PROFESSORS ATTACKED

Taranaki Daily News, 12 September 1934, Page 7

PROFESSORS ATTACKED

FREE SPEECH AT AUCKLAND SUPPRESSION SUGGESTED —— l LABOUR MEMBER’S PROTEST THE ETHICS OF EDUCATION By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night Outspoken views on the freedom of speech issue raised by the utterances in Auckland of Professors Dickinson and Sewell clashed during the financial debate in the House to-night. From Mr. W. P. Endean (Co., Parnell) came the suggestion that disciplinary action should be provided for by legislation, whereas a declaration was made by Mr. R. McKeen (Lab., Wellington South) that those who attempted to stifle free speech would be guilty of establishing Fascism in New Zealand. Mr. Endean said he understood Professor Dickinson had declared that all the good that came out pf the last war was the establishment of' the Soviet Republic. “He also said, I believe,”. Mr. Endean continued, “that if war were declared and New Zealand became embroiled in it his audience by all and every means ought to resist the Government. In my opinion that amounts to downright sedition under the Crimes Act. The member for New Plymouth, Mr. S. G. Smith, 'has shown that. Professor Sewell spoke on somewhat similar lines. “Professor Dickinson has been lent to us from England, and his presence here involves the expenditure of public money. The Government ought to amend the Education Act to enable it to take disciplinary action against people guilty of such utterances. It is remarkable in this democracy that professors lent to us from England should be permitted to come into contact with our young men and young women and infect them with the insidious doctrine of the Soviet Republic. The Government, which is the custodian of the public purse and the public .welfare, ought to take power unto itself so as to control such visitors’ utterances. The case of Professor Sewell is an outrage to our modern civilisation and modem democracy. “IS HE DANGEROUS?” Mr. F. Langstone (Lab., Waimarino); Do you think he is dangerous? Mr. Endean: Here we have an educated man advocating free love, or practically free love. Mr. Langstone; Gosh! Mr. Endean: And in the case of Professor Dickinson, treason to the State to which he belongs.. Mr. Langstone: Eat more meat! Mr. McKeen said both Mr. Endean and Mr. Smith had referred to j Professors Dickinson and Sewell. Mr. Endean had said Professor Sewell was preaching revolutionary Socialism, and so had Mir. Smith. Mr. Smith: Oh no, I did not say that. Mr. McKeen: You said he was striving to establish a Soviet in New Zealand, and Mr. Endean said there should be an amendment of the Education Act to prevent these men from expressing their opinions, and that they should not be al- 1 lowed to come to New Zealand to express an opinion such as that. Mr. Smith iaid they were teaching revolutionary Socialism in New Zealand and attempting to establish a Bolshevik and Soviet -system in New Zealand. Mr. Smith: No. “Mr. Endean said it was an outrage on democracy,” declared Mr. McKeen. “Let me say those who are guilty of suppressing free speech are guilty of establishing Fascism, because in Italy and Germany the suppression of free speech takes place.” EXPRESSION OF IDEALS. Mr. McKeen said it appeared that in New Zealand the expression of ideals was regarded as revolution. Those who were attempting to suppress free speech were only creating trouble for themselves. The wisest course would be to give an open forum to anyone who had ideas to express and allow that person to express his own opinion. New Zealand had a police force strong and efficient enough to ensure that law and order were maintained, but if an attempt were made to suppress freedom of speech those who attempted it would be guilty of establishing Fascism in New Zealand. There were Mosleys in England and they had Mosleys in New Zealand. Mr. McKeen charged Mr. Smith with, being unfair and unjust to Professor Sewell, a perusal of whose booklet containing an account of his speech would show him not to be the bloodthirsty individual some would seek to have him appear. ' Mr. Smith: Is that pamphlet the same as his speech? ... “Yes,” replied Mr. McKeen, who read a long extract from the booklet, adding: “If that is not the most peaceable and persuasive statement ever made I have never heard one. This is the man they want to hunt out of New Zealand. It appears they are concentrating on grabbing these men, who should be of some assistance to us in forming opinions.” The University Council at Auckland hid defied the authorities to suppress the opinions of any professor outside his university. The duties of those men were not teaching revolution or the establishment of a system of Soviets in New Zealand. After their day’s work was finished the authorities had no power to determine how they should act. In explanation later Mr. Smith denied he was referring to Professor Sewell in the course of his Budget speech.