RELEASE OF MOSLEY

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 24124, 7 December 1943, Page 3

RELEASE OF MOSLEY

FURTHER REPLY TO CRITICS

ADMINISTRATION OF REGULATION 188 (8.0. W.) RUGBY. Dec. 5. A further reply to critics of the conditional release of Sir Oswald Mosley, the former British Fascist leader, was made by the Home Secretary (Mr Herbert Morrison) to-day. He first challenged those who wanted to put Sir Oswald Mosley on trial. “If you will state the charge and quote the law under which such a prosecution could take place, instead of talking and writing in general terms. I will consider it,” he said. Mr Morrison said it was quite wrong to say that Regulation 188, under whicn Sir Oswald Mosley had been rounded up, should be administered politically. That was dangerously near to the Nazi argument. The regulation had been made for the security of the nation, and it could not possibly be stretched one iota beyond what .the security of the nation justified without undermining the whole fabric of democratic law and justice. “Sir Oswald Mosley was transferred from prison to house arrest because the powers given to the Home Secretary by Parliament did not justify his continued detention in the new circumstances that arose,” said r Morrison. If that were so, it could npt be justified by any regard to politics, or to public agitation or street meetings. “Anybody would think I let Mosley free to resume political activity,’ he said. “The truth is that 1 have tied him up with sterner conditions than m any other 188 suspension order, and I have warned him that if- there is any nonsense my power of redetention remains in full force.” ~ Mr Morrison said he thought the underlying cause of the public concern about Sir Oswald Mosley was the fear on the part of many good people tha. his release thwarted the determination to put down Fascism; but in fact he had taken the course he did because of his own determination, as a democrat, to see that Fascism was put down, and to guard against the intrusion of even the shadow of Fascism m Britain’s democratic life.

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. EFFORT

MEETING BASE AND SUPPLY NEEDS

“MUST BE LESS ACTIVE IN ACTUAL FIGHTING ”

(Rec 8 p.m.) NEW YORK. Dec. 6. “New Zealand and Australia cannot continue to play their present active part in the prosecution of the war. and at the same time meet British and American demands for the development and maintenance of base services and food supply,” said Sir Walter Layton. leader of the British press delegation, who has arrived in San Francisco, “The New Zealanders and the Australians will have to be less active in the actual fighting, though very reluctantly, for they want to participate in the island fighting which they regard as being right at their doors. They dislike the idea of taking men from the fighting forces and pitting them to work developing and/«triaintaining bases and supply, not only because they regard the Pacific as ‘the war,’ but also because of their magnificent record with the Royal Air Force in North Africa, Italy, and the Pacific. “This switch-over is, already partly being done, though the Australians are practically carrying the whole of the New Guinea campaign on land. New Zealanders are fighting alongside the Americans on Bougainville Island and with the British Bth Army in Italy. “Manpower is their special problem. Both countries have mobilised about as high a proportion of men as Britain for war work of all kinds, the armed services, munitions manufacture, and road building. The problem is: what to do now.”

AGRICULTURAL LAND

LABOUR’S POLICY IN BRITAIN NATIONAL OWNERSHIP PROPOSED (8.0. W.) RUGBY, Dec. 5. IA a published statement of Labour policy, the National Executive of the Labour Party advocates the passing of legislation giving the State , power to acquire all agricultural land, and laying down a basis of compensation to owners. , A “We desire to emphasise that the necessity for national ownership of agricultural land is too urgent to leave to a very gradual piecemeal procedure over a long period of years,” says the statement. “Acquisition should be carried out as rapidly and on as large a scale as is practically possible. Pending total acquisition of agricultural land, we recommend that the following indispensable conditions should be insisted upon in connexion with the ownership and use of all agricultural land: (1) the character of equipment on the. land should be prescribed by a competent body responsible to the Minister of Agriculture; (2) a National Land Commission should be authorised to issue development bonds at a low rate of interest, and to make loans for the purpose of assisting with equipment in approved cases; (3) if the existing owner is unable or unwilling to provide indispensable capital equipment, then the National Commission should purchase the land. Rent appeal courts of a suitable character should be appointed to determine fair rents.” Other suggestions envisage the continuance of the present county executive agricultural committees; the formulation by the Minister of Agriculture of a definite home food production programme; the appointment by the Minister of Agriculture of a National Land Commission to hold all agricultural land belonging to the State and to be responsible to the Minister'for its administration, equipment, and use.