THE POSTAL ENQUIRY.

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3169, 21 August 1917, Page 6

THE POSTAL ENQUIRY.

MR; ELLIOTT'S CASE CLOSED,

CASE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OPENED.

By Telesrapli-Prcss Association. Auckland, August 20 The hearing of evidence by the. Commission appointed to investigate tho allegations made by tho Hov. Howard Elliott against Postal officials in Auckland was continued to-day. Harty Seabrook produced correspondonco with Postal officers in regard to tho return of a letter addressed )o "Tho Menace,'" nn Amoricau publication, which lotter was marked "Prohibited." Ho also produced a letter from tho Postmaster(.Toneral expressing regret (hut this letter had beon returned, especially a.s thero wns no authority for that act. The Department had lie. doubt that (he letter bad i been slopped through a. misunderstanding. The Postmaster-General was iiot aware of any organisation to stop tho issuo of "The Menace," and assured Seabrook that neither of tho two officers con. cerned in the stopping of. the letter in question was a Itoinah Catholic.

Mr. Gray asked witness would he accept tho statement: that neither of tho officers concerned was a Horrmn Catholic,

Witness, after some hesitation, replied: Yes, I do; but I want to kuow who is at the back of tho*; officers.

William ttichardson, printer, stated tllat in March or April he was waited on by Superintendent Iviely and two policemen. Superintendent Iviely asked if ho had published a leaflet entitled "Rome's Hideous Guilt in the European Carnage." Witness replied that it lx>re lite imprint. The .superintendent asked how many copies had beon published, and witness replied 15,000. The superintendent .seemed surprised, though witness had since discovered that the number published totalled 20,000. Ho asked _if witness intended to continue publishing these pamphlets, to which witness replied that he did, and that, it had been reprinted from the "Church Magazine." Tho superintendent asksd if he intended to print more. Witness replied that he did. ■ A few more witnesses gave evidence of not having received envelopes addressed I to them, which closed .Mr. Elliott's case. The inquiry was adjourned till Tuesday. Auckland, August 20. In opening the case for the Postal De. partnient, Mr. Gray said the Post Office enjoyed full and complete public confidence. It remained to Mr. Elliott to break down that confidence by making wholesale charges of corruption and breaches of duty against, officials in Auckland. It appeared that Mr. Elliott and his friends wer,e moved not so much by a. grievance against the Post Office and its officials as by a desire to use the Post Office as a stalking-horse in an attempt to shake off the censorship estab. lished upon au organisation avowedly aimed at hindering the operations of tho J?oman Catholic Church. It was possible that-Mr. Elliott believed he had a high and lioly mission to coinJiat what ho believed to be errors of the Roman Catholic Church, but euch belief did not justify the methods ho employed on the public platform and elacwhoro to base the allegations he had rnado against the private life.of ministers and teachers of the Roman' Catholic Church, and were bound to create ill-will, aniLtho samo applied to the letters written to trap postal officials. A person who would stoop I to such methods was devoid, of any sense. I of the duty ho owed to those whom he sought to attack. Mr. Elliott's propaganda had created anger, bitterness, and resentment in the community. Such, utterances came literally within the war regulation which prohibited the exciting of such hostility and ill-will as would endanger the public safety. Oue of his allegations, that Roman Catholics were not taking a proper part iu the war, was unquestionably euch as would arouse bitterness in the heart of every Roman Catholic who heard of it. considering that a largo proportion of the British Army and almost the whole of tho Belgian and French Annies wore composed of mombers of the Catholic Church. Mr. Gray claimed that Mr. Salmond had completely disposed of the allegation that the censorship of box had been instigated by Catholic influence. Tho postal officials were in no way responsible ;'or the operation of that censorship. Ho would prove tliat of 2500 circulars posted on July 6 none was delayed by the censor, because., owing to a mistake, none was submitted to him. The delay must have occurred in tho Post Office, and ho -was prepared to submit every officer to give evidence regarding it. The evidence had proved enly nine envelopes delivered empty, and there wero only five proved cases of no delivery at all. W. It. Morris, Secretary of the Post Office, stated that the Department took no account of the religion of its employees. He did iiot know, or desire to know, how many Catholics were in the service. Hβ had never heard of friction between Protestants and Catholics in tho Department. Asked by Mr. Ostler to produce the Solicitor-Generars order and the correspondence between him and the Department, Mr. Morris said he would not do so without specific instructions. Mr. Bishop said he had no authority to order the production, of these documents. Mr. Morris said ho did not think his attitude inconsistent with his statement that the Post Office did not desiro to conceal anything. The question would affect the "censorship and not the- Post Office.