FORBIDDEN IN WARTIME

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 222, 7 June 1918, Page 6

FORBIDDEN IN WARTIME

LITERATURE THAT MIGHT CAUSE ILL-FEELING

P.P.A. AND THE WAR CENSORSHIP

THE GOVERNMENT'S ATTITUDE '

fke "lueshoii °f the censorship of printed matter has been discussal be tween the Government and the Proteint Politica Association recently. The fol lowng-letter has been addressed to Jf r J. b.. Dickson, M.P., ns representing the Dominion Executive of the Protectant Political Awociaiion by tho Hon. Arthur I on. Sir l-raucis Bell, Attorney-Gen-

Ilie question or permission for entry into Jfen- Zealand from abroad of printed matter, questionable by reason of its charaoler in lime of w,ir, is one to be decided by the Minister of Customs The stoppage of sale or other circulation of literature already in Now Zealand, or printed in jW Zealand, is a matter con. trolled by the Attorney-General To ensure as far as possible uniformity in the principle of our decisions we have arranged to act together in determining tho various questions involved and, at our request, Mr. Martin Chapman, Jv.C, has kindly consented to read and* act as censor of ail literature referred to him by us, and to advise us as to its character.

Our duty is to prevent, during the war, tho circulation of matter, objectionable for numerous reasons, of which it is only necessary at present to define three general classes, viz.—(a) Incitement to resistance of the law; (b) i reasonable as having a tendency to assist tho enemy; or (c) so offensive in language, allegations, or insinuations as to give rise to justifiable resentment by any clues of the community. "Under class ic) wo have to deal with the literature in respect of which you have mado representations, and of wh'ich the books and pamphlets already stopped at the Customs aye examples. Every work must be considered and dealt with on the separate considerations affecting its special character, but we think it desirable to lay down for your guidance somo indication of the general principles wo propose to adopt in regard to the class of printed matter which your association desires to circulate.

''Literature attacking nny religous doctrine or political principle is only objec. tionablo if the language used is outrageous in its violence. Again, the attribution to a religious sect of objects distinct from the advancement of religion is not of itself sufficient to justify intervention by us. But the'attribution of habitual immorality to classes of persons who have taken a vow of celibacy is beyond tho line of permissible controversy during the wnV. Members of one of such classes oinnot defend themselves, and the public .peace and safety would bo endangered if the circulation of such matter were permitted." Deputation of Protest. • Following upon the receipt of this letter the Dominion Executive appointed a deputation tu wait upon Sir Francis .Bell and thei Hon. A. M. Myers on Tuesday last, when tho matter was discussed at length. Mr. Dickson, M.P., stnted that lie had received tho letter addressed to him by Sir Francis Bell aud Mr. Myers. .They I wished to oppose the appointment of Mr. Martin Chapman, K.C., as censor, and desired to know whether ho would bo a military' censor. They had had experience of a case in Auckland in which the military censor had absolutely refused to answer any question in Court, and they did not want a repetition of that. He thought that the instructions which it was proposed to give Mr. Chapman were tantamount to a direction to prohibit the introduction of tho books in question. The literature was not, being imported by the Protestant Political Association, but they were aware that tho books were, for sale throughout the British Dominions, and no other Government had taken steps to interfere with their circulation. Ho felt that they were not Tecoiving fair treatment by the action proposed. Sir Francis Bell said he wished to re(imovo an apparent misapprehension as to tho duties of the censor. Tho Minister of Customs and he could not read all the literatim that might be stopped by the j Department (more was involved than tho I particular class of book now under dis-r cussion), and they Unci nsked Mr. Chapman to read the literature and advise them. Tho censor would have no further responsibility, the actual decision remaining with tho Ministers. A Dangerous Expedient. The Rov. Howard Elliott said the matter they particularly wished to refer to was class (c) mentioned in the letter sent to Mr. Dickson, viz., literature "so offensive in language, allegations, or insinuations as to give rise to Justifiable resentment by any class of the community." They were in hearty agreement with the Government's desire, to suppress literature coming under classes (a) and (b). There was nothing disloyal in the platform of the association; but class (c) was entirely different, and could not bo clearly defined as could classes (a) and (b). The principle proposed was capable of very far-reaching effects. A censorship for literature that was not treasonable or seditions, but merely affected religious institutions, wns particularly lin-Mritish. As nn asso-' ciutioii _ they wore onposed to the introduction of immoral litonituro us they wero to the exhibition of immoral pi<, lures. But when it became a question of censoring litcrduro not on moral grounds but merely on tho ground that feeling in nw Rfction of (lie community inii.'ht bo oxcilod, tho proposal was o.v cnwlingly vexatious. Ono of the planks <if (heir pliilfni'in »w mi association was hi ngititn for the Government inspw, (.ion of nil institutions, anil they wished to develop a public opinion nloiig educational linen lather than by nny violent campaign. Such work was being done in England. Tt was a question wjiether thb Government wns justified in fSiipnrcssing ii record of facts which throw light upon a condition of things operating in other countries, and which in some degree might liuvo influence here. The Roman Catlinlic Church had foiled in the Supreme Courts in Canada and tho United States t<. suppress certain of th'j books which, the Nmv Zealand Government now {imposed to prohibit. Tho attion proposed was a violation of ttie priuciplo of freedom in a matter which was calculated to servo, a legitimate purpose. The association was in no way concena ed in tho books financially. The pre posnl to appoint a censor was setting uj> a false standard of decision, namely, Was the literature likely (o irritate the "Roman Catholics? It wns a standard that took no account of the truth or historical value of the bonks. And it wns not being applied uniformly. Tho "Tablet" had not been: interfered with, ' and tho literature for which search was boinn madn w i.-) anli-lioman literature. If the books were true, there was no i reason to complain of tins use of the i facts. If they were unjnie, -redress , could bo obtained in the Courts of the country. As to tho appointment of a censor, he felt that no one man, nor any body of men, could lie considered a fair tribunal unless the party for which he stood was represented also. Tho appointment of any ono man, no 1 matter how well-informed or. how fair 1 lie might be, would merely give free play • to ''if own view.

