UNIFORM BAN

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22608, 22 December 1936, Page 6

UNIFORM BAN

'POLITICAL GATHERINGS DEBATE IN THE COMMONS PROBLEMS OF DEFINITION [from our own correspondent] LONDON, Nov. '.15 Some difficulty has been experienced ill getting the Public Order Bill, which includes a provision for the banning of political uniforms, through the British Parliament. This difficulty has not been one of opposition to the bill, but rather of defining a political uniform. In- a debate, which threatened at times to verge upon the ridiculous, it was asked whether a tie could be a uniform. Mr. R. H. Turton said he wanted "uniform" to read "military or quasimilitary uniform." Mr. K. Pickthorn said he hoped he would never see the word "quasi-mili-tary" in any Act of Parliament. "But where are we to stop?" he asked. "Suppose 5000 people meet in Hyde Park, and, say, at three o'clock, on a given Bignal, they all produce badges twice the size of five-shilling pieces and fix them in their lapels, or produce a piece of green chalk and chalk round their hats. Is that not an invitation to the various sections in the crowd to get together?" Red Ties Quoted Sir William Davison said he understood the word "uniform" to be used in its widest sense to include even uniform characteristics like everybody wearing the same badge or the same hat for political purposes. Vice-Admiral Taylor, stentorian eailor, was impatient of legal distinctions. He slammed down a plain question —would a procession of people, all of them wearing red ties or red shirts, be wearing uniforms within the meaning of this bill? "I cannot," said the AttorneyGeneral, Sir Donald Somervell, "think that any Court would hold that a tie is a uniform. But I can imagine that a red blouse worn in connection with a political association might be held to be a political uniform." Mr. McLaren, a Scotsman tvho represents an English constituency, Burslem, predicted that Scotsmen, tired of the Tory stupidity of England, would start a great Scottish home rule movement which would involve wearing the kilt. "I could imagine Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald attending one of these meetings," said Mr. McLaren, "and, in consequence of the patriotism of which he is capable, being apprehended because he is going beyond* the limit of the bill:" Idea Rejected Sir John Simon, Home Secretary, rejected the idea that the kilt could be a political uniform, saying: "It is impossible to regard a national uniform as signifying merely association with a political object." A serious pronunciation difficulty also arosß over the word "blouses." Mr. Turton called them "blewses," or "blooses." "You mean 'blouses,' " cried other members. "You," said Mr. Turton, drawing himself up, "like to pronounce the word one way and I prefer to pronounce it another way. If you want to make that an offence, you had better bring in another bill." The Home Secretary moved his amendments to meet objections to the clause banning quasi-military organisations. The first ensures that persons controlling quasi-military organisations shall not be convicted because of activities carried out without their consent. The second puts the onus of proof that persons charged were members of quasimilitary organisations on the prosecution. Sir John Simon is not looking forward to his duties as controller of political uniforms. When someone pointed out that'" the Home Secretary would have to decide on what special occasions political uniforms might be worn, he said, plaintively, "It will not be any fun; for me."

The bill passed its third reading in the House of Commons on December 7.