CITIZEN RIGHTS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23336, 3 May 1939, Page 17

CITIZEN RIGHTS

Sir.—f have read Mr. Bloodworth's latest letter and i cling without hesitation or qualification to my original statement that for the importers, of whose case I was writing, the Law Courts did constitute the last, and only, line of defence. 1 have never deviated from that opinion. I assumed that Mr. Blood worth would take it for granted that I was speaking of "practical" defences, that is. defences that would offer a reasonable prospect of sucross.

Mr. Blood worth in his latest letter very unfairly quotes only a part of my statement and for his own reasons leaves out all reference to the rest of it. I said that the importers "could have appealed to Parliament for relief. That would have meant a delay of at least six months. What possible chance of success would they have had on an appeal to a body so definitely dominated by a Labour majority? How could they have hoped for redress against the harsh effects of regulations which were part and parcel of the official policy of such Labour majority.?'' Mr. Bloodworth quoted the portion relating to the time factor of six months. He omitted all reference to the rest of the paragraph quoted above.

When I wrote that sentence about the Law Courts I had before me certain statements made and published by Mr. Mloodwort h's mentor and leader, the lit. Hon. the Prime Minister. Mr. Savage had said as long ago as January of this year that even if llie importers were successful in the Courts Parliament would immediately be asked to pass legislation that would in effect nullifv and destroy the value, of the Court's decision. Air. Savage had also indicated that the import regulations Mere not an emergency measure, but were part of the policy of the Labour Government to insulate New ,Zealand. He had added that he hoped these new regulations would last for ever. I'nder these circumstances, what possible benefit could the importers have derived from an appeal to Parliament to suspend or modify or repeal the regulations that were a fixed part of Labour's permanent policy? Since the Prime Minister made the statements f have referred to above, ho has shown clearly that an appeal to Parliament would be even more use- j less; bv a more recent utterance he declared: "T. am in the habit of saying at times that certain things will lie done and that other things will stop. 1 have got to say 'stop,' that is all, and it stops." These words were uttered without reference to import regulations, but they are significant of an attitude of mind. Mr. Savage had previously made it quite clear that if the importers came to Parliament he would at once say "Stop." That is why I thought, and still think, that the Law Courts provided the only course that held out iitiv reasonable prospect of relief within a reasonable time, and that is why T said, and still say, that the taw Court# constituted the last and only line (i.e., practical or useful line) of defence. 11. M. Algie.