Sfr Francis Dell iigMn exnlained ihat the function of the censor would ho mere, ly to read the bonks and advise Ministers. The decision would still rest with them.

The llov. Mr. Klliott said (hat certainly did lift the position to a different piano, but on the very highest, grounds it was not fair to subject literature which they desired to have to the decision of one or two Ministers. If the proposed standard of censorship were fair, it could be extended to (he meetings of the nsf.ociation also, a-s anything they said was irritating to tho Itomivn Catholic community. !

Sir Erancis 801 l pointed out that om

ivar regulation might be extended to interfere with innocent people, but the common-sense of the community and the fairness of tho Magistrates wero sufficient to prevent that being done. The Protestant Point of View. The "Rev. Mr. Elliott went on to say that the position from the Protestant point of view was a serious one. A number of concessions had been made to Roman Catholics in educational matters, and Archbishop O'Shea had practically challenged the Government on tho subject of conscription. The Protestants had' not given tho Government any anxiety. They had shown their desire, to assibt, whereas the Catholics were to-day prepared to forco the Government to an issue. Tho Protestants were prepared to stand by the National Government. They were the backbone of the country, and were being formed into a strong political assoSir Francis Bell suggested that tho discussion should not proceed further on. these lines. The Rev. Mr. Elliott said that the people throughout the country were tusious to do what was rigut, and. he urged that tho censorship be not_ proceeded with unless there wereobjections to the literature on moral grounds. / Thefffcv. Sir. Knowles Smith asked what was the definition of "justifiable resent- | ment," as referred to in the letter to Mr. Dickson, M.P. The interpretation might be made so broad as to include ■everything that was distasteful to a section of the community. Their association had repeatedly emphasised the fact that they stood for the winning of the war, but that sentiment was not -very clearly revealed in the publications of the ether side, which seemed more concerned with the exemption of certain classes'from miliinry service. He was unable to agree that '.he literahre in question could possibly affect the war in any direction. Ho recognised there were Roman Catholic priests who were anxious to take their place in the war, and tfns literature would not affect theif position in the slightest, nor would it either help or hinder, the man who did not want to go. War and Peace. Sir Francis Bell printed out that such men would be. equally, unaffected by *li 6 preaching of sedition, which could hardly be justified on that ground, lie wished in replying to distinguish between argument addressed tn the Government to convince it that it was , making a mistake, and statements made to the Government as to wlmt would happen to it if it adopted a curtain course. The latter class of statement or argument would not affect him for a. moment. He -ad listened with great interest to what had been said, and appreciated the temperate and forcible character of. the arguments used. Everyone, would concede that there was ft clnss of literature admissible in ordinary limes which was not admissible in limo of war. lor instance, it was practically within .ho i-Mit of all Englishmen to argue Urn conscription was undesirable, aud/bould not be adopted «i a matter of principle, and that was a right which every man was entitled Iff defend except at the. particular point of lime when his advocacy came to be against the interests oflhe country at war. AVhat right had any Government to legislate by wir regulations except tho admitted right o any country to suspend even the Habeas Corpus lc"n time of war? The personal nghb of everybody ceased to .ft taigo extent during that period when tho nation e existence was at stake, and the wholo ri £ even of appeal to cease by an executive Act, wine h1 in I me of peaco would be immoral, That disposed, from his point of view, of t at part of the argument winch was founded upon the traditional right