THE PEACE PETITION

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26264, 8 November 1950, Page 5

THE PEACE PETITION

Sir, —If P. Swithin would keep his head out of the clouds more often he would realise that long before I wrote on this subject the majority of people had already deduced that any proposals put forward on the subject by Russia were not sincere, and in the words of Mr McNeill (when that country had placed before the Assembly a drastic disarmament scheme just two years ago): “Unless trust is created and the are opened for full inspection, none of us will be good representatives of our people if we accede, to the Soviet requests.” Mr McNeill was Britain’s representative. He added that “in 1937 Russia spent 17 per cent, of her national income on armaments, and we have every reason to believe that now, three years after the war terminated, they are spending more than double that amount.” A sufficient proof of insincerity.—Yours, etc., O. M. BRUNDALL. November 5, 1950.

Sir, —The responsibility for maintaining peace rests on every upright man and woman. That is the reason why the collection of signatures for the peace petition is of such vital importance. By signing this petition the ordinary person takes an important step, one which registers the overthrow of the widespread erroneous conception that he or she personally "can do nothing.” Everyone who signs the petition thereby declares for all to hear: “I am against the atomic weapon. I demand that it be banned. I hold that the first government to use that weapon will be committing a crime against humanity.” Individual responsibility further urges that everyone actively participates by 1 joining the New Zealand Peace Council and strengthening the world-wide peace movement which to-day has become the true voice of Millions. Those who contemptuously ridicule are inviting the horror of Hiroshima to visit Christchurch.—Yours, etc., P. SWITHIN. November 4, 1950.

Sir.—Your correspondents on the peace petition have brought up the question of who originated it. The District Peace Council, which is sponsoring its circulation in Chrstchurch, desres to point out that the validity of this historic document, to which half the world’s adult population have appended their signatures, does not rest on the political or religious beliefs of its originators, but on the moral worth and the common sense of its demands, which state simply the desire to live in peace, the demand that atomic weapons be banned, that there be strict international control to enforce this, and that the first nation to use these weapons shall be declared a war criminal. It is on these points, and on these alone, that its validity can be argued pro or con. —Yours, etc., GRAEME DUFFY. Secretary. Christchurch District Peace Council. November 7. 1950.

Sir.—l must reiterate the main point in my previous letter, that another war fought with the latest weapons of total war would cause the end of civilisation. I believe the World Peace Congress is composed of sincere men. I hope their efforts will help create a spirit of goodwill between nations. “No Muddlehead’’ says that Communist-dominated countries are backing the peace petition 100 per cent. Let us do the same and we shall have taken a big step in outlawing not only the atom bomb but also war itself.—Yours, etc., xt u „ TOLERANCE. November 7. 1950.