The Chronicle LEVIN. SATURDAY, JUNE 16, 1917. THE WAR REGULATIONS; ALSO APPLES.

Levin Daily Chronicle, 16 June 1917, Page 2

The Chronicle LEVIN. SATURDAY, JUNE 16, 1917. THE WAR REGULATIONS; ALSO APPLES.

Instructive argument n'<>ncerniin{3 the War Regulations of New Zealand took place recently between the 'New Zea- • ind A ttoirney-Ge ne ra 1 (Hion. A. Jj. Herdman) and Sir John Findlay, M.P. In defending the political, prisoner P. ' C. Wobb, a member of the Xow Zealand | Parliament who wa<s tried for sedition ' a low weeks ago, Sir John iFindlay remarked that if the arguments of the counsel for the Crown (Mr Raymond. K. 0., were accepted 'by thei Magis-1 trate, a power of autocracy would be given to the Ministers that would be too great for any liberty-loving person to care to continue under. (We give the purport of Sir John's utterance; not fhis 'exact words). fTlie Attorney-General, in the course of an interview wth ia (Dominion reporter, took .Sir John Findlav's remarks to apply to The War Regulations as a whole, and not solely to Mr Raymond's contention; and the Attorney-General's comment was that the War Regulations were meant only to prevent speech or acts inimical to a successful prosecution of the war. The iBon; I Mr .Her dm mi's assertions must ho governed wholly >I>vi what the weekly fruit of the 'Retaliations amount to. lii "Wellington last week a man was sent to prison for uttering in the street some century-old allegations as to the difference, between soldiers who kill men in doing a soldier's duty to his country and men who in passion commit murder. \How such vapid utterances could he construed into "an interference with the proper conduct by the authorities of 'Niow Zealand's part in the war," the magistrate and the Hon. Mr Herdman might tell; but for four own' part we feel jimpelled to dissemble our own opinions of the procedure; .and 1 to urge upon the Attorney -General and his fellow Oa;b3net 'Ministers l ithe exoeptiona.l suitability of Levin lands for the growing of apples. Tn doing this, we foiel sure that even the Wellington magistrate will be unable to construe our abortion into any covert act intended on our part to hamper this dominion's executive in its attempt to do its duty b.v the l (lonian ('Oil. We merely call attention to the wonderfully fecund qualities of Levin soil so as to preserve our mind from any tendency to reflect upon the problem of prohibition of thought "by War Regulations. But as to the Regulations themselves we are on 'broader ground; wg have the Attorney-General's assurance to our safety in that regard. So we intend

to refer to the "War Regulations in j unmlstakeable language. Wo frankly say that we hav© 110 sympathy with people, who make sueli insulting rema arks as those vised by tho Welling-! ton tradueer of our soldiery. But that aspect is apart from the main j issue; were merely mention it lierc by way of very necessary anticipatory answer to a class of tradueer not unknown in this district. "What we "do" stand up against, without reservation, is the substitution of government by Regulation for the constitutional practice of government by Statute. The practice of government by regulation is the worst legacy .that has come down to /Now Zwalanders from the Seddonian days. It was obj'ect'iionaMe when Ififfit introduced; it is fifty times more so in theso times of stress, and whes administered by Ministers such as some who now hold office. Tiro (BritishEmpire fights to-day to maintain liberty and justice; her overseas States and Dominions and Colonies hack her endeavors; and yet, hero in New Zealand, tho communities sustain almost in silence a liffcrity-strangjliug:, oliga re)i ia 1-adniji 11 isteral, restricting and hj'pocrite-minkirlg system of isujipression of public criticism that is enough to make finely-ibalaujcied men and stronger ones to bide their time determinedly. Tho parlous case for Liberty was excellently pourtrayed by Sir John Fiudlny; but to our mind he missed the strongest argument of all against tho present system. It is this: that no body other than Parliament as a whole (in its capacity as law-giver) should have power to constitute a penal offence. The delegated power of doing this may be within Parliament's right to transfer; but we doulbit 'i't., 'Beyond argjnmtent the: fact is that the making of the regulations sprang into practice' as a helping corollary to an administration of the country's affairs by Cabinet, Ministers; obviously a Parliament could not provide by statute all necessary; machinery) for collecting customs levies, agricultural supervision, and so forth. But surely it was nover Parliament's intention to delegate to a Cabinet the power to make degrees of ■ criminal offences (in such wi~e as that which the. Coalition Cabinet lately has done?) 'It is hard to .say whether the tragic or the preposterous aspect of the, case is the more impressive. Who .are these administrators? these makers of [political criminals? They are but an aggregation of peaceful-time mediocrities raised to (Parliamentary place oil waves of popular appreciation for bazaars opened, railway concessions secured, children all admired, subscriptions given, and hands shaken! They have brought to their duties (in the aggregate of their ability), a brainbound strabismus-eyed outlook 011 the broad field of politics that is deplorable 'in times of stress such as these. In times of peace no big issues arose to demonstrate political ineptitude. But, oh, the change! Our men to-day fight for an admirable sentiment (Liberty) and tho sentiment is about all that New Zealand has in these days! And the worst feature of the case is the necessity wo and others are Hinder of 'thei practice. However, we have to-day one safe line to follow (wo thank the Attorney-General for the hint) : wo criticise the regulations; not what they are intended to safeguard. Hitherto w-e have been constrained to dilate over-much on the prevalence of 'malic-acid properties in the soil of Levin; it is a safe, helpful method of "using language to conceal our thoughts'' of which the Herniations take 110 purview. But. as we had begun to say, when our ''King Charles's head," tile apple, again fell in upon us, the At-torney-General has shown the way out —and .we follow it. The Government Regulations, in short and long, reflect the ways of men whose hearts are bigger tlmn their intellects; of men wlioe methods (in peace time as in war time) are those dear to the hearts of all oligarchs; whether Russian, Austrian, German or New Zealand Conservative. S'uch men, but for the fortune of birth and wise immigration laws might have been growing apples in mid-Europe to-day and lamenting the failure of their chief director of orchards (or empire) to repress the striking tendienidies of the Strausvilleirs. (If the foregoing sentence is not as clear as it ought to be, our readers must blame the Regulations not ourselves). What we would say, ere retiring into our apple for three months or s'o (like the editorial codlin grub that we have to be), is that the trUo Principle of liberty js that which -is established oif the broad basis of preponderating; public b'pinion. That public opinion always places true value upon public utterances; and the vapid, tho raucous, tho unreasonable expressions of opinions (that so stir the political souls of the political and Social nonientiitieis who predominate) in high places) perturb no wide circles in the aggregate of tho [ people. The best way with human geysers (as with natural ones) is to let J them blow. If they represent 110 I great number of the body politic they will stir no great number, and if ever they attain to the position of com--5 manding a majority of the people it will bo the duty of the present Attor-ney-Goneral and his fellow Ministers and supporters to acknowledge that numerical superiority in a constitu- | tional manner. That there "have" ben dissidents from . such truly constitutional views as this (even amongst Attorney-Generals) an English example not yet five years old will prove. But wo are certain that 110 such • precedent as this could obtain in New Zealand. Pending the arrival of this remotely-distant event, the small minority of malcontents should be allowed liberty of speech; not bo muzzled and made dangerous by Regulations iand ; pen!al processes and sentences devised to do (at groat -expense and by infliction of misery) the work that a healthy* public opinion reallv ensures automaticallv. ' ■ * |