No Reconsideration Of Ban On Protest March

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28930, 25 June 1959, Page 14

No Reconsideration Of Ban On Protest March

The City Council by-laws committee was yesterday afternoon reported to have refused an application to reconsider its decision not. to allow university students to march through Christchurch streets as a protest against the Rugby Union’s ban on Maori players in the 1960 All Blacks team to tour South Africa.

The application for reconsideration was made by nine persons connected with the Council of Civil Liberties, including members of the Canterbury University staff, two ministers and a trade union leader. They made their submissions to the committee chairman (Mr H. P. Smith) in the municipal chambers.

“I undertook to put their views before members of the by-laws committee and to ask whether they felt the committee should meet and reconsider the matter. I have discussed the question with a majority of the committee and they do not feel that reconsideration is justified,” said Mr Smith when approached after the meeting.

“It is fair to- say. that this approach was made quite independently of the Students’ Association,” he added. In its written submissions, the original signed copy of which was later made available to “The Press,” the group described itself as “a group of citizens not directly connected with the proposed protest march.”

“We feel that what is involved here is a civil right and a civil liberty to demonstrate for. certain political and moral issues,” the submissions said. “This right is dear to people cherishing democratic traditions. To rebuff students who wish to give expression to a sentiment widely shared by many citizens is bad education in democracy. “No Reason” “We feel that the students who wish to demonstrate their feelings should respect the need for orderly traffic control and similar consideration, but we feel that

the reason given in the report published in ‘The Press’ this morning ’That the council does not want to become involved in the issue,’ is no reason for preventing a procession.

“Could we, therefore, suggest that instead of a blanket ban on the proposed procession, students be permitted to choose a route which does not interfere with the traffic in the city too much and that possibly a time be agreed upon which suits both students and the traffic department.

“If a decision on these lines could be conveyed to the Students’ Association, we feel sure the public of Christchurch would feel that the council has acted reasonably. “As the matter now stands, there is a widespread feeling that the Christchurch City Council and its by-law committee have not lived up to the best democratic traditions which must be preserved, even in the face of some inconvenience and difficulty,” the submissions concluded.

The signatories were: “L. C. Southon, T. P. Hogan. W. Rosenburg, W, S. Metcalf, Malcolm W. Wilson, It. H. McDonald, R. A. Hill, Paul Goddard and N. Buchanan.”