DEPORTATION OF LYONS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19504, 12 June 1925, Page 8

DEPORTATION OF LYONS.

THE LAW TO BE ENFORCED. LABOUR’S APPEAL REJECTED. GOVERNMENT STANDS FIRM. (Pan United Peess Association.) WELLINGTON, June 11. A deputation representative of Labour organisations of the dominion waited on the Prime Minister and Attorney-general this morning to protest against deportation of the man Lyons, who was prominent in connection with the recent trouble on the Manuka, to ask that the provision as to undorsirablo immigrants’ exclusion bo repealed or amended so us to give a person the right of appeal against a deportation order ; also to ask that the ban on the importation of certain classes of economic, social, political, and philosophical literature he lifted. Replying, the Prime Minister said that Parliament had dirccled that in the matter of this kind certain things should he done. The Attorney-general had merely acted on the advice of the Executive Council. This question had been carefully considered by the Government, whoso opinion w'as, and it was tile opinion also that it was the Government’s duty, on behalf of the people, to say who should or should not be allowed to land in the country. That was the position. If a person wore considered to be one who would not assist in the. peace and good government of the country, as Now Zealanders they claimed the right to say to such a person: “ You are no longer required here, and you may return to the place you came from.” 'That was his opinion, and it represented the, feelings of those who, at the moment, wore carrying on the Government of the eoni’rtry. lie was pleased to hear that the deputation did not believe in I.W.W. principles or Communism. To that extent they agreed, lie had heard it slated that Lyons was a returned soldier who had fought for his country. While it was pleasing to know that, and it was a fact which was to Lyons’s credit, yet at the same time it did not give him any license to come to ■New Zealand and preach a doctrine that they did not agree with. * ‘Tt just means this,” said Mr Coates, “ that wo as New Zealanders, either adopted or otherwise, take up (ho stand of saying that we shall decide who shall come into (ho country.” On the other hand, the Government, did not intend to take the risk of allowing people to say what doctrines ought to bo practised and preached here. The Prime Minister added: 11 If these doctrines wore given effect to, I believe it would lead to wretched disaster and bring trouble and distress to thousands of citizens who to-day have a reasonable opportunity of getting on their feet and doing well. I need not refer to the matter any further than to say that the Government will carry out the law, I do not know, Mr Young, whether the seamen are prepared to take Mr Lyons back or whether lie is prepared to go, but my advice, it ho will lake friendly advice, is not to make any more bother, hut return by fho ship without making any further trouble, and got away quietly. Wo know what the law savs, and Hie law will be given effect to. In regard to banned literature, Mr Coates said that it was the duty of the Government of any country to decide what reading matter should eome into the country. The Government did not under-estimate the intelligence of Hie people, but it simply said that pertain literature, in its opinion, was not in the public interests or in the interests of the iieonlo themselves. In the interests of the country and of the peace and quietness of the people the Government thought it better that sonic form of ban should he imposed on literature which could not benefit them.