Freedom Assn. Aloof From Free-Speech Deputation

Northern Advocate, 30 January 1940, Page 6

Freedom Assn. Aloof From FreeSpeech Deputation

[Special to “Northern Advocate ” 3 AUCKLAND, This Day. Anticipating that the question of the privilege of public assembly and freedom of speech will be discussed by the Auckland City Council at its meeting on Thursday night, when a deputation will be heard on the subject, the director of New Zealand Freedom Association (Mr. R. M. Algie) has forwarded to the Mayor (Sir Ernest Davis) and members of the council, a memorandum giving reasons why the association has decided not to take part in the deputation. In a covering letter to the Mayor, Mr. Algie stated that the case for the deputation would, he was informed, be presented by people, some at least of whom were or had been associated with Communists and pacifist groups.

No Common Cause with Reds

He explained that under ordinary circumstances the association, would have regarded it as its duty to urge the importance of maintaining intact privileges regarded as being essentially democratic and fundamental to our system of free representative government. The association, however, could not possibly make common cause in such a matter representative of Communist and pacifist organisations, which were unwilling to take part in the defence of Democracy against the brutal forces of aggression. “How kr.g ’ me letter asxs, “would the' privileges of public assembly and free speecn survive if Herr Hitler vtre firmly esfabhshed in Lmdon ai d M. Stalin in Paris?”

Intervention Inevitable.

Referring to the memorandum, Mr. Algie expressed the hope that its contents would be of some service to the council in reaching a proper solution to a difficult problem.

“The propagandist activities of Communists, of pacifists and of certain other like-minded groups are creating so much hostility in the public mind that a measure of intervention on the part of the authorities would appear to be inevitable,” said Mr Algie. “The privileges of public assembly and of free discussion .are rightly regarded as the absolutely fundamental to our conception of Democracy.

Repression Sometimes Expedient

“Without those privileges representative government as we understand it could not function, and if representative government were to go, Derrtoc racy .as we know it would vanish from our land.” Measures of repression, unless wisely applied, invariably produced their repercussions.

In times of emergency and grave national peril it might well be expedient, and even desirable in the common interests, that rights and privileges normally regarded as fundamental should be brought within the ambit of legislative restriction, suspension or even abrogation.

Local Bodies Only Concern,

Local bodies should start out with the .assumption that the people living within their jurisdiction had the privileges of public assembly and free speech, and they should also act on the assumption that those privileges were not to be taken away except by the central government. The only concern of the local authorities should be to adopt such bylaws as might be regarded as necessary for regulating the time, place and conditions at or upon which those privileges should be exercised. Machinery for Control In concluding his memorandum, Mr Algie said that the Emergency Regulations already in existence contained ample provision for dealing adequately and effectively with any person who abused the privileges of public assembly and free discussion. in regulating the exercise ot the privileges of public assembly and free discussion, legal authorities should not discriminate unfairly between sections of the people, but should lay down regulations which would be general in their nature, uniform in their application, and scrupulously impartial in their operation and effect.