THE POSTAL INQUIRY

Otago Witness, Issue 3314, 19 September 1917, Page 18

THE POSTAL INQUIRY

OFFICIALS EXONERATED. WARM DEBATE IN HOUSE. (From Our Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, September 13. _ In the Ho'iiso of Representatives this afternoon Sir Joseph Ward laid on_ the table the report of tho Royal Cornnaissioner (Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M.) ino the charges mado by the Rev. Howard Elliott against the officers of tho Post Office at Auckland to tho effect that certain circular notices posted at; Auckland, on or about July 6, relative to a meeting to be held at Auckland under tho auspices of the Protestant Political Association, were corruptly or improperly suppressed or detained by those officers. Mr Bishop, in his lengthy report, says, inter alia: ISSUES REVIEWED.

It will be convenient for tho purpose of my report to tako tho issues submitted to me in the order in which they aro set out in tho extended reference.

(a) —Whether correspondence addressed to Post Office Box No. 912 at Auckland has been corruptly or improperly suppressed or detained by tho officers of the post office ? The evidenco shows that about 2500 envelopes had been posted, containing circulars advising people to whom thoy were addressed of the tact that a public meeting would be held on a given date, and inviting the addressees to apply for tickets of admission. Nine of the persons to whom these 2500 envelopes were addressed received them empty, and two did not receive them at all. If I were to take the evidenco on theso points as absolutely reliable and conclusive, I should still consider that the shortages were trifling out of so very_ many posted, and certainly there was. in no degree satisfactory evidence of any impropriety or corruption on the part of the Auckland postal officials, especially where there is an utter absence of motive except the very far-fetched one suggested by Mr Elliott—a desire to stifle his meeting. But I ask myself whether there is no margin for error or mistake in the preparation and posting of these circulars. Which _is the most reasonable proposition—that nine envelopes out of 2500 had been posted without contents, or that these nine envelopes had had their contents improperly or corruptly removed by post office officials without any apparent or sufficient motive ? And so with tho two envelopes \vhioh are alleged not to have been delivered at all, I am very far from satisfied that theso envelopes were ever posted. Again, there is too much margin for error amongst 2500 letters handled by a number of different people. It has been strongly urged that the sorters ought to have detected that certain of the envelopes were empty, and something ulterior is inferred from their failure to do 60. I do not attach the slightest importance to this. I had ocular demonstration of the fact thift tho most expert sorters could very easily and frequently fail to detect the fact that certain envelopes were empty. A further statement is made that some -40 notices were posted to ministers of various denominations' with a view to having the fact that the meeting was to be held duly notified from tho respective pulpits on the Sunday previous to the meeting, and that these notices did not reach the addressees until the Monday, and in some three cases until the Tuesda.y. However this may be, I am perfectly satisfied that the delay was in no way duo to the post office officials, but, rightly Or wrongly, was entirely due to the act of the Censor, who did not release tho letters until too late for delivery on tho Saturday. With regard to the letters and other incidental complaints, it is very greatly to be regretted that Mr Elliott when he made his complaint to the chief postmaster, did not then and there supply all available particulars of the addressees, etc., when requested to do so. The chief postmaster was therefore unable to make such inquiries as were right and proper to bo made in the interests of his officers and in tho interests of the public. MILITARY CENSORSHIP.

(k) —On what grounds a military censorship has been established over tho correspondence of the persons using the said post office box? The commissioner, after quoting the evidence of tho Solicitor-general, sa y S .—"it seems to me that this statement of the Solicitor-general, coming as it does from an authority of such high standing, sufficiently discloses the grounds upon which tho censorship was established. I am not m any way called upon to express my opinion as to the sufficiency or otherwise of _ the reason. Suffice it to say that the Solicitorgeneral considered it wiso in the interests of the country that the censorship should be established, and informed the chief military censor accordingly, and that his advicewas acted upon. The charge that the military censorship had been established in the interests of the Roman Catholic Church is thus absolutely disposed of and completely disproved." Mr Bishop thinks the reason why Mr Elliott and his friends should be so deeply convinced that the military censorship over tho box was in the interests of the Roman Catholic Church was as follows: —Both the Orange Lodge and the Protestant Political Association have on occasion used the same box. Some time ago a paper named .The Menace, published in America, came under the ban of the Post Office, under section 28 of "The Post and Telegraph Act, 1908." This paper is most rabidly anti-Roman Catholic, and makes most virulent attacks on that church, especially with regard to its political activities. Some of its writings would very naturally give great offence to very many Roman Catholics. Some of these had apparently drawn the attention of the Postmastergeneral to the fact that the paper contained objectionable advertisements of a nature to bring it under the prohibition set out in section 28 of the Post and Telegraph Act. Very stiong protests were made by Mr Seabrook and others against this ban, as they considered that the objectionable advertisements were only made an excuse for stopping the paper. Subsequently tho ban was removed, and The Menace was allowed free circulation. A MISCHIEVOUS TENDENCY.

