QUEEN’S GARDENS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22630, 23 July 1935, Page 10

QUEEN’S GARDENS

USE FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING • GRANTED BY CITY COUNCIL R.S.A. REPRESENTATIONS IGNORED x The question whether public speaking should be permitted in the Queen’s Gardens, where the city’s memorial to fallen soldiers stands, was again before the City Council last evening. It was introduced in the first place by a deputation from the Dunedin Returned Soldiers’ Association, and later in the evening it was the subject of a recommendation by the General Committee to the effect that public speaking should be allowed in ali city reserves, with the exception of the Queen’s Gardens. The representatives of the Returned Soldiery’ Association made an eloquent plea for the preservation of the sanctity of the reserve, but when the njatter was brought up again in conjunction with the General Committee’s report the representations of the speakers were characterised as humbug and hypocrisy by * one or two councillors, and when an amendment providing for public speaking in these gardens was moved by Cr Silverstone it was carried by a majority of one. ATTITUDE OF R.S.A. The t R.S.A. deputation comprised Messrs C. L. Calvert, P. S. Anderson, and J. S. Skinner. Mr Calvert said the deputation wished to explain the views of -the R.S.A., and he suggested that those views were held by a majority of the people of the city. , They regarded the memorial as the only visible tomb of the glorious dead. It was a beautiful monument in' a beautiful setting, and to a great many it was a garden of memories. The association was anxious to retain for it that special character, and in this it realised that nothing could be done without the cooperation of the council. When proposals for its use for_ public speaking were mooted, the association was on the point of appealing to the council to take some steps to eliminate the improper use of the gardens. To allow public speaking: there would undoubtedly cause pain and hurt to a great many people. It was unnecessary pain, and they hoped that thia tomb would be protected in such a way that it would become a hallowed spot like the Cenotaph in London, which everyone passed by with bared head. Mr P. S. Anderson supported Mr Calvert and urged the council to consider the question of making the Queen’s Gar dens a special place of memories—a garden of memories to which people could turn with pride and satisfaction. It was only a small reserve, and it should not be difficult for the council to do something .to make it a special corner. y SPEAKERS CROSS-EXAMINED Cr M’Millan asked the deputation i whether public speaking had ever been allowed in the Queen’s Gardens since the memorial was erected. Mr Skinner said that he , had been a . member of the executive of the Returned Soldiers’ Association since the memorial was erected, and he could say that on tht> only occasion it was used- for that purpose a protest was made and permission .was withdrawn. Cr Silverstone; Was any official communication ever received by the City Council from the Returned Soldiers’ Association on this subject? Mr Skinner: We did not come here prepared to answer a cross-examination, but if the council desires’ that information we can supply it later on. Cr M'Millan wanted to know who had put a stop to public speaking in the Queen’s Gardens. He understood from people who were familiar with the position that no objection was raised to such gatherings until the police suggested that they were a danger to the public welfare. Was it merely a question of the police taking a hand? Mr Skinner said the Returned Soldiers’ Association had always been strenuously opposed to any such use of the reserve. Cr Jones suggested that no action was taken until rioting begap in the Dominion three years ago. Cr Batchelor asked why objection wab taken to public.gatherings in the Queen’s Gardens when there seemed to be no t objection to hockey and other games being ' played in the shadow of the South African War Memorial at the Oval. Mr Ahderson said there was all the difference in the world between the size of the Queen’s Gardens and the Oval. Mr Batchelor was about to engage in further discussion when he was rebuked by the Mayor and told to confine himself to questions. The , Mayor asked the deputation whether its views represented only those of the'executive of the Returned Soldiers’ Association or the views of the whole association. Mr Skinner replied that the opinions expressed were those of the executive, but a special meeting of the association hack 1 been called and the matter had been fully discussed. Ther-e had been a unani-

mous expression of opinion that the Queen’s Gardens should not be used for f ether than commemorative gatherings. Further to this the speaker had found throughout the country branches of the association a general 'attitude of “hands off the Queen’s Gardens.”. _ The. Mayor then informed the deputation that its representations would be brought before the General Committee, when the question was again considered.

COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION

Later in the evening Cr Allen moved the adoption of the following clause in the General Committee’s report;—

In terms of an instruction from council, the committee hag considered the general question of the use of city reserves for public speaking, and now begs to recommend that all conveniently located reserves, with the exception of the Queen’s Gardens, be made available for public speaking. The list would comprise the Oval, the Market Reserve, Bathgate Park, the Museum Ground, and the_ Gardens Reserve. The committee desires' to reaffirm that the Queen’s Gardens, as the site of the fallen soldiers’ memorial, should not be used as a location for public speaking.

