THE WAR LEGISLATION BILL

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 44, 16 November 1918, Page 10

THE WAR LEGISLATION BILL

ADVERSE CRITICISM

Mr. H. F. von Haast has sent copies of the following letter to members of both Houses of Parliament:—

Dear Sir,— I Permit mo to draw your attention to i the grave injustice that will be done to | a large class of loyal natural-born BritMi subjects, born and bred in New Zenland but of German extraction, if tho above Bill becomes law iu its present form. , Such British subjects (although many of them have fought and died for their country) are by tho Bill termed 'persons of enemv origin," and they and their wives are prohibited for all time—unless the Act be repealed-from acquiring land or even leasing it for more than two years unless licensed to do so by the Minister of. Lands. This prohibition appeal's to extend to investment of moneys upon mortgage of land. Let me call attention to the consequences bv concrete cases:— ■ 1. We accept as a volunteer, and compel to light if he does not volunteer, every natural born British subject, son of a German naturalised in New Zealand beforo his birth. Such a. man might have volunteered, fought all through the war, won the V.C., and yet on his return ho could not buy himself a home or even rent a dwelliiighouse for more than two years without a license from the Minister, nor could his widow if he were killed at the front. 2. Let ine cite mv own case, because it is illustrative of the injustice done by the Bill, because I have no objection to being referred to by name in the course of the discussion, and because 1 am better able to stand any attacks that may be made upon me than younger and less. known num. T ~' My father, the late Sir Julius von Haast, a German bom in Bonn, was naturalised iu New Zealand nearly sixty years ago, and died more than thirty 'years ago. His services to New Zealand speak for themselves. My mother was an Englishwoman, daughter of the late Edward Dobsuti, C.E., one of the Canterbury pilgrims and another of New Zealand's pioneers. I was bom in 18G4 after my father's naturalisation, and bom and bred in New Zealand: My wife was born in Australia of Scotch parentage. No New Zealander, therefore, on account 1 of the services to tho Dominion of his ancestors on both sides, has a better claim to consideration from his country and a better right to have all his privileges and his status as a British subject preserved in their integrity. Of my own attempts to serve the State I must'let others speak. Suffice it to say.--as some proof of the confidence reposed in me-fchat during .the. war the Wellington District Law Society elected me its president, the Government apuointed me a member of the Board of Science and Art and also of the "University Senate, .on which latter body I had represented the graduates for several years before. In spite of these facts I am by tho.Bill declared a person of enemy origin, neither my wife nor I may buy an eighth of an acre on which to build a. four-roomed cottage or rent a house for more than two years, and in the event of my death mv widow may not even buy a plot of land wherein to bury me in my own country without a license from the Minister of Lands. And the irony of it is that tho Minister himself may lie not only a person of enemy origin, but a fullblooded German born in Germany and naturalised in New Zealand. It will be said that the person of enemy origin is protected because, if ho is loyal, the Minister will grant him a license. But the Minister has an absolute discretion. He is not compelled to grant licenses to loyalists; he may, if he chooses, refuse licenses to all persons of enemy origin. If a future Minister happened to bo one of those who speak so violently, against New Zealanders <f German extraction, he would refuse licenses to all of them. Moreover, tho Minister in tho future may ba a man who has been guilty of sedition and hindered his country in the hour of need: he may be a Sinn feiner, who conspired with the Germans and took part in the ■Dublin revolution; or a Boer, who seized tho opportunity of the cutbreak of war to reoel against us in South Africa. Any one of these men might acquire laud in New. Zealand without restriction. Tlio Bill casts a slur on all natmralborn British subjects of Gorman extraction. The term "persons of .enemy origin" leads the public to suppose that 1 and others like me are in a "pariah" class, that prima facie wo are traitorous and disloyal. It does more: it is a direct incentive to the rest of the community to boycott us, especially as every person knowingly concerned in the making of a contract for the acquisition of land by an unlicensed person of enemy origin is liable to three months' imprisonment, if, therefore, I or any other person of enemy origin, seeks to purchase an eighth of an acre on whicu to build a four-roomed cottage, or to lease a house, the owner, in view of tho lead given him by the Bill, may ba inclined to say: "No persons of enemy origin need apply. Why should I be bothered to inquire whether you can get a license from |'the Minister or not?"

Moreover, by all those who are singing a hymn of hate against New Zealauders of German extraction this Bill will be considered. a first step towards the total exclusion of all "persons of enemy origin." There will follow demands that persons of enemy origin be prohibited from acquiring shares, from exercising the franchise, from holding a position in the Civil Service, from being eligible for Parliament, and so on until life is made intolerable and impossible for them in their native land. If you take away from the native-born New Zealander of German rxtractiou tho elementary right of a British subject to acquire his home and make it dependent on tho caprice of a Minister, a right possessed by the foreigner naturalised and resident only a few ,v>ars in New Zor4and, the criminal, the negro, tin! rcbci, the sedition-monger, the coward, and the shirker, the deprivation of his other rights may' appear to the people not to be illogical. I understand that in all other statutes and regulations the rights of- naturalborn British subjects have been preserved. May I respectfully suggest that justice demands that the same course be followed in this Bill, and that the verdict of 'Parliament, to-day shall be in tho case of native-born New Zealanders in their own country as the verdict of the House of Commons was 08 years ago in tho case of Don Pacifico (a Jew, a Portuguese by extraction, but a native of Gibraltar,' and a British subject living in Athens), that "a British subject. 1 inVhatevw land he may 'bo, shall feel confident that the watchful eye and the strong arm of England will protect him agnin6t injustice and wrong"?—l am, CtC " H. F. VON HAAST. November 11.