RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH

Grey River Argus, 16 August 1934, Page 5

RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH

N.Z. RESTRICTIONS Presbyterian Protest (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, August 15. The provision of a public place to free expression of opinion was adv. tated by the Wellington Presbytery. The Puibl'c Questions Committee of the Presbytery brought forward the following motion: —- “Tn view of the present world tendency to limit the right of fre« speech a tendency already evideu even ii. our own country, and in viev of the fact that our Church has re ro’u'ely sought to establish and maintain this principle, this P. esbyte.-y re-affi:ms the right of every indivi ual, or party, to give full to its views provided in doing so »t does not violate the law o* the lan It protests against the action already taken to curtail this right and u r g‘ ’he Government 1o safeguard the<e rights, which are integral parts •

our British constitution. Further th Presbyterv would urge municipa I autr orities in larger centres 10 niak available nonie reserves or other sni' nb’e place where those who are in. ab’p to hire a hall might have

opportunity to evpk'Oiss themse'ves. “A sort of Hyde Park where the;, ran let oft* steam.” was the sugges tion of one minister.

it was observed that the “law o the land’-' was an unhappy phra«o since the law of this land might h n

amended to eliminate all possibility of freedom of speech. What wa~ wanted was a safeguard for freedor of expression of views, while at th same time, the country’s constitr tion was preserved. There must be : safeguard against sedition. A ministerial member: But the la.w J of sedition might be «o framed tha f ’•* would be the duty for us to pre: 1 - sedition.

The motion was carried, the word “incite to- violence” being insert instead of “violate the law of th land. ”