RIGHTS OF ALIENS.

Taranaki Daily News, 15 September 1922, Page 5

RIGHTS OF ALIENS.

REMOVING RESTRICTIONS. PROPOSAL BEFORE HOUSE. GERMANS AND OTHERS. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. In the House to-night, the Hon. W. D. Stewart moved the second reading of the War Disabilities Removal Bill. He explained that during the war there grew up of necessity a whole forest of regulations relating to alien enemies. The definition of an alien enemy had a wide application, and many naturalised persons came within it, much to their annoyance. This class of persons included Syrians, who, against their inclinations, were subjects of Turkey, and as a result many disabilities were placed upon them, though they were perfectly loyal in their conduct.

It was now felt the time had come when these disabilities should be removed, and the Bill proposed to do this, insofar as no person who in New Zealand is a British subject, whether by naturalisation or otherwise, shall hereafter be (subject to the disabilities imposed by any Act or war regulation. The restrictions would, however, continue so far as ■ foreign enemy subjects were concerned. The right of naturalisation would still be reserved by the State and no person naturalised in some other part of the Empire need not necessarily be regarded as naturalised in New Zealand. Those precautions would, he thought, amply protect the State against undesirable or treacherous persons. Mr. T. K. Sidey (Dunedin South) said he did not consider the Bill a contentious measure. His feeling was it was long overdue, and should have been brought down much earlier in the session. The time had undoubtedly come when we should take this step.

Mr. C. E. Statham (Dunedin Central) regretted ’the Bill was limited to naturalised subjects. He thought it should apply to all Christian Syrians in the Dominion, as they unquestionably were loyal to Britain and had no occasion to love Turkey, of which country they were technically subjects. He thought we had gone too far in withdrawing the rights of citizenship to persons who were naturalised before the war.

The Hon. J. A. Hanan thought the experience of Britain, where many trusted Germans turned traitors towards the country which befriended them, quite warranted us in placing restrictions on naturalised (subjects, especially Germans. This legislation was evidence of a remarkable change in public opinion. A few years ago no one would have dreamed that such a Bill would be introduced so soon after the war. His opinion was that no German should be allowed to own an acre of land in New Zealand, and he thought we should exercise caution in passing such legislation as this.

Mr. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) urged that the time had arrived when we should remove all war disabilities and restore the vote to conscientious objectors.

Mr. G. R. Sykes (Masterton) protested against any concession being granted to conscientious objectors. He felt they were safer in gaol than at tlie front.

Mr. Massey said that if all our people objected to defend the Empire New Zealand would be under the heel of despotism to-day. and he would sooner see it under the waters of the Pacific than that that should happen. As to the objection that British women who married alien enemies became alien subjects it was the law of Britain, prior to the war and of almost every country that the nationality of the husband became the nationality of the wife. and he believed it was so still. He bad not beard it had been altered; at any rate, there was .good reason for it during the war. He had no wish to be vindictive, but as chairman of the atrocities committee at the Peace Conference he could not forget the horrors they heard described there as the work of Germans, and he thought tha men guilty of them ought to have been punished. The Kaiser, who was largely responsible for the war, should have been punished, but unfortunately he was not. However, he thought we were safe in going as far as the Bill proposed to go, and he urged the House to pass it.

The Bill was read a second time.