REV ELLIOTT'S ACTIONS

New Zealand Times, Volume XLII, Issue 9796, 20 October 1917, Page 2

REV ELLIOTT'S ACTIONS

PRONOUNCEMENT BY BAPTIST UNION. At its sitting yesterday, the executive of the Baptist Union considered the question of ttho actions of the Kcv. Howard Elliott as organiser of the Protestant Political Association and tno attitude assumed towards him in Parliament, and especially by Mr h. M. Isitt, M.P. Subsequently the secretary, Bov. B. S. Gray, was authorised to make public the following resolutions, which were carried unanimously : “That we desire it to he understood that tho Baptist denomination has no connection as a denomination with the Protestant Political Association or any other political association, but inasmuch as tho fact of the Rev. Howard Elliott being a of the Baptist Church was stressed in Parliament as though the denomination were itself involved in Mr Elliott’s proceedings, this executive resolves : “1. That this executive condemns the action of tho Government in instituting a censorship over the P.P-A. P.O. box, applying not only to literature but also to private correspondence, while it refrained from any similar action with regard to the Roman Catholics, and holds that its failure to prosecute tho Roman Catholic organ the ‘Tablet’ for the publication ot seditious articles warranted tho charges of. religious partisanship. It attaches no importance to the statement-made by the Attorney-General, Mr Hordraan, that, acting upon the advice of the Crown Haw Office, he concluded that no action should be taken, as a verdi could not he obtained, since suffii advice was tendered by a department which, either in ignorance or defiance of tho fact, acted without any legal authority in giving instruction that the unjust censorship should he instituted. , r r ..... “2. That while it accepts Mr Isitt a assurance that so far as the “ a Pt' s t Union was concerned he was actuated only by a desire to defend its good name, this executive feels that it was quite competent to deal with the matter, and regrets that its action was prejudiced by such a public declaration as that made by him m Parliament. It considers that a more judicial statement of the case might have been expected from him, and ls E™atly surprised that ho uttered no word of condemnation of the Government s unjustly discriminating censorship. 1 “3. That it entertains no doubt of Mr Elliott’s sincerity, but dissociates itself entirely from the. cb S ges .^f ers insinuations contained ui the letter, which have caused so much public dilusstn and condemns the use and publication of them in with the Roman Catholic Church.