THE POSTAL ENQUIRY

Evening Post, Volume XCIV, Issue 48, 20 August 1917, Page 7

THE POSTAL ENQUIRY

ROYAL COMMISSION

SOLICITOR-GENERAL'S EVIDENCE.

(BI TELEGRAPH.—PRESS ASSOCIATION.)

AUCKLAND, 18th August.

At the postal enquiry to-day the Rev.' Howard Elliott was cross-examined at length, mainly in connection with hia attitude toward the Roman Catholics. Ho said he had been a Minister for twenty years, and- commenced the propaganda when, at schnnl, ' At this stage permission was given to ) take ifche evidence of the Solicitor-Gon-eral (Mr. J. W. Saluiond) for the Department, as he hadv.to leave for Wellington. He was responsible, he said, for the drafting of the War Regulations. Ho had also been called upon to advise as to tlft censorship of correspondence and mail matter in NewZealand. At the end of 1916 the attention of the authorities was drawn to the activities of the Committed of Vigilance and the Rev. Howard 'Elliott. The first occasion was in December, 1916, when a communication was received by the Attorney with which was enclosed a copy of the pamphlet, "The Hideous Guilt of Rome in ithe European Carriage." He did not propose to mention the name of the informant, but he could assure them that the writer was hot a Roman Catholic. He came to the conclusion, that the pamphlet-was a-,misr, chiovons publication, and that fcHe ((association responsible should-not -be allowed to have 'unrestricted' use 'of- the. Post Of?, free for distribution. He senst a memo- ; randum to: Colonel Gibbon, who was in I control of 'the censorship, enclosing the i pamphlet, and stating that-its circulation was likely, to be mischievous. The suggestion .'of censorship originated with witness. He had no instructions from Ministers of the Crown. The suggestion had been made that censorship Mid been established in the interests of the Roman Catholic. Church. He "gaye 1' that sugges-". tion.an emphatic denial. He thought the circulation of the pamphlet would have a considerable effect on the recruiting of Roman Catholics. He had no reason to .• modify his •views since then, except that he was inclined to regret that He had not made the censorship 1 stronger. '' Cross-examined, witness said, he was not a Catholic, and had no reason to he-"?,. lie-ve Colonel Gibbon was. He had not advised further restrictions, tn saying he regretted that the censorship had not been stronger, he was making no threat. '.. He was inclined to think that the Rev. Mr. Elliott could have been prosecuted under the War Regulations of. 4th December, 1916. Mr. Ostler: Is it not a fact that the censor is under the control of the New Zealand Government? Witness:. How do you mean? Mr. Ostlej: Could the Government not say they do not want your, services any more? Witness: Yes. There is.no express power appointing the censor. The censor ■ is appointed under Section 27 of the Post Office Act, J Mr. Ostler: Why have you allowed , Catholics to publish week by week a publication? Witness: I have not allowed it. » Mr. Ostler: Have you advised censorsnip over Catholic literature? Witness: I have advised in regard to countless publications, some of them Catholic. Mr. Ostler.: Do you mean you may have advised censorship over . Roman Catholic-literature and foi^/otten it? Witness: i have no recollection. I suggest that you pursue the investigation on different lines. I am not going to disclose what I have advised the censor to do Mr. Ostler: Very well, we ■will draw our own conclusions. Can you tell whether the Government intends to continue, the censorship over this tion?Witness: I cannot.