oi Englishmen Scotchmen, and Irishmen to "sponk their minds. Eβ now came to the question as affecting the literature which they, desired to have admitted and to circnlate If tho Government were convinced that the circulation of this literature at this time was, by reason of the existence of the war, undesirable,,and if, in nation to that, it was found- that a certain part of that literature was to oflensiye as to invite the. dissension which tho \eiy formation of the National Government showed tho country desired to -avoid, then it was tho duty or the Government to exercise tho executive power which the country has entrusted to them. The Oniy Question. Tho fiev. Mr. Elliott: But one section of tho commiinitv has no right to bo irritated it what is published is true. _ Sir Francis Bell. "The question is not whether it is truo or not. 'lne point is that you should not at this time proceed to your proof or your attack. Why you choose this time,! do liot understand. The country has entrusted to us the right of saying whether this as a fit time for such propaganda. Personally, 1 dislike interfering with men in a manner in tinie cf peace no Government could adopt. But I know that 11 is necessary that in time of war some ono or somebody of men should determine what is and what is not expedient, and it is for tho body of the community until the end of the war to surrender their view of expediency." Ho and his colleague would take inie further consideration the arguments addressed to .them by the deputation; but that they shovfld have all the license of peace in time of war ' lie could not concede

Mr. Myers's Viows, _ The Hon. A. M. Myers (Minister of Customs) said he had listened to-the arguments of the deputation already in Auckland, and the attitude taken up by the Attorney-General was exactly what ho himself had adopted on that occasion. It was his privilege to carrs; out the duties of a Minister of the Crown, and he found regulations dealing with certain matters. Certain books were brought under his notice by his officials, and ho brought them before the Prime Minister, and the general conclusion was that at ii time like the present it was not desirable to circulate such literature. A distinction must bo made between the rights of individuals during timo of war and time of peace. Ho believed the deputvtion was acting from a sincere sense of duty, but the .Government was not concerned wiUh the truth of the allegations contained in the books They were only concerned as to what the eitect would be on the wholo community. They might attack tho Roman Catholic Church in regard to mat'.ers affecting "any religious doctrine or political principle,' but when they brought in literature which wiis ofl'eiw.ve to u .section of the community, to whom, as to themselves, the Government was looking to do their ditty, tlie Government conceived it to be its duty to take up tlie altitude that had been defined. The Government would do everything possible to see that a' fair decision wns arrived at, and' with tiiis object in view had decided to appoint as censor a man who wns looked upon as eminently qualified to occupy such a position, and one who was likely to give an unbiased recommendation. The present was no timo to carry out the promulgation of such literature. That wns no'; going to help the Government in seeing that each section of thb community did its duty While Be National Government existed it would carry out its duties Irrespective of the views of any section of the community. And if every platform in tho country carried resolutions, that would not affect their attitude. There would be no , favouring of any one sectio.i of tlie community, and if tlie "Tablet" offended it would be dealt with in tho same way as nny other publication. IT* wai-. cognisant of dhe fact that the Rornnt> Catholic Laymen's Federation some time ago wns called into existence fo* tnt, purpose of _ promoting what they toncci/ed to be (liqir rights. The Kdv. Mr. Elliott thought tho Government irmy hare been influenced by Mhe noisy protests of the liotnnn Catholics to brtiove that the probability of trouble being caused by. (he literature in question was greater than it really was.