The commissioner proceeds: —"Some of the papers addressed to Box 912 came to be regarded as likely to have a mischievous tendency, and Box 912 being now under military censorship. The Menace suffered accordingly. Hence the association of ideas

on tho part of many loyal citizens who objected to the political activities of tho Roman Catholic Church. It has aroused a most bitter sectarian feeling which certainly is in no way lessoned by the style of oratory indulged in bv Mr Elliott. To my mind it is most deplorable that at this particular time, when our Empiro is at deadly gripi with an unscrupulous enemy and our soldiers are doing their noble part to uphold our interests, irrespective of creed or country, that a crusado —for it is nothing 1 t-lse—should bo entered upon to attack a church, the members of which must ba deeply pained at, and who will certainly resent the ianguago that is being hurled at them by such men as Mr Elliott, who claims to represent a very numerous organisation. A TRAP THAT FAILED. No better illustration of what I mean—and this, I think, is a subject of fair criticism—could be cited than the contents of certain letters which Mr Elliott wrote or dictated and addressed to Box 912. They were intended as a trap for the post' office, but failed of their purpose. Copies of these letters were produced to me, and after perusing thorn I refused to allow them to be read in public, as I considered that their contents would cause deep pain and giva serious offence to a great number of people belonging to the Roman Catholio Church. Mr Elliott admitted that these letters wcro fabricated by himself and that the names and addresses were bogus, but they ' were addressed to the Committee of Vigilance at Box 912. lam fain to believe that there are few ministers of religion who would have thought of concocting such abominable and disgusting accusations against members of |a Christian church as are contained in three of the letters unless ho was so 'saturated with sectarian bitterness that he lost all sense of propriety. Mr Elliott states tliat lie la a Baptist minister of 20 years' standing. Whore is his charity? In his cross-exam-ination by Mr Cray he seemed utterly unable to appreciate the invidious position in wfiich he had placed himself in working, as ho said, under the name of religion. To use his own words, he did not feel called upon to -consider the feelings of Roman Catholics. I attach to this report the copies of the letters that I refer to, so that it may be judged whether my comments are not justified. They also throw a flood of light on to the foundation of the allegations made with respect to the influence of the Roman Catholio Church as regulating and influencing even the military censor. People who would believe such stuff as is contained in_ at least three of these letters would believe anything. NOTHING AGAINST THE POST OFFICE.

It was arranged between myself, Mr Morris, and Mr Ostler (counsel for Mr Elliott) that any postal officials that Mr Ostler desired as witnesses for his side should be placed freely at his disposal if he would name at any stage those he required, and an assurance was given that no postal officer would be penalised for any evidence he might give. This was a totally unnecessary assurance to ask for, but still it was freely given. However, as it turned out, Mr Ostler did not avail himself of the offer, and contented „himself with cross-examining those officials who were called by Mr Gray. A great number of these were called, and gave evidence on oath, ranging from tho Chief Postmaster (Mr Williamson) down to the lotter-carriers who were alleged to be connected with the missing letters and the empty envelopes. All the Post Office officials who gave evidence appeared to me to be witnesses of truth, and they left a very favourable impression on my mind. They were very straight-forward, and it seemed as if there was nothing to conceal. I have no hesitation in stating that I am convinced that no postal officer was responsible for any improper or corrupt dealing with any of the letters. The public may rest assured that the very high reputation that the Postal Department has always enjoyed in this dominion as one of the most important departments of State has not in any way been lessened by the result of this inquiry. DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE. RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY CONDEMNED,. STATEMENT BY ATTORNEYGENERAL. (From Oub Own Correspondent ) WELLINGTON, September 13. Sir Joseph Ward was asked to state the general effect of the report of the commissioner. He said that the commissioner had found no wrong had been done by any member of the postal service, and proceeded to read the findings. The motion to print the report gave rise to a debate that was in danger at times of becoming acrimonious. Mr Nosworthy said he had not had time to examine the findings fully, but it was his opinion that nothing had occurred over a long period of time had done so much to shake public confidence in the post office as the evidence that had been given" in_ this case. It was a strange thing that m a country like New Zealand they had proof that a censorship had bqpn established over the letter box of a Protestant institution, while the Roman Catholic Federation's letter box was not treated in this way. The public were going to resent the attitude of certain gentlemen in connection with this matter. If the Government wishes to take to itself the prerogative of interfering with the letters of private individuals, why did it not deal with the correspondence of labour unions, about which there might be some suspicion that they would be using the post office to circulate matter tending to stir up strife and sedition? There might have been some justification for this, but to apply the censorship only to this Protestant organisation was an insult to the whole of the Protestant community. The commission had cleared tho post office of all the imputations against it, but it would take a great deal more than that to satisfy the people that something very much out of the way had not happened. Ho was not satisfied with the Postal Department in regard to what happened. Mr J. S. Dickson said he was quite satisfied that the finding was against the weight of ovidence. The commissioner had simply white-washed the postal service. He said that tho evidence had shown that postal officials had done certain things in the interests of the Roman Catholic Church. The committee of the Protestant Association in Auckland would probably not let the matter rest as it stood at present. The department had held up letters and moneys, and the committee would probably take the

