The Dominion SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1919. AN ATTACK ON FREEDOM

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 56, 29 November 1919, Page 8

The Dominion SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1919. AN ATTACK ON FREEDOM

Nothing has done more to define the really vital issues-at stake in this election than the adoption by the Labour-Socialist faction of tactics which strike directly at the roots of popular freedom and democratic rule. To find a true parallel to the efforts of these extremists to gag their political opponents and destroy freedom of speech it is necessary, so far, at least, as our own; nation is concerned, to hark hack to the dark ages. The fact is plainly set before the people of this country that the Labour-Socialists arc working actively to establish the tyranny of an unruly minority led by men who rely upon substituting mob-demonstration for the' fair and open discussion of public questions and freedom of election. It only deepens tho sinister character of this brutal attack on popular liberties that its authors feel constrained to put up a, weak prctencq of repudiating the methods by which their opponents are howled down and denied a hearing. Of late several _ Labour-Socialist candidates have disclaimed responsibility for thp disorderly interruption of their opponents. Ono of them asserted on Thursday night, for instance, that his party was not responsiblo ■for the rowdy element at other meetings, which consisted, in his opinion, of "young fellows out for a. bit of fun." He_ did not attempt to explain, however, why it is that meetings arc disturbed in electorates m which his party is represented in some force. , Still less did lie attempt. to account for the fact that in such electorates the only meetings never disturbed arc those addressed by candidates of his own persuasion. Under any test at all, such an explanation as he offers stands 6ut as an insult to the young manhood of community. It implies, for instance, that in Wellington South young New Zealanders out for fun are howling like wild beasts at a gallant soldier and giving a quiet hearing to his opponent, who not long ago was professing Bolshevik sympathies. This is slander carried to a grotesque extreme. Only the Labour-Social-ists and their dupes arc capable of the perverted outlook which such things possible. The truth that 1 the disorderly disturbance of their opponents' meetings is one of the chief political weapons of the Lab-'our-Socialist ■ extremists is of courso apparent to all. It is demonstrated in the character of the disturbances—they are all of a pattern and are marked always by screeching repetition of the categories of the Red Federation—and in incidents like that, of Thursday night, when a Labour secretary who had ventured to take the chair at a Liberal meeting was warned in set terms that he would be ejected from his union v/ithin the week unless it contained "a scab element," , As. a matter of fact it is only by a late after-thought that Labour-Socialist candidates are now denying complicity in tho tactics of disturbance. Until they realised that such tactics wero likely to provoke a. popular revulsion against their party they were much less cautions. Snccific evidence on the point was afforded at Mr. P.-Fraser.'s meeting on thc_ night of November '19. The chairman, 'Mr. Canham, blandly accounted for the small attendance on that occasion by explaining that many supporters of Mr. Fiusußhad gone to Mn. Pirani's meeting to "ask questions." Mr. Fraser himself admitted that he' would have liked to go to his opponent's meeting, but that it would not have been "good form." No one needs to be reminded of the kind of questioning to which Mr. Pirani was subjected. The point, of course, is that' as recently as ten days ago prominent Labour-Socialists were all but openly admitting the tactics they now repudiate. Tlicy have changed their tune only because it has been made fairly clear that in this free country an attempt to suppress freedom of speech is likely to be visited with the penalty it deserves. .

It is one of the most impressive facts of all in connection with the current disturbance of meetings that immunity isnot confined solely to Labour-Socialist candidates. These candidates always get a quiet hearing, but' the same privilege is extended to some candidates of other parties. A moment's consideration will account for this phenomenon, and the explanation is noteworthy as showing how systematically the extremists arc employing their weapon of mob-disturb-ance. Within the last week two Liberal candidates in Wellington city electorates have been given a comparatively good hearing. Their experience is in remarkable contrast. not only to that of most of the "Reform candidates, but to that of other candidates of the Liberal Party, notably Mn. P.iraxi, who has been howled down with such ferocity at successive meetings as to preclude any attempt on his nart to deliver a-speech. What, then, is the reason of tiie comparative immunity extended to Mr. BrovvNk in Wellington North and to Mr. M'Kbnzib in Wellington East? Obviously it is due to nothing else than that each is. a vote-sfilittcr who may possibly enable the extremists to slip in their own candidate on a minority vote. The Lab-our-Socialists well know that they have no hope of capturing cither seat in a straight-out contest, but conceivably the position might be altered if both Reform and Liberal candidates go to the poll and divide the votes of the Moderate majority. The consideration show.n by the extremists to the Liberal candidates for Wellington North and Wellington East is thus fully explained and at the same time the clearest possible light, is thrown upon Mic care and'cunnin<? with which the conspiracy against free speech is organised. , In howling down their opponents at public meetings the extremists are, of course, even more intent upon denying them an opportunity of addressing a wider audience through the public Press than upon refusing them an immediate hear ing. This fact in itself affords a standard by which to measure _ the denunciations of the "capitalistic Press" in which they frequently indulge. Their real grievance against the "capitalistic Press" is, _ of course, that it aims at presenting fair and balanced reports of the controversies of the day and at giving all parties an open Ilea ring From such a Press Labour-Socialist extremists have as little to hope and

as much to fear as from the freedom of speech on the public platform which tljey are doing their utmost to suppress. . A complete refutation of their slanders against the Press is to be found in its columns from day to day. Even these slanders, which in.their pointless repetition and utter want of truth might well bo rejected with contempt, arc reported freely side by side with the w&rds of better men. Almost the only example in this country of an incurably biased and perverted newpaper which violates every standard of honest impartiality is the official organ of the Lab-our-Socialists. Any man or woman in whom common sense survives who takes the trouble to compare a "capitalistic" newspaper with the Jfnoriland Worker will hope devoutly that capitalism may endure for ever. The character of their own official organ makes it easier to understand that the denunciations of t])e "capitalistic Press" by the Labour-Socialists are part and parcel of the astutely organised and engineered conspiracy against freedom of speech in which they arc sapping popular liberties. Carelessly regarded the surface aspects of this conspiracy—the disturbance i of meetings, the frothy denunciations of a fair-dealing Press, and so forth —may seem to amount to little more than the exuberance of distempered fools and fanatics. A_ closer examination, and due consideration of such facts as have been touched upon, will demonstrate that such an impression is far from being _ warranted. The whole thing is in accordance with a systematic and deliberate plan designed to undermine the rights and liberties the people of this country at present enjoy, an organised conspiracy by a gang of anti-social plotters,_ many of whom are recent arrivals in the Dominion, to establish an' irresponsible tyranny. Our rights and liberties were not a free gift of nature. Thcv were, built up bp our forefathers at. great cost, and it is time that the sane and loval people of New Zealand realised that tbev can,nnlv be maintained bv an alert and vip"vmjs democraev. On election day the free nr>n and women of this countw will have an open opportunity of showing what they think of it.