DOMINION BOOK

Waikato Times, Volume 128, Issue 21371, 15 March 1941, Page 11

DOMINION BOOK

ATTITUDE TO ENGLAND MR MILNER EXPLAINS REPLY TO CRITICISM (By Telegraim.—Press Association) DUNEDIN, Friday A reply to criticism of his recent address concerning the publication “Contemporary New Zealand” was made by Mr Frank Milner in a statement last night. “In reply to Mr Downie Stewart’s query,” he said, “I have to say that I did in full conference dissociate myself from the assessment of New Zealand’s attitude to Britain as given in ‘Contemporary New Zealand.’ Did he do the same? I may say that I went to the 1938 Empire Conference resolved to keep my mouth shut. In spite of high Governmental precedent to the contrary, I did not think it seemly for delegates from microscopic New Zealand to educate the Empire. I did, however, make one break, and that was to attempt to castigate the protagonist of the New Zealand speakers for his distorted version of Britain’s Far East policy. “As for the Hon. W. E. Barnard’s reprimand,” Mr Milner continued, “I regret he does not know the context of my remarks. I made a protest against the resuscitation of Professor Findlay’s unfortunate characterisation of our loyalty as national feeble-mindedness. This was recently contributed by Dr. W. M. Sutch to the March, 1941, number of the ‘National Education.’ I did not, disinter the corpse. The exhumation was done by Dr. Sutch, who snuffs up its putrescent odour with his customary avidity. As for ‘Contemporary New Zealand.’ I used the first chapter merely to illustrate the continuity of this pestilent policy of deprecating our Imperial affiliation in order to foster and camouflage republicanism and economic self-sufficiency.” STATEMENTS QUALIFIED EDUCATIONAL SUBJECT (By Telegraph.—Press Association) WELLINGTON, Friday “Some of you will have noticed in the press a reference to National Education by Mr Frank Milner in connection with remarks passed by him about the book ‘Contemporary New Zealand,’ ” said the Dominion president of the Education Institute, Mr D. Forsyth, at a meeting of the Wellington branch tonight. “It is only fair to the editor of National Education and to the contributor who wrote the article after consultation with the editor to point out that the whole text was devoted to an educational subject without any reference to partisan politics. “The quotation to which Mr Milner took exception referred in the first instance to a matter of national culture and was, moreover, qualified in National Education by the remarks which followed. They were; “This was written well before the present war and was not comment on the naturally understandable views of most New Zealanders at present, but there is a significant phrase used which explains what I mean—energies unavailable for the uses of ordinary life. That is the trouble. Our lives lose flavour, richness and even meaning because our energies, thoughts and senses have not been directed to New Zealand.’ “The Educational Institute has always provided space in its journal for free discussion of problems related to educational and cultural matters and could not possibly permit any form of private censorship to question or distort views expressed,” said Mr Forsyth. “In this instance the controversy has arisen quite outside the scope of anything said in National Education, as any fair-minded reader can see by referring to the current issue.”