A WOMAN’S JOURNAL

Hokitika Guardian, 5 December 1924, Page 4

A WOMAN’S JOURNAL

. QL'IvSTIOX OF PIUXCII’U I ucv. ti. ! The action of the managers «»f the 1 woman’s publication. “Wonmn’n Xu- i tional Council New-.” in .suppressing ) portions of a lcltor without consultm*; f tho editress. was the subject of a large- f Iv attended meeting under the auspices of the W.C.T.U.. held in St .lohn’s school-room to-night. when a resolution was carried expression entire approval ■ of the actions of the editress. The otter referred to was intended for pnbli- < cation in the correspondents’ column, and related to the trunic death of a , woman at the Kelvin Maternity llospi- . tal. A letter was received from the Christchurch branch upholding the edi- , tress. .Miss limiting. Mrs \Y. F.vans presided, mid read apologies for absence from .Mrs Clover and I.ady Stout, who upheld the edi- i tri'ss. Mrs Kavns expressed the opinion that ir there had been more of the league spirit, which was so much in tin" air to-day. brought into the present regrettable state of affairs, it might not have been necessary to summon the meeting. The president said she would waive the personal aspect to discuss the broader principles involved, and she did not intend to refer to •anything prior to the publication of the letter ol .Mrs I!bodes. Such a letter, ii would not he denied, necessarily appealed to different women in a different manner. 'l'he main point involved was that the letter bail been altered, or. rather, portions deleted without reference to Miss 1., limiting, the editress. .Mrs I'.vans outlined the incidents leading up to the meeting, mentioning that every effort had been made to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion without the necessity of calling the present meeting, hut one of the managers. Miss Knglaiid, who had been asked to attend the eniifer- • once and give explanation, had objected to the presence of either the editress or stenographers. She wondered what the dill'ereiieo in relationship of managers and editor on flic “Woman s ' 'National Council News” could he as compared with the usual relationship , existing between the parties on other • papers. There was a very broad priui ciple involved, and it was tlie duty of Women to stand up to a principle which they firmly believed to lie right. (Ap-

phlllso). I Mrs I’oiTyniiiii, prosielent nf the I'oxton branch of tin* AV.C.T.U. mill eeli- ’ tress anil business manager of tin* - “Wliito Rihbnn,” saiel slio propns'etl to . speak from tlu* broader constitutional i principles than upon the personal as- , poet. First of all came the cause of womanhood, and anything that threatened to wreck it was to he avoided. !> The journal was to further advance s womanhood, hut this could not he done * unless free discussion was allowed on I important subjects. The letter written a hy Mrs llholies dealt with one of the ( burning and most important <|uestions u of the day. She wrote fearlessly and oonrnecoiislv. and had avoided the law ’ of liliol. The editress passed the letter a |,ut io her surprise found the mnnay eers had with-held puhlieat ion. and als p,„-,*d the letter to he puhlished in an if abridged form. There was nothin!.' aluisiv’e in the letter, although the lanii gunge might have been justilinbK „ strong. It could not he suggestei! that the managers could have powers ol censorship without consulting the editor. ’■ who was. and must always he, the suII preme authority as to what is pulsis lished. and the managers had certainly ■v done wrong in the case under review. y. They had displayed the gravest discourtesy, and further, had shown an utter lack of sporting instinct and lack ol knowledge ol what was right in a * newspaper oHiee. It was nothing moie M or less than a direct vote ol no-iou-fideuce in an editress who was a pl'olesu* sjonal journalist, with a reputation to h defend. The society, iherefore, had a |o light t• i stand behind her on a i|iicstion of principle a licet ing womanhood. Numerous branches had passed resolutions " upholding .Miss Hunting. It was rers ' tainly Iclt that an explanation should 11 lie forthcoming, ami also an apology to r ’- the editress and an assurance that ie there would not he a similar oecurie fence again. When there was a vital ,f ((iiestion at issue, the woman of today wanted the plain, ungarbled truth, and. did not want any “red herrings drawn across the trail. (Applause). '' The National Council of Women wa« "■ too \ aluahle to lie scrapped, and he■r lore the iptestion of allilialioii should lie considered it would he advisable to wait until all avenues had been traversed with a view to going to the

highest women’s court if necessary. I Alter dealing with all aspects ol the 'case, the following resolution was carried unanimously: “I hat this meeting is convinced that the subject of imitermil mortalitv calls for the frankest and •* fullest dsic iission, and no good purpose e could la* served hy any attempt to burl; ;, inquiry into all its contributing ,o causes.”

A motion: “That this meeting having failed so lar to discover that the* terms cell which the late editor accepted the* position differ in any way from those which usually govern the relationship between manager and editor in other papers, believe* that no other course except resignation was open to her.” was carried with one* dissentient. Aliss Bunting, in expressing pleasure* at the* feeling ol the meeting, saiel that she hail hi*eii lighting lor a- princinle. and a principle* only. The meeting concluded with votes of thanks.