be nursed while tho other is kicked. It is about time tho Defence Department woko up to the fact that to make tho new scheme a succors it should try to encourage instead of putting a greater gulf between tho people and themselves. Now, as one who is highly interested in this new scheme I would like t<s ask: Is it not a wcllrknown fact that, the kilt is tho best marching dress in the British Army, and wherever a Highland regiment has been it has proved itself to bo one of tho right class of tho regular soldier, and can proudly uphold their traditions? If tho kilt is to be abandoned at least in tho local soldiery, New Zealand can say to her shame that it is the only country under the Union .Tack that has so degraded the kilt—not only the kilt, but it is an insult to the Scotchmen who are in the country. Now, again at tho meeting the other night a local officer said that the kilt would only bo lost for about two years, but if we arc to let them go for that time, it U better for us to keep them for I hope the Department does not think that the Highlanders aro going to be dictated to by a lot of uudcr-strappers who imagine they can do and say what they like. And yet this is what they are attempting to do.—l am, etc., BEN NA GAEL.