“FREE SPEECH” ISSUE

Evening Star, Issue 21823, 12 September 1934, Page 3

“FREE SPEECH” ISSUE

PROFESSORS’ AUCKLAND UTTERANCES OUTSPOKEN VIEWS IN HOUSE [From Oub .Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, September 11. ' Outspoken views on the freedom of speech issue raised by the utterances in Auckland of Professors Dickinson and Sewell clashed during the Financial Debate in the House to-night. From Mr Endean came the suggestion that disciplinary action should bo provided for by legislation, a declaration was made by Mr M'Keen that those who attempted to stifle free speech would be guilty of establishing Fascism in New Zealand.

Mr Endean said he understood that Professor Dickinson had declared that all the good that came out of tho last war was the establishment of the Soviet .Republic. “He said also, I believe,” Mr Endean continued, “ that if war were declared and New Zealand became embroiled in it, his audience, by all and every means, ought ■to resist the Government. in my opinion that amounts to downright sedition under the Grimes Act. The member for New Plymouth (Mr Smith) has shown that Professor Sewell spoke on somewhat similar lines. Professor Dickinson has been lent to us from England, and his presence here involves an expenditure of public money. Tho Government ought to amend the Education Act to enable it to take disciplinary action against people guilty of such utterances. It is remarkable in this democracy that professors lent to us from England should be permitted to come into contact with our young men and young women and infect them with the insidious doctrine of the Soviet Republic. The Government, which is the custodian of the public purse and the public welfare, ought to take power unto itself so as to control such visitors’ utterances. The case of Sewell is an outrage to our modern civilisation and modern democracy.” Mr Langstone: Do you think he is dangerous P Mr Endean: For here we have an educated man advocating free love, 01 practically free Jove. ( Mr L'angstone; Gosh! Mr Endean: And, in the ease of I’rofessor Dickinson, treason to the State to which he belongs.

Mr Langstonc: Eat more meat. Mr M'Keen said both Mr Endean and Mr G. Smith had referred to Dickinson and Sewell. Mr Endean had said that Sewell was preaching revolutionary Socialism, and so had Mr Smith. 1 Mr Smith: Oh, no, I did not say that at all. “ You said he was striving to establish a Soviet in New Zealand.” retorted Mr M'Keen, “ and Mr Endean said there should be an amendment to the Education Act to prevent these gentlemen from expressing then opinions, and that they should not be allowed to come to New Zealand to express an opinion such as that. Mr Smith said they were teaching revolutionary Socialism in New Zealand and attempting to establish the Bolshevik and Soviet system in New Zealand.” Mr Smith: No. “ Mr Endean said it was an outrage to democracy,” declared Mr .M'Keen. “ Let me say that those who are guilty of suppressing free speech are guilty of establishing Fascism, because in Italy and Germany the suppression of free speech takes place.” Mr M'Keen said it appeared that in New Zealand the expression of ideals was regarded as a revolution of thought. 'Those who were attempting to suppress free speech were only creating trouble for themselves. Ihe wisest course would be to give an open forum to anyone who had ideas to express, and allow that person to express his own opinion. *New Zealand had a police force strong and efficient enough to ensure that law and order were maintained, but if they attempted to suppress freedom of speech they were guilty of establishing Fascism m New Zealand. There were Mosleys in England and Mosleys in New Zealand. Mr M'Keen charged Mr Smith with being unfair and unjust to Sewell. A perusal of his booklet containing an account of his speech would show him not to be the blood-thirsty individual some would seek to have hint appear. Mr Smith: Is that pamphlet the same as his speech? “ Yes,” replied Mr M Keen, who read a long extract from the booklet, adding: “If that is not the most peaceable and persuasive statement ever made, I have never heard one. This is the man they want to hunt out of New Zealand. It appears they are concentrating on grabbing these men, who should be of some assistance to us in forming opinions.” The University Council in Auckland had defied the authorities to suppress the opinions ot any professor outside ins university duties. Those men were not teaching revolution or the establishment ot a system of Soviets in New Zealand. After their day’s work was finished the authorities had no power to determine how they should act. In an explanation later, Mr Smith denied that he was referring to Sewell m the course of his Budget speech. ■