WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE?

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2462, 3 August 1922, Page 4

WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE?

It should be noted by all Christian people, whether Catholics, Protestants, or any other persuasion that here are references to Christ which are blasphemous from the standpoint that it is using His sac-red name from a political motive to instil into the minds of the young feelings of hatred towards others. The fact of the words being mild and' persuasive does not decrease the evil. We want our readers to realise that such is the kind of teaching that is being carried into hundreds of homes in New Zealand and pressed upon the attention of the children to the poisoning of their minds. Apart from the fact that the statement is historically an impudent lie, it is surely the lowest form of propaganda conceivable to use the religious feelings of children on which to build a bias of class prejudice and distrust. It will be useless for the “New Zealand Labour Party” (so-called) to protest that it is not responsible. The evidence is that the writing was produced by a member of that party who went to assist the party’s candidate, at Patea. There is also the fact that these vicious statements'have appeared repeatedly and no member of the party has ever challenged or repudiated them. The style, and other evidence, points to a leader of the party in Christchurch as the probable author. On a previous occasion the words “Official Organ of the New Zealand Labour Party” were removed from the heading of the sheet referred to. Spare us from any more of such hypocricv since it is well known that leading members of the party support, write for, edit, and manage the paper. The public can very well judge who are responsible. In the interests of decency and common sense we urge the suppression of this noxious political hysteria which insults all religious feeling by its blasphemous familiarity with events held sacred by all Christian people, whatever their political views.

Mr Howard’s last attempt at defence is a sneer at the wmy in which his opponent in the discussion makes his living. That is the teaching by the very bad example of mean personalities which prove nothing. (Contributed by the N.Z. Welfare League.)