matter into the Supreme Court. He maintained that the instructions issued by the Solicitor-general were grossly improper. He had taken to himself powers which the Governor-general could not take and greater powers than the Parliament would give authority for. On his instructions letters of the association had been held up which dealt only with Catholic matters and not at all with matters within the sphere of the military censorship. It would take more than the report of the commissioner, to satisfy the publio right throughout New Zealand that everything was all right: The confidence of the public had been shaken, and largely because a great majority of the officials of the" Auckland post offices were members of the Roman Catholic Church. MR HERDMAN'SiSTATEMENT. The Hon. Mr Herdman (Attorneygeneral) defended the report, and attacked the Protestant Association for some of its activities. He felt certain that when the public read the report and had an opportunity of reading the evidence they would come to the conclusion that no more ill-advised and reckless attack on the administration of any department had ever been made in the history of the country. He presumed it was better in on a subject of this kind to declare one's religion, and he wished it to be understood i that he was a Presbyterian. —(Laughter.) J A reference had been made to the fact i that the Post Office had stopped the circulation through the Post Office of a j periodical called " The Menace." Ho, maintained that this had nothing to do with the subject of, the inquiry. Months and months before—when Mr Rhodes was Postmaster-general—the Post Office refused to accept thio paper because of certain ad- j vertiscments it contained. Later when i the paper came into the country without the objectionable advertisements it was received by the Post Office in the ordinary ■way. He justified some of the restric- j tions placed upon the operations of the Vigilance Committee in disseminating : literature of a certain character through the Post Office. When the country was engaged in such a terrible war as it was at present, no section of the community and no religious organisation had any right to precipitate a violent sectarian controversy. —("Hear, hear.") And the reason why the censor interfered with Box 912 was that it came to the knowledge of the Government that certain literature was being circulated through the country by the organisation to which that box belonged ; which tended to provoke a violent sectarian*' squabble. One of the publications which I came within this category was that called " Rome's Hideous Guilt," in which an attempt was made to fasten the whole blame for the origin and continuance of the war I on the Pope and the Church of Rome, j The Vigilance Committee in Auckland j identified itself with this publication. His attention had been drawn in the first instance to the circulation of this literature by the member for Wairarapa, and he at. once sent a copy of the circular to the J Crown Law Office for consideration. His ' view was that during the war no man— I Protestant or Catholic—had any right to , engender strife. December last was a ; critical time in New Zealand. The Milltary Service Act had been passed by Par- j liament, and a certain amount of opposi- j tion was springing up against it. Semple ' had just returned from Australia flushed with the triumph he had scored in his agitation against the conscription proposal there, and he had come back to this coun- , try with the avowed object of stirring up so much strife as to make the administration of the Military Service Act impossible. Why, then, at such a time should not the Government step in to prevent the circulation of literature extremely offensive to a certain section of the people?—Literature likely to cause so much irritation that it ' might be made difficult for the Government , to carry on military operations? Such | literature must have had a bad effect on enlistment if the free circulation of it were allowed. * . .•• Mr Dickson Why didn't you deal with . the Catholics? Mr Herdman said he had been asked why : the Government did not censor the Tablet, ' which was the official organ of the Catholic ' Ohuroh in New Zealand, and also why he did not censor "The Green Ray," another publication (not religious) published | in the Tablet office. The reason why those periodicals were not censored was because they were in circulation and they came to the Government regularly. Mr Nosworthy: You didn't take any steps to stop them, and there were some disgraceful things in them. Mr Herdman said he had not prosecuted either of these two papers, but if he had done so there would have been a pertect olaze of indignation right throughout the country. Mr Lee: That wouldn t matter if ;t was the proper thing to do. Mr Herdman said he did not think it would have been the right thine to do, and j he was not satisfied that any of the matter. in those papers was seditious. He-was advised that even the publication, "Rome's Hideous Guilt," was not seditious. Ho had always made it a rule in regard to prosecutions" for sedition that the case should bo quite clear before a prosecution was ordered. Nobody was ever prosecuted unless j «t conviction was certain to follow. Tho •result of tho continuance of the campaign J

