The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. SATURDAY, APRIL 20, 1929. BANNED BOOKS

Southland Times, Issue 20664, 20 April 1929, Page 6

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. SATURDAY, APRIL 20, 1929. BANNED BOOKS

While there is some advantage in the public being told what books have been banned by the Government, the announcement in the Gazette that certain works on political economy will not be permitted to enter this country is no less disturbing than it was when the authorities maintained a .steady silence on this point. If the titles of the banned books are not known anybody may obtain them and break the law without being aware of the fact, but though he is safeguarded from this offence he is brought up against the fact that his reading is still being censored by the authorities. In these days the suppression of obscene books Is being accepted as a wise provision, but no less than in the old days is it recognized that the exercise of this power is attended by grave dangers. There is a vast difference between books that offend the susceptibilities of certain people and books that having no merit in literature make their appeal to the dirty-minded, and there is a general desire that in matters of this kind the censorship should be active though careful. These arguments, however, cannot be applied to the case of works on political economy. A glance through the titles of the latest books to come under Government prohibition is enough to show their communistic tendency, and is it wise to give these works the added attraction of the authorities’ fear of them? When the Reform Government was in office this system was frequently condemned in these columns, but it is disturbing that the United Government, which makes much of its Liberal principles, should follow a course that is opposed to that sound basis of democratic government—the freedom of speech. If the thunder of the Gazette notice were anything more than thunder the eagerness of a Government to employ this weapon for the suppression of unfavoured works might have the recommendation of practicability, but enough evidence has accumulated to convince anyone that the Government mandate prohibiting the importation of these works Is not effective, and actually operates in the direction of increasing the circulation and adding to the importance of them. Wc can recall one work dealing with Europe after the war, and praising the Russian Soviet Government under the Bolsheviks. It was written by an Australian who had visited Europe, but who had not gone to Russia. There was nothing new in his book—all the facts had already appeared in the daily newspapers—beyond his deductions, and by the time this book appeared in Australia the Communist experiment in Russia was failing. Lenin was admitting that the original theories drawn from Marx were unworkable and the New Economic Policy was appearing. This book caused hardly any stir in Australia and less in New Zealand until the Government banned it. Then copies came into the Dominion in large numbers and people read it as a work feared by the authorities. No one could criticize it because it was illegal to possess it and so the faulty arguments were permitted to circulate without definite contradiefion. Again a novel ostensibly dealing with New Zealand life was published in England. It caused no interest until the New Zealand authorities banned it before they read it. At once the English

advertisements were changed to inform the reading public that the book had been censored. It sold, and an authoress who otherwise would have found the oblivion she deserved was able to place other works. The censorship is not effective. In Britain a novel was censored and abandoned by its London publisher. Immediately it was taken up by a French firm and at a higher price has enjoyed a big sale. In the case to which we now refer Communist literature is banned by a so-called Liberal Govern merit. These books will still come into New Zealand, and no one will be able to reveal the faults in their reasoning. Is this sensible? Is it wise? Here is a precedent established for any extremist Government. After all a Socialist Ministry might as reasonably say that Alfred Marshall’s economics should be banned. Tire Soviet Government in Russia makes itself ridiculous by. banning fairy tales that laud kings, princes and princesses; but are we any better in censoring ideas? We expect the Government to take a sane course. There arc laws in this country powerful enough to deal with the sale of indecent or obscene literature, and there is no need to worry the unknowns who govern our reading. When will the mandarins of Government learn that you cannot kill ideas by legislation or by attacks? Ideas can die as a result of inward infirmaries, but suppression by means of a censorship will give them greater strength and prevent the revelation of their faults. If freedom of speech is a sound policy, then surely freedom of reading is equally sound.