ST. PATRICK'S DAY EXCESSES.

Evening Star, Issue 17924, 21 March 1922, Page 3

ST. PATRICK'S DAY EXCESSES.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Your editorial on tho above subject ; appears to have been written in haste, and shows a mental confusion, ia the writer which a few moments' reasonable consideration would have rectified. Ido not intend to say anything about your remarks concerning Dr Whyte and Dr Liston; neither of these gentlemen needs assistance to state his case if they think it worth their while to say anything at all. However, as a member of tho Irish Society (the society responsible_ for tho carrying out of St. Patrick's Night concert) and for every item on the programme 1 wish to say why I was strongly opposed to having ' God Save the King ' sung at that gathering. When wo sing ' God Save the King ' we do not, of course, mean the person of the reigning monarch (if we did I would willingly .sing the anthem if I thought it would do him any good, just as I would sing an anthem for tho poorest of his subjects); but we mean the monarcliical system, of which the King is the visible head. Now, there is nothing in tho laws of this country to prevent anyone from advocating a republican or any other form of Government. A man may be a republican and still be loyal to his country. On the other hand, 1 could conscientiously hold monarchical views and still be opposed to bringing any pressure to bear upon people to induce them to sing monarchical anthems. I might be blessed with a sufficient sense of the ridiculous to prevent me from forcing them to sing ' (}od Save,, tho .Monarchy' in a hall when I could not prevent them from singing for a republic in the street. But the anthem ' God Save the King ' has lost whatever claim it had to bo considered a National Anthem. It basin Now Zealand at least —become the slogan of a political group. It belongs to a party and the class that party represents, who use it as a political lever to serve their own ends. Even at the last municipal elections we had a patriotic party using this anthem as a catch-cry to secure votes. When that happens tho anthem, let it be ever so excellent, becomes merely a party weapon, and for that reason, if for no othor, 1 would oppose its being sung at any gathering. In any case the singing of ' God Save the King ' could not be a test of loyalty, even to the throne, much less to the country, because anyone unscrupulous enough to commit treason would not be ai>ovo singing an anthem, or taking an oath, or saluting a flag. This "loyalty" propaganda has really become an obsession in some quarters. We cannot go to a theatre or a concert hall without having this political test imposed upon us, and every sane person must know that if the Empire is founded on nothing more substantial than anthems and flags it will very soon tumble into oblivion.—l am, etc., March 20. J. IIonrNSOV.

[We had not thought so much ignorance of the National Anthem could be displayed in a communication'of a few hundred 1 words. Tho anthem should not be a test of loyalty, but apparently it can be nn acid test. —Ed. E.S.]