FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22329, 1 August 1934, Page 4

FREEDOM OF SPEECH

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — I wish to congratulate you in the first place on your very fair leading article on the above subject in Monday morning’s paper; and, secondly, to say I am in entire agreement with views expressed in the letter in this morning’s paper by “Sane Labour.” I am a working man, and have been so all my life. I am also a strong supporter of the Sane Labour Party, but have no use for these Communists or Friends of Soviet Union followers who have done the workers an enormous amount of harm. .

The Labour Party, at its conference in Christchurch, threw both these parties out of its ranks, as the leaders of the Labour Party could see that they were the greatest hindrance and drawback to their success. The leaders of the New Zealand Labour Party say they stand for law and order. If so, do they approve of the actions of Mr Gilchrist in defying the law by speaking at Dowling street corner when he had no permit to do so? Then, again, do they approve of Mr Gilchrist’s actions in going to a church service, and to a church of which he is not a member, to air his views on this question? Mr Gilchrist is a member of the Labour Party, and I, like “ Sane Labour,” look for something from the Labour Representation Committee about the actions of Mr Gilchrist. I do hope Mr Silverstono roads this letter before the City Council meeting to-morrow night, when we do hope that he, as a member of the Labour Party, will let us know if he approves of one of its members deliberately defying the law. As a member of the Labour Party.. I look for the leaders to show their hand plainly in this matter if they want to obtain public sympathy and my vote at next election.—l am, etc., Sane Labour No. 2. Mornington, July 31.