THE WOULD TO-DAY.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXII, Issue 8312, 28 February 1912, Page 6

THE WOULD TO-DAY.

"Guardian" Office, February 28, 1912. In spite of the crass stupidity and! conservatism of the bulk of humanity, the world still moves, and the thoughts of men are being slowly broadened. One -cheering sjgn, for example, is to |>o found in an influential movement that was started,in England/last; month' to secure the release of two men who Hiad been sent to prison for blasphemy at Leeds. "Blasphemy" is only another term for coarseness, and it is the aso of coarse language with regard to things usually considered sacred. Coarse language of all kinds is to be deprecated. As a celebrated bishop is reported to have said to a hornyhanded son of toil who excused his rude speech by pleading that he believed in calling a spade a spade. " That is all .right, but there is no reason why you should ca}\ it a b ..shovel!" But, wliiie we have no sympathy with' those who use , offensive terms when discussing religion, we recognise that strong language- is often the expression of strong thought; and as thought is free, so should be its expression. A conviction of this kind appears to underlie the petition that was lately presented to the British Home Secretary, which set forth: — " That punishment for blasphemy is a form of religious persecution inconsistent with modern ideas of toleration. That to punish' persons for coarseness or violence in the expression of opinions which may be promulgated without punishment if soberly expressed is to make a lapse from good taste into .■a crime and a cruelty." This petition did not, as might be supposed, emanAte from profane and atheistical, people. The catholicity of the signatories;, was the most remarkable feature about it. The names included those of the Rev; Stewart Headlam, a clergyman of the; Church of England; Mr James O'Grady, M.P., a Roman Catholic; Mr T. E. Harvey, M.P... a member of the' Society of Friends; Mr Thomas Burt, who is a Methodist; Mr Frederic Harrison, a Positivist; Sir John Brunner, a Unitarian; and Dr. Charles Leach, M.P., who is a Congregationalist. "We have not heard the result of the memorial, but with such backing it deserved to succeed. The decision as to what constitutes blasphemy must rest entirely with the Court, and therefore the operation of the hxvr is apt to be harsh and arbitrary. In the case under notice the two men were sentenced to four months' imprisonment— a sentence that smacks of, the vindictive, and justifies its definition »s "a ■ form of religious persecution." Analogous to the law against blasphemy are those dealing with contempt of Court and breach of Parliamentary privilege —antiquated attempts to bolster up a particular cause or institution by means of a fiction. With the spread of enlightened ideas these laws will be swept aside —partly because they will not be required, but mainly because men will recognise that no good cause or institution requires to have its dignity maintained by force.