A MISCHIEVOUS UTTERANCE

Evening Star, Issue 17924, 21 March 1922, Page 7

A MISCHIEVOUS UTTERANCE

DR LISTON FURTHER CENSURED. DISCUSSED BY COUNCIL OP OF CHURCHES. .(SnccuL to mis ' Star.'] CHRISTCHURCH, March 20. At the Council of Christian Congregations the Rev. J. J. North moved: That this Council of Christian Congregations regrets exceedingly that prelates of the Roman Catholic Church in New Zealand should more than once have used the' occasion of the Irish Treatv, which has been approved by tho Parliament of Great Britain, by the Irish National Assembly, and by tho world at large, to express suspicion of the honesty of the intentions of the Mother Country, and their discontent with the treaty itself, and generally to malign the Empire. The council is unable to believe that any man is a good Now Zcalandcr who defames tho Empire. The council expresses its pleasure at the stern attitude of the Mayor of Auckland, and trusts that an end will be voluntarily put to this type of mischievous utterance.

In submitting the motion Mr_ North said the resolution had been drafted by the executive in connection with an utterance at Auckland on St. Patrick's Day by Dr Listen. Such statements wore calculated to have a disrtiptivo effect in the Dominion. It was made to appear that Now Zealand was one country and the British Empire another. It was a source of satisfaction that Dr Liston's speech had been promptly replied to by the Mayor of Auckland.' When discussing the treaty in Wellington some time ago Archbishop Redwood also spoke in a derogatory manner of it. When it was stated that a man could be a New Zealander and not a member of the Empire it was time to make a protest. He considered it behoved the council to back up tho attitude of the Mayor of Auckland in denouncing tho bishop's statement. There were many adherents of the Roman Catholic Church who were not Irish, and such utterances must cause them great concern. It was especially strange for the Roman Catholic Church to take up such a view, when the Church always prided itself on being so universal. He considered that the resolution was couched in quite mild language, considering the terms of tho speech. Tho motion was seconded by the Rev. Mr Chard.

Mr C. E. Bevan Brown said he had been filled with indignation when he read the speech. To stir up tho feelings of tho Empire at such a time as the present was very wrong. It hurt him to read that British soldiers had been referred to as foreign soldiers. Ho could not understand how a Christian priest could countenance such a deed as the murder of two sick policemen in hospital, as had recently been reported from the North of Ireland. Dean Carrington considered that the motion v, r as too embracing in its terms. With the consent of its seconder and mover, the motion was altered on hie suggestion by deleting the reference to Roman Catholic prelates generally and substituting Dr Liston's name.

The Rev. J. Patcrson said the executive had considered tho question carefully. They deprecated those people who were seeking to make out of the Irish trouble a disintegrating force in the Empire. The executive considered that the question was of great social importance; hence the drawing up of the resolution.

A member of the audience expressed the opinion that if such a motion was passed it would* effectually kill any chance there was of Roman Catholics joining tho Council of Christian Congregations. Dean Carrington moved that tho council proceed with the next business, but this proposal was overwhelmingly defeated.

A number of other speakers denounced the speech of Dr Liston, and stated that no doubt there were numbers of Catholics who would not associate themselves with the speech. The Rev. J. Napier Milne said the resolution Ought to be passed. It did not censure the Roman Catholic Church, but merely the author of the speech. Personally ho (Mr Napier Milne) was a meek and mild man who had got into trouble because he had sympathised with tho Roman Catholics on the death of tho Pope. He was not a member of tho P.P.A., and never expected to be.

The Rev. Mr North said that if the P.P.A. had given such a statement utterance he would be as condemnatory of that body as of Di: Liston. The motion as amended was carried, with two dissentients.

EDITORIAL COMMENT. [Special to the 'Star.'] CHRISTCHURCH, March _ 21. Commenting editorially on Dr Liston's speech, tho 'Press' says- Perhaps the Mayor of Auckland has used terms stronger than aio properly applicable to Bishop Liston's words and the intention of his speech; but we can think of no point of view from which the speech is not utterly deplorable. If His Lordship had not used the phrase " murdered by foreign troops" in his referenco to men who were engaged in the rebellion of 1916 his speech might have aroused much lees indignation, for it is obviously by this wrong and bitter phrase that the Mayor of Auckland and others had beon chiefly moved. Even if that phrase had not been employed protest would have been necessary. Nobody need doubt that Dr Liston loves his native New Zealand, but wo should have thought no friend of New Zealand would wish to 6tir up old animosities and affront the loyalty of tho people. We can but hope that this is the last speech of the kind to be made in this country. POPULAR OUTBURST. MAYOR GUNSON'S OVATION. [Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, March 21. A large audience assembled in the Town Hall to hear an address by Bishop Locke. On Mayor Gunson rising to introduce the bishop the audience made a remarkable demonstration, rising and cheering him for some minutes. Mr Gunson said he took this as an impersonal tribute to the attitude he had taken up towards recent seditious statements, and as an expression of the support of the citizens. HIBERNIAN SOCIETY SUPPORTS THE BISHOP. AUCKLAND, March 21. No. 81 branch of the Hibernian Society passed a resolution whole-heartedly condemning the attacks on Bishop Liston, extending him warmest appreciation, and unbounded and unalterable confidence.

Bishop Listen's remarks and ' Mayor Gunson's official protest wiero brought under the notice of tho Rotary Club, Auckland, luncheon by the president (Mr C. Rhodes), who said members of the club must have been interested, if not thrilled, by the publication of Mr Guneon's remarks. This produced loud and prolonged applause, followed by three cheers for tho mayor. When the demonstration had subsided Mr Rhodes remarked that members had said what he wanted to say fifty times better than he could have done it.