for stirring up sectarian strife might have been serious. Fortunately, there was very little sectarian strife at present. Mr Elliott had made a speech at Hamilton, and at that meeting there was something like a scene. At any rate, there was considerable oxiiiosition to what ho was saying. The result of that meeting was that the Government cold Mr Elliott that he must not continue meetings of that kind, as they were liable to provoke disturbances. He was concerned with the sectarian aspect of tho matter. His duty was to see that _ there was no disorder, and that every section of tho community got fair play, and that no feeling was aroused that would interfere with the proper conduct of the war and of our military operations. The responsibility for the censorship was taken by Colonel Gibbon, and ho was not a Catholic. The speaker went on to examine in some detail the charges made against tho post office and the facts as proved by the inquiry. One of tho charges was that of 2500 circulars sent through the post office a large number had not reached their destination, but what did the inquiry show? That the total number of circulars that did not reach their destination was nine, and not one of the circulars had ever been seen by the censor. Mr Dickson: They held them back. Mr Herdman paid that some of them might have been held back for a day or two, but they were eventually sent on. Mr Dickson: Too late for tho Sunday services. That is the point. Mr Herdman said that one of the reckless and foundationless statements that had been made was that the Catholics were given preference in the police. That was a mattor which he had watched with the greatest oaro. Ho had been associated for the six years during which he had had control of the police with two gentlemen at the head of the force who were Catholics. He knew those men thoroughly, and he knew them to be absolutely loyal to him. He knew also that they had shown tho greatest fairness in the matter of promotions. Some of the methods used by Mr Elliott in his campaign were open to serious reprobation. One of the devices used to prove that the post office was interfering 'with the correspondence of the association was the sending of fictitious letters through the post. He understood that they were purely inventions. If so, they were much to bo condemned. If they were not, it was the duty of Mr Elliott to give the -police all the information in his possession regarding the subject matter of them These letters were sent from different addresses in different parts of New Zealand to Box 912. He would read two of the letters to let the House know the character of them. Mr Herdman read the letters. One of them hinted that there was a lime pit in the Auckland Convent in which a dead body could be placed, and the other was a gross reflection on the chastity of a nun.

The second letter was received by the House with cries of indignation, and members asked Mr Herdman not to read any more.

Mr Isitt said in indigna.it tones: "It makes one almost ashamed of being a Protestant."

Mr Herdman said that if the author of tho letters believed that the. statements in them were true it was his dutv to let the police know all about them. If they were inventions, it was difficult to conceive how a man who was a minister of religion could go into the privacy? of his room and invent such villainous letters He hoped his attitude would not be misunderstood. .He was not concerned in the controversy as between Catholic and Protestant. His only concern was to prevent a breach of the law. He considered that this kind of thing should not be allowed to go on in war time, as it must, if permitted militate against the conduct of tho -war. OTHER MEMBERS' VIEWS.

; The actions of Mr Elliott and his friends were condemned by Messrs Hornsby, Payne, i Witty, Webb, and" M'Combs. Mjj Isitt said he would put copies of the letters of Mr Elliott's statements before the heads of the Baptist Church. He beI lieved that when the filthy and black- • guardly concoctions had been read the j offender would bo dropped very quickly. j He hoped that when tho people knew the offences of which this man had been guilty no minister of any church would soil himself by having any contact whatever with him.

Sir Joseph Ward said the report endorsed the integrity and honour of the postal officers. He had not had any hesitation in promising an inquiry when the matter was first mentioned in the House. He did not know what were the creeds of tho postal officers in Auckland, or in uny other centre. The men who entered the service were not asked what religion they professed, and no man in the post offico had ever been promoted or debarred from promotion on account of his religion. The member for Parnell had said that Catholic employees wore- dishonourable, and that he could not .trust them. That was his misfortune.

