Correspondence.

White Ribbon, Volume 23, Issue 276, 18 June 1918, Page 11

Correspondence.

(The Editor is not responsible for opinions expressed by correspondents.) (To the Editor.) Dear Madame,—At the Dominion Conv“ntion a resolution was passed urging the appointment of a woman censor for picture films. The members of the Hastings Union are feeling very strongly that some definite course of action should be adopted if we wish to achieve our object in this respect, and as a step in this direction they wish to urge the Unions throughout New Zealand to write to the Minister of Internal Affairs and ask for this appointment. If the Utters were backed up by a deputation from the Wellington Unions, the Minister might be further m ide to realise that there is really a very wide desire for reform of the present day picture shows. Hoping that the Wellington and other Unions will be able to help us in this matter. —I am, etc., R. M. LOVELL-SMITH. Sec. Hastings Union. 803 Ellison Road, Hastings, May 22 , 1918.

(To the Editor.) Dear Madam,— W ill you allow me to supply some information that may help to set right, or prevent a veryserious injustice? In the resolutions prepared last week by Lady Stout and distributed to a large number of women’s societies throughout the country there were two (Nos. 0 and 7) to which serious objection was taken here, and Lady Stout withdrew them ; they were not brought before the meeting on June Hat all. They have not, however, been withdrawn throughout the country, and som.° societies are passing them in complete ignorance of the facts, They run as follows: (>. “That til’s meeting strongly deprecates the inhumanity shown to the accused women in the kelburn cas° by the withholding of the verdict for over a month, thus inflicting unneces sary anxiety and misery on them.” 7. “That this meeting protests against the withholding of sentence in the Kelburn case until such time as the chief witnesses for the defence should have left the country, thus nullifying any chance of success in an appeal to a higher Court. in reference to No. 6, the charge of “inhumanity” would be cruel if it were not absurd. If a criminal is arrested just after the Supreme Court sittings, he will hav * to wait the best part of three months before he is even brought to trial, yet no one talks about inhumamtv. Secondly, tlv n delay was not “over a month/’ The case closed on May 9, and judgment w.ts delivered on June 4 —a space of 26' days. The ordinary interval when judgment is reserved in the Magistrate’s Court is about a week: here 1

there were four days of conflicting evidence to be sifted, it. addition to the ordinary work of a short-hand°d Bench. 1 1 en, in consequence of the sudden illness of the- Hawke’s Bay Magistrate, Mr McCarthy was despatched at the shortc st possible notice to tak - his plac e. I)ur ng his absence, so far as the Kelburn rase was concerned, there was no Court in Wellington, for no one else might legally deliver judgment. The King’s Birthday caused a day’s further delay on his return, and judgment was delivered on June 4. So that evidently the Magistrate is not to blame. I h ‘ resolution numbered 7 is even more* serious. If it means anything, it means that the Magistrate of set purpose delayed judgment in order to prevent the accused having a fair chance in th * Appeal Court. There is no ground whatever for this attack upon a const ientious and high-prin-cipled man. It is most unfortunate and regrrttible that such good women should thus unwittingly assist the attempt that “vested interests” arc* now making to have the Magistrate removed from Wellington, because his consistent and feole s drrrnistration of the law, and of the liquor laws in particular, < uses them discomfort.—l have tin* honour to he. Madam, your obedient servant, 1.. M. ATKINSON.

(To the Editor.) Dear Madam, 1 have r°ad with interest Miss Jes e Mackay’s letter in the May number of your paper in reference to th * treatment of conscientious objectois, and would lik“ to endorse every word of it. As may be seen in the- Convention number of the “White Rib hem,” a resolution on this subject was brought forward at the Tiraaru C onvention, and it was a matter of great regret to its support- • rs tha; it was not allowed to be proceeded with, and that the- N.Z. Union w is nut yet prepared to take a definite stand for freedom of const enc e. I know there are many amongst our members who do nm view it in this and it may be long before on this point “The multitude make virtue Of the faith they had denied.” In the meantime, the only course for us is to continue to hold the ideal before the public mind until the beauty of that ideal shall win all to its acceptance. I would commend to all readers of the “White Ribbon” the words of Professor Garvin, which J quoted in moving the resolution. He says, in speaking of the great importance he attached to liberty of conscience, and espec ally to that of a conscience with which he did not agree: “We risk the loss of one of the greatest factors in human progress if we do not tolerate the conscience th it seems to us unreasonable.” I am etc., MARIAN JUDSON. June end.