CR SILVERSTONE’S AMENDMENT

Or Silverstone moved' as an amendment that the words “ with the exception of the Queen's Gardens” be deleted and that the Queen’s Gardens be added to the list of nlaces where speaking was permitted. It was his aim to have the reserve once again thrown open to outdoor speakers. It had always been available since he could remember —from about 1904 that was—and he saw no reason why they should now be closed. Many addresses had been delivered, and meetings held there since the memorial was built. He objected very strongly to the suggestion that secular addresses were sacriligious to the memory of the dead. He had never yet heard any utterance there that was sacrilege or in any way detrimental to the public welfare. After all, public speaking did not hurt the dead. They could do no more than mourn for the dead, but for the living they could do something to have implemented the promises that were made to the young men who fought. They could not afford to have too much sentiment in such things. When sentiment crept in practical considerations, vanished. After all, the Returned Soldiers’ Association deputation could not say with certainty that all its members held itg views. It was no use denying that no objection was raised to public speaking in that reserve until turbulent times came along, and men and women were neither getting enough to eat nor a decent standard of living. He sincerely hoped the amendment would be carried. Cr Jones supported the amendment, and emphasised the fact that it did not in any way represent a studied disrespect to the memory of the dead.

Cr Batchelor restated the views expressed by him on a former occasion, and said the deputation from the Returned Soldiers’ Association had failed entirely to convince". What they had expressed wa« all cant, hypocrisy, and humbug.

“A GENTLEMEN’S AGREEMENT ” Cr Begg, during whose term of Mayor the memorial project was commenced, said a “gentlemen’s agreement” was entered into to have the whole reserve dedicated.

Cr Munro: You had no right to do it. Cr Begg: I am simply telling you what wan done.

Cr Munro: I still maintain that you had no shadow of right to do anything of the sort.

Cr Begg added that there were over 800 acres of open reserve within the city boundaries, and yet they wanted this tiny corner which was a shrine to so many people. The speaker quoted Edinburgh, London, Melbourne, Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch as centres where such a use of hallowed ground would not be tolerated. Why should these people want it in Dunedin?

Cr Munro said he was glad to have the true position about the Queen’s Gardens. Why did they not dedicate the reserVe to the returned soldiers? Because they dared not do it. The citizens would have risen in arras against the annexation of a part of their reserves. They knew it, too, so they entered into a secret “ gentlemen’s agreement ” to do it. No one was allowed to know anything about it. He knew nothing of it or he would have led a movement against it. The best tljat could be done now was to fence off the memorial. ■ Cr M'Millan said Cr Munro had hit the nail on the head. It was a case of keeping Labour - speakers out. He asked the town clerk if the Returned Soldiers’ Association had ever objected to the council. Mr Lewin: I cannot recall it. Cr M’Millan: I thought so. The whole thing savours of humbug. OTHER COMMENT Cr Neilson said they could not afford to keep the Queen’s Gardens sacred because it wag the best place for public speaking in Dunedin. It was no good offering out-of-the-way places where speakers had no chance of getting a crowd. After all, the best memorial they could raise to the dead was to see that - those who lived were properly cared for and treated. The Mayor said he thought the Returned Soldiers’ Association had overemphasised the aspect of the memorial as a tomb. That was a new idea in British memorials, and a strange one to him, Mr Cox said it was to be regretted that the General Committee had returned this subject to the council so soon. When it was' referred back to the committee discussion was stifled and the council was willing that it should remain so, in the meantime at least., But Cr Allen had forced discussion of it again, and, against the wish of the committee, had brought it back on his own casting vote. The speaker said he could see no disrespect to the dead in the proposal, and concluded by suggesting that speaking was not so unholy a thing that it should profane holy ground. CR ALLEN’S REPLY Cr Allen, in replying, said if the Returned Soldiers’ Association deputation could not change the views of councillors nothing he could say would do it. Ho had listened with interest and a great deal of pity to all that had been said, and he was sorry to think that the feelings of so many people should be outraged in this way. They were not asking for much when they sought to keep these two acres sacred. It had been said by the Mayor that he (Cr Allen) had forced the matter by his casting vote. That, was not right, and he protested against the Mayor’s statement. When the matter came up for discussion no member of the committee opposed the resolution, which was adopted unanimously.

The Mayor: The complaint is that the resolution was not brought forward then in its present form. This is said to be your own resolution. Cr Allen; That is not so. You are confusing this with another resolution in connection with which I exercised my casting vote.

On being put to the meeting, the amendment was carried by seven votes to six. Tho|e who voted for the amendment were Crs Silverstone, Munro, M‘Millan, Jones, Neilson, Batchelor, and the Mayor. Those against were Crs Allen, Scott, Begg, Cameron. Shepherd, and Mitchell.