Mr Dickson: It is my experience. Sir Joseph Ward said that many employees who were not Catholics said they employed Catholics because of their trustworthiness. He- had controlled in his time nearly every department of tho State, and except from one portion of the community ho had never heard of this sectarian bitterness. He had not known until tho last day or two what was the religion of the Censor against whom the charges had been made.

The Censor was a Presbyterian. A censorship had to bo maintained in the public interest. The man who had originated the trouble could easily have ascertained that fact, and could have learned why certain letters had been delayed. Sir Joseph Ward went on to say that he was one of the minority in this country. Ho respected the views of the majority. He did not care what any man's religion was; ho tried to do his duty to his own. He believed that the great majority of the people wanted no religious quarrels, but an attempt was being made to stir up sectarian etrffo for, he believed, political purposes. Similar things had been done in other countries, but the boomerang hod alwaya come back on those who threw it. Protestants and Catholics were fighting and praying side by side in the national cause, and surely it was not too much to hopo that the religious animosities that had blackened some of the pages of history would not be alto arise in New Zealand. Ho moved that the report and the evidence, with the letters attached, should \bo printed. The motion was adopted.

STATEMENT BY THE REV. MR ELLIOTT. DISAPPOINTED BUT NOT SURPRISED. THE EVIDENCE MISREPRESENTED. POSITION OF THE CENSOR. The Rev. Howard Elliott, who is in Dunedin at the present time, was asked by a Daily Times reporter if he had anything to say regarding the findings tho commission. " I am disappointed with the finding of the commissioner," said Mr Elliott, "but not surprised. When the commission was first mooted," he continued, " and the name of Mr Bishop was associated with it steps were taken to object to his appointment and letters were addressed to Cabinet, but the appointment had been made before the appointment was issued, and Cabinet did not accede to our request for a Supreme Court judge. I felt then, and I feel more strongly now, that the matter was important enough to have warranted the appointment of a Supreme Court judge." "Mr Bishop has, it the telegraphed report of his finding is correct, ignored tho important matter of the action of tho Solicitor-general in directing a censorship over Box 912. As Mr Ostler pointed out, this action was entirely illegal and excep tional, in that the correspondence of no Roman Catholic institution, or priest or official had been under censorship, whilst thft pamphlet, "Rome's Hideous Guilt in tho European Carnage," which had been circulated through the British dominions, and which was issued by a loyal Protestant body, had, by the direction of the Solicitor-general been banned. At the same time publications, which were circulating through, tiio post week by week, contained statements which," if not actually seditious, were certainly disloyal to the last degree. "In the matter of the letters which are referred to, and to which Mr Bishop takes strong exception, I am bound to say that he has totally the evidence. I distinctly stated, when giving evidence before the commission, that those letters were not fabrications. -They were formed upon facts reported to the Protestant Political Association, and though bogus names and addresses were used they were used just as the post office officials use bogus names and addresses to test its own officers. I. sent those letters to ascertain what the motive of the censorship was, and the fact that the letters referring to -the Roman Catholic Church were in the first instance suppressed whilst others not referring to that church went through the post was evidence that the censorship was concerned to protect the Roman Catholic Church.

"A further point worthy of note in connection with this matter is that two lots of letters were sent through the post to test the censorship. In the first lot of letters the three referring- to the Roman Catholic Church were suppressed by the Censor. In the second lot of letters, which were posted a week before the Commission commenced its sittings, the whole four referred to tho Roman Catholic Church, and none were suppressed. The Censor could not have been right on both occasions. Either ho was in error in suppressing tho former letters or ho was in error in passing the latter letters. "Mr Bishop, in his finding," continued Mr Elliott, "has not touched upon the important fact in connection with the censorship that a number of letters containing sums of money forwarded for the purpose of securing literature have been detained. The money has not been returned to the senders or to the Protestant Political Association, although we have asked what has become of it. "That the evidence submitted won the popular verdict in Auckland there can be no doubt, as witness tho demonstrations in court.' The finding of the Commission is against, the weight of the evidence, and this, I am convinced, will become tho opinion of the people of New Zealand when the full report of the proceedings is _in their hands. This report is now being printed by the Protestant Political Association, and this fact is in itself evidence that we are not ashamed to submit to the people of New Zealand the whole of the facte adduced in evidence. "What further steps will be taken." concluded Mr Elliott, "in reference to the finding of the Commission I cannot yet nay, but they will probably be determined by the decision of Cabinet."