QUESTION OF A CONCESSION

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIX, Issue 8784, 14 July 1914, Page 8

QUESTION OF A CONCESSION

To the Editor “N.Z. Times.” Sir, —May I avail myself of your columns to refer to a wrong impression whicli appears to have arisen from some remarks of mine made at the meeting of the City Council held on Thursday last. It is stated that air C. \v. Palmer lias taken strong exception to my having reterred to the Navy League as a political body organised for a political purpose. I certainly made use of this expression, and I cannot see my way to withdraw it. However, I should like to make it clear tbit I did not say, and I do not believe, that the Navy League is a party organisation. A body organised for the purpose of influencing the policy of the State’ is undoubtedly a political-organisation. AVhen I joined tho Navy Jbeague 1 did so upon the assumption that it was a body organised for tho purpose of influencing the British Government of the day m such a way that it would maintain an eruciont standard of naval defence. This is - clearly a political purpose, though not one which divides the great parties, Conservative ijnd Liberal. It has, however, its sincere opponents among certain sections of the British people. I am not of this number. Now, sir, to come to the occasion of my remarks. It was proposed by the finance committee ,of the council to grant the use of the Town Hall at a much lower price to the Navy League than to the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Tho council, as the, trustees of the hall which is the common property of all the citizens, must act impartially in letting the hall. Hence 1 characterised the proposal of the committee to grant a greater concession to the Navy League than to tho Society for Prevention of Cruelty to An.mals as improper. It was a proposal to favour a body, a - political organisation, a body having in the community opponents genuine and sincere, although most of us disagree with them, but to refuse a similar favour to a body in no sense pplitical, purely benevolent and universally approved; moreover, the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is urgently in need of funds. The Navy League, with its huge me'm’bership, is not and ought not to he in need of funds. I favoured granting the same concession to the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals as to the Navy League, and moved my amendment to that effect. If, however, any distinction was to be made in the treatment, of the two bodies, the greater concession should undoubtedly have gone to the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. I trust I have succeeded in calming Mr Palmer’s wrath. —I am, etC ” T. C. A